Pirooz Mohazzabi, Qinghua Luo, Department of Mathematics and Physics, University of Wisconsin-Parkside, Kenosha, WI, USA: "Has the Twin Paradox Really Been Resolved? Despite several attempts that have been made to explain the twin paradox, which are
based on asymmetry and acceleration, it is shown that none of these explanations can resolve the paradox in the general case. Three specific examples of the twin paradox are provided in which the system is completely symmetric; consequently the existing
explanations are not able to resolve the paradox." https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354318351_Has_the_Twin_Paradox_Really_Been_Resolved

Why Solutions to the Twin Paradox are WRONG https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRuVGOm7560

Solutions to the Twin Paradox are STILL Wrong https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGoAZKyI6ZY

More than a century of fervent research, uncountable amounts of money and mental energy wasted, and...nothing but confusion and wrongness in the end. The traveling twin is younger because Einstein said so. What kind of science is this? Peter Hayes has
given the answer:

"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)

Einstein's relativity is an all-powerful system of mental cheating and at the same time it is extremely vulnerable:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=bg7O4rtlwEE

The formula

(frequency at observer)=(speed of light relative to observer)/(distance between light pulses)

shows VARIABLE speed of light.

"But this seems to be nonsense. How can it happen that the speed of light relative to an observer cannot be increased or decreased if that observer moves towards or away from a light beam? Einstein states that he wrestled with this problem over a lengthy
period of time, to the point of despair." https://history.aip.org/exhibits/einstein/essay-einstein-relativity.htm

Pentcho Valev https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Any physicist knows that Newton's theory did predict gravitational deflection of light (Einstein's deflection was larger by a factor of two). Even Sabine Hossenfelder knows that:

Sabine Hossenfelder: "As light carries energy and is thus subject of gravitational attraction, a ray of light passing by a massive body should be slightly bent towards it. This is so both in Newton's theory of gravity and in Einstein's, but Einstein's
deflection is by a factor two larger than Newton's...As history has it, Eddington's original data actually wasn't good enough to make that claim with certainty. His measurements had huge error bars due to bad weather and he also might have cherry-picked
his data because he liked Einstein's theory a little too much. Shame on him." http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2015/04/a-wonderful-100th-anniversary-gift-for.html

Yet Kip Thorne teaches that Newton's theory predicted no gravitational deflection of light:

Kip Thorne: "A second crucial proof of the breakdown in Newtonian gravity was the relativistic bending of light. Einstein's theory predicted that starlight passing near the limb of the sun should be deflected by 1.75 seconds of arc, whereas NEWTON'S LAW
PREDICTED NO DEFLECTION. Observations during the 1919 eclipse of the sun in Brazil, carried out by Sir Arthur Eddington and his British colleagues, brilliantly confirmed Einstein's prediction to an accuracy of about 20 percent. This dealt the final death
blow to Newton's law and to most other relativistic theories of gravity." http://commons.erau.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3169&context=space-congress-proceedings

Definition: Einstein's relativity is an ideology ensuring that the more blatantly you lie, the more generously rewarded you get:

"Nine scientists just won an award that's worth more than a Nobel Prize, earning a cool $1 million for their cutting-edge research. Called the Kavli Prize, these lofty awards... [...] The three winners in astrophysics this year were Ronald Drever, Kip
Thorne, and Rainer Weiss. The trio won for detecting the ripples in space-time known as gravitational waves — arguably the most remarkable scientific achievement of the year, if not the past 100 years. "This detection has, in a single stroke and for
the first time, validated Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity for very strong fields..." http://www.techinsider.io/kavli-prize-winners-2016-6

"Weiss will share the $1.2 million prize with Kip Thorne, Caltech’s Richard P. Feynman Professor of Theoretical Physics, emeritus; and Ronald Drever, emeritus professor of physics at Caltech. Together, they are cited by the Shaw Foundation “for
conceiving and designing the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO), whose recent direct detection of gravitational waves opens a new window..." http://news.mit.edu/2016/rainer-weiss-awarded-shaw-prize-astronomy-0601

"LIGO Gravitational Wave Researchers to Divide $3 Million. The three ringleaders of the gravitational-wave experiment, known as LIGO, Ronald P. Drever and Kip. S. Thorne of the California Institute of Technology, and Rainer Weiss of the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, will split $1 million. The other $2 million will be split among 1,012 scientists who were authors of the article in Physical Review Letters, or who made major contributions to the study of gravitational waves." http://www.nytimes.
com/2016/05/04/science/ligo-gravitational-wave-breakthrough-prize-yuri-milner.html

"In addition to a cash award of $500 000, to be shared equally between Drever, Thorne and Weiss, each of the three will receive a gold medal and a citation that reads: The Gruber Foundation proudly presents the 2016 Cosmology Prize to Rainer Weiss, Kip
Thorne, Ronald Drever, and the entire LIGO team for pursuing a vision to observe the universe in gravitational waves, leading to a first detection that emanated from the collision of two black holes." http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2016-05/iau-
ro2050416.php

"The Nobel Prize in Physics 2017 was divided, one half awarded to Rainer Weiss, the other half jointly to Barry C. Barish and Kip S. Thorne "for decisive contributions to the LIGO detector and the observation of gravitational waves." https://www.
nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/2017/summary/

Pentcho Valev https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)