Status
Not open for further replies.

#### logicman

First, I think some of the negative comments are unwarrented. SR can be a real problem. Especially in this kind of case.

I, too, caught a similarity between your paradox and the twin paradox. Both explanations boil down to the same difficulty.

It's really nice that so many things in Physics can be explained by diagrams and simple logic. In this instance we can't do it. An expert might be able to prove this to you but unfortunately I'm not one. All I can do is point out where your logic is wrong: You are trying to understand the problem in terms of Euclidean Mathematics. Unfortunately your paradox and the twin paradox share a similar feature which is very hard to picture and understand until you can handle the advanced Math. Both paradoxes expose that SR uses what is called an "indefinite metric." This is the SR version of the "dot product" between two vectors that you may be familiar with. That means when we "square" two vectors in SR the result can actually be a negative number. It sounds ridiculuous but it's true and is the source of much confusion. (This is the meaning behind my previous comment: You can't separate the space and time in space-time.) Like I said, I can't draw the pictures to show you how to do it. My apologies for that. But the experimental successes of SR show that the Math is correct.

-Dan
In what you wrote there is not a single specific thing that I could refer to. Your argument is this: my thought experiment must be carried out incorrectly, because the special theory of relativity must be true. This is gibberish.

#### topsquark

Forum Staff
In what you wrote there is not a single specific thing that I could refer to. Your argument is this: my thought experiment must be carried out incorrectly, because the special theory of relativity must be true. This is gibberish.
Again, I offer my apologies about not being able to give you a more meaningful answer. I'm sure it's frustrating to get an answer that you can't understand.

In the video you made a rather disturbing comment at the beginning. You said that if we could not resolve the paradox then SR must be "nonsense." I have two thoughts about this.
1) First, just because we are unable to prove something is correct does not make it incorrect. There have been problems in Physics that have gone unresolved for years, most spectaculaly the fact that the nucleus is a very small ball of positively charged protons. When this was discovered it was pointed out that such a thing could not exist. A proper theory of the strong nuclear force was developed over 40 years later. The solution to the problem had to wait until we knew more.

If there indeed was no solution to your paradox then the answer would have to wait until we knew more. However we do know. I shared with you my thoughts and even apologized knowing that the facts of the solution were unknown to you. That does not make it "gibberish" that just means you need to study more to understand the concepts I mentioned.

2) Given that you threw down a challenge to SR like this and even went to the trouble of making the video I strongly suspect you have sent this challenge to a number of people/websites. Anti-Einsteins (as I call them) are of a specific breed. I have encountered many and they all seem to have a similar fixation: It doesn't really matter if someone can prove them wrong, they just keep going. The Psychology here is simple. You feel you are right and whether you want to admit it or not you are going to deny any solution you are given that solves the paradox. I have seen this behavior countless times.

Clearly I know more about the Mathematical nuts and bolts of SR than you do. I am not a Relativist but I do know what I am doing, though I lean on the Math to get me by rather than the diagrams that would help me teach the subject. And yet you call my words "gibberish" because you don't want to believe that I know what I'm talking about. Please reflect on your goals as to why you are (doubtless) going to continue to carry on your campaign.

Elsewhere.