Date: Jan 4, 2013 4:49 PM
Author: Koobee Wublee
Subject: Re: Simplified Twin Paradox Resolution.

On Jan 4, 10:03 am, "Paul B. Andersen" wrote:
> On 04.01.2013 14:36, Pentcho Valev wrote:

> > Clever Draper,
> > Special relativity predicts both - that the travelling twin proves younger
> > and that the sedentary twin proves younger

> Can you prove that the Lorentz transform predicts this?
> We all know that you can't, which I am sure you will demonstrate
> by failing to do so.

On the other hand, the little professor from Trondheim has
demonstrated that he has failed miserably at understand the Lorentz
transform. <shrug>

> > - but Einsteiniana's scenarios demonstrate only the former
> > prediction and conceal the latter.

> Here you can see the twin scenario from both twins' point of view:

Good job, paul. You have handed over the material that proves you
have no understanding of what the Lorentz transform is all about.

When B is not accelerating, the Lorentz transform says there is no way
to tell absolutely who is traveling and who is not. Time dilation
should be building up when A observes B as well as when B observes A.
The JAVA applet does not reflect what the Lorentz transform says. You
may want to decrease the acceleration distance to just 1 and increase
acceleration to 2 for a better dramatic effect. <shrug>

paul?s gross blunder: The mutual time dilation is building up when B
is not accelerating. The applet violates the principle of
relativity. <shrug>

Hopefully, paul remains ignorant on this one since else he would
remove the material just like he did with the rest of his blunders.