Table of Contents
- 1 Preliminary
- 2 Introduction
- 3 The Twin Paradox
- 4 The Modern Resolution of the Twin Paradox
- 5 The Four Criticisms of the Modern Resolution of the Twin Paradox
- 6 The Way Post-modern Physics Resolves the Twin Paradox
- 7 The Post-modern Resolution of the Twin Paradox
- 8 Comparing Both the Modern and Post-modern Resolutions of the Twin Paradox
- 9 The Third Criticism and the Possibility of Time Travel
- 10 Summary
Subtitle: True Time Travel
My dear reader, for you to understand this article, you must have the basic understanding of absolute relativity and also how the two forms of absolute time transform in absolute relativity. Also, I would advise you to read this article first because equations will not be stated in this article, but they will be explanatorily applied. Thanks!
I am going to finally resolve the conflict of arguments and interpretations surrounding the twin paradox. However, I am going to first begin with how modern physics resolves the twin paradox before I proceed to show you how post-modern physics resolves the twin paradox.
This is because modern physics does not resolve the twin paradox according to truth. For there is something fundamental about the principle of inertia which is a cornerstone of relativity and which lies at the foundation of our current scientific structure which we have not considered since Galileo.
What this missing component is in our understanding of inertia has been inserted into post-modern physics, and I will show you in this article how this new understanding resolves the twin paradox.
The Twin Paradox
What is the twin paradox? The twin paradox is a result that arises from special relativity which informs us that time moves more slowly for bodies in uniform motion than for bodies at rest.
So, the twin paradox describes the situation where we apply time dilation to identical twins, such that one of the twins is at rest on the Earth surface while the other one happens to have travelled at a considerable fast speed, almost approaching the speed of light, to a distant part of our galaxy.
Now, according to special relativity, the twin that traveled, when he returns back to Earth, would find that he is now younger than his brother who remained on Earth which is the frame of rest.
When the consequence of the twin paradox became popular, scientists realized something. They realized that according to the principles of relativity, it could also be said that when the traveling twin returns he must have aged more than the Earthbound twin. These two contrary results gave rise to the twin paradox.
However, before I proceed, I would like you to know that the contention surrounding the twin paradox arises because the principles of relativity are reciprocal for bodies at rest and for bodies in uniform motion.
This reciprocity of relativistic principles in special relativity arises because of the principle of inertia. So, the contention surrounding the twin paradox arises because it is assumed, and even generally accepted, that the principle of inertia is a principle of true physical equality.
So, this is the central question around which the twin paradox revolves:
Is the principle of inertia a principle of true equality or not?
Both modern and post-modern physics resolve the twin paradox depending on they resolve the above questions about the principle of inertia, whether it is a principle of true equality or not. I will come to this soon.
The Modern Resolution of the Twin Paradox
How does modern physics resolve the twin paradox? For modern physics, the twin paradox is all about how clocks would flow differently for both the Earthbound twin and the traveling twin. Modern physics, therefore, resolves the twin paradox based on the physical observation of time.
This physical observation of time is what is impressed as the form of time both twin inherently experiences. Thus, how clock operates due to motion is the critical and only component for judging the differences in the ages of the twins due to their motions.
So, modern physics in resolving the twin paradox does so based on relative, physical time and not absolute, metaphysical time. Thus, in modern physics, the kind of time that dilates due to uniform motion is physical time observable by the use of clocks.
Also, modern physics proceeds to resolve the twin paradox by accepting that the principle of inertia is a principle of true equality, and that it is the traveling twin that becomes younger than the Earthbound twin because he experiences acceleration, especially when he made a u-turn back to Earth.
If you look at the resolution method of special relativity or modern physics, you will realize the honest yet desperate search for asymmetry between the traveling twin and the Earthbound twin. And in this search for asymmetry, special reference is given to the traveling twin on the grounds that he experiences acceleration which dissolves the symmetry between both twins due to the principle of inertia.
So, the condition for asymmetry between the Earthbound twin is founded on acceleration. This is a good way to escape the need to question the principle of inertia and the principles of relativity.
But is the modern resolution of the twin paradox true? No, it is not. The true grounds for ascertaining asymmetry is not acceleration, rather we must revert back and question deeply the principle of inertia. How well do we understand this principle?
Before then, let me present the four criticisms against the modern resolution of the twin paradox.
