Consider Einstein's 1918 paper
http://sciliterature.50webs.com/Dialog.htm. According to Critic, special relativity predicts "two clocks that have been positioned side by side, each one is running behind the other", which is unacceptable. Relativist (
Einstein) agrees that this is unacceptable, but adds that one of the clocks "is accelerated from time to time", so "no contradiction can be constructed against the principles of the theory".
Actually, Einstein's 1918 paper can be regarded as a proof that the turning-around acceleration is crucial to the solution of the twin paradox. All along, the stay-at-home clock sees the traveling clock running slow. All along, the traveling clock sees
the stay-at-home clock running slow. That being so, only the turning-around acceleration saves the theory from contradiction and guarantees that the traveling clock lags behind the stay-at-home one at the end of the journey. Einstein is quite explicit: "
According to the general theory of relativity, a clock will go faster the higher the gravitational potential of the location where it is located, and during partial process 3 U2 happens to be located at a higher gravitational potential than U1. The
calculation shows that this speeding ahead constitutes exactly twice as much as the lagging behind during the partial processes 2 and 4. This consideration completely clears up the paradox that you brought up."
David Morin seems to agree with Einstein initially but then makes a U-turn and adds that "a discussion of acceleration is not required to quantitatively understand the paradox", which is tantamount to saying "the turning-around acceleration is immaterial"
:
David Morin, Introduction to Classical Mechanics, Chapter 11, p. 14: "Twin A stays on the earth, while twin B flies quickly to a distant star and back...For the entire outward and return parts of the trip, B does observe A's clock running slow, but
ENOUGH STRANGENESS occurs during the turning-around period to make A end up older. Note, however, that a discussion of acceleration is not required to quantitatively understand the paradox."
https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/david-morin/files/cmchap11.pdf
Other Einsteinians also contradict Einstein and teach that the turning-around acceleration is immaterial:
"Just in case the reader might decide that it must be the accelerations that cause the difference in duration for the twins, this section describes how it is possible to explain the paradox entirely without accelerations."
https://www1.phys.vt.edu/~jhs/
faq/twins.html
Most Einsteinians teach that the turning-around acceleration is immaterial. Some remain faithful to Einstein and teach that the turning-around acceleration is crucial. David Morin teaches that it is both crucial and immaterial.
Needless to say, the public is completely confused and paralysed. What we have here is the most efficient brainwashing not just in the history of science but in the history of humankind perhaps.
"This paper investigates an alternative possibility: that the critics were right and that the success of Einstein's theory in overcoming them was due to its strengths as an ideology rather than as a science. The clock paradox illustrates how relativity
theory does indeed contain inconsistencies that make it scientifically problematic. These same inconsistencies, however, make the theory ideologically powerful...The gatekeepers of professional physics in the universities and research institutes are
disinclined to support or employ anyone who raises problems over the elementary inconsistencies of relativity. A winnowing out process has made it very difficult for critics of Einstein to achieve or maintain professional status. Relativists are then
able to use the argument of authority to discredit these critics. Were relativists to admit that Einstein may have made a series of elementary logical errors, they would be faced with the embarrassing question of why this had not been noticed earlier.
Under these circumstances the marginalisation of antirelativists, unjustified on scientific grounds, is eminently justifiable on grounds of realpolitik. Supporters of relativity theory have protected both the theory and their own reputations by shutting
their opponents out of professional discourse...The triumph of relativity theory represents the triumph of ideology not only in the profession of physics bur also in the philosophy of science." Peter Hayes, The Ideology of Relativity: The Case of the
Clock Paradox
https://tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02691720902741399
Pentcho Valev
https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)