The Four Criticisms of the Modern Resolution of the Twin Paradox
The First Criticism
Special relativity describes the dilation of time as measured using clocks and the contraction of space as measured using meter sticks when bodies move in uniform motion. And the first criticism of the modern resolution of the twin paradox is the criticism of its dependence on physical space and time. The principles or the transformations of relativity in their true form apply to absolute, metaphysical space and time and not relative, physical space and time.
This criticism also addresses the Galilean transformations which are also based on relative physical space and time and not absolute metaphysical space and time. So, the first criticism of the principles of Einsteinian relativity also applies to the Galilean relativity of which Einstein’s relativity is an extension.
The first criticism addresses as wrong the elucidation of the twin paradox based on clocks and not true time. The true nature of time beyond what our clocks tell us has now been revealed to us and we shall approach soon the twin paradox based on true time, which is the real entity that constitutes our prenotions of time.
The Second Criticism
The second criticism addresses the elucidation of the principle of inertia based on physical space and time. This is concomitant to the description of the transformations of relativity based on physical space and time.
The principle of inertia based on physical space and time states that rest and uniform motion are indistinguishable. This form of the principle of inertia is what I usually call the relative principle of inertia which is different from the absolute principle of inertia.
Contrary to the relative principle of inertia which is based on relative, physical space and time, the absolute principle of inertia is based on absolute metaphysical space and time. And according to absolute relativity, the absolute principle of inertia states that uniform rest and uniform motion are indistinguishable.
The modern resolution of the twin paradox should have been based on the absolute principle of inertia and not the relative principle of inertia.
The Third Criticism
The third criticism of the modern resolution of the twin paradox is that it does not take into account the new fact that the twins are ponderable (non-charged) bodies and as such their relativistic experiences due to motion are fundamentally different from those for electrical (charged) bodies.
Post-modern physics takes note of this important realization, and in this article, I will be resolving the twin paradox by paying close attention only to the relativistic experiences of the twins as ponderable bodies.
Also, in another section of this article, I will discuss the third criticism and its relationship with the possibility of time travel.
Let’s now proceeded to the fourth criticism of the modern resolution of the twin paradox.
The Fourth Criticism
The fourth criticism is almost similar to the second criticism, but it addresses the fact that modern physics describes the twin paradox based on only the principle of inertia, neglecting or been unaware of the other two fundamental principles necessary for a complete understanding of what happens when one of the twin travels and the other stays behind on Earth.
These other two principles are the principle of non-inertia and the correspondence principle. I will inform you about these other two principles in the next section on how post-modern physics resolves the twin paradox.
The Way Post-modern Physics Resolves the Twin Paradox
Before I proceed to really show you how post-modern physics resolves the twin paradox, I want to tell you how I am going to do that.
I am going to take my eyes off clocks and I am going to be concerned about absolute metaphysical time which has two forms, uniform time and accelerated time. This metaphysical time constitutes our prenotion of time, and it predetermines the motion of even clocks, and it is the true time both twins experience.
Absolute time is directly experiential and it is not externalized like our physical clocks. I want you to take note of this shift from the physical universe of modern physics (and even classical physics) to the metaphysical universe of post-modern physics where all the true laws of the universe become exposed.
Consequently, absolute relativity which is concerned about absolute time reveals three fundamental principles of motion in the cosmos not known or recognized in modern physics. These three principles shall give us a complete understanding of what really happens when one of the twin travels and the other stays on the Earth surface.
What are these three principles?
The first principle which I will apply is the correspondence principle which states that uniform rest and accelerated rest are indistinguishable. This newly found principle in the universe would particularly apply to the twin on the Earth surface.
The second is the absolute principle of inertia, which as I have said, states that uniform rest and accelerated rest are indistinguishable. This is the true form of the principle of inertia which governs all uniformly moving frames.
The third is the principle of non-inertia, which states that accelerated rest and accelerated motion are indistinguishable. This is the new principle that governs all accelerating bodies. This principle is indispensable in the true resolution of the twin paradox because there are points during which the traveling twin accelerates.
I will bring these three principles together so that you can have an encompassing understanding of the true resolution of the twin paradox. And the second and third principles are the other two principles I criticized the modern resolution of the twin paradox for not taking note of.
Now, before I proceed, I want you to know that in absolute physics the (absolute) principle of inertia is not a principle of true equality but a principle of sensational equality. And by a remarkable extension, this also applies to the principle of non-inertia. Both principles are principles of sensational equality and not of true equality.
When bodies move they inherently carry inertia, but the principle of inertia and the principle of non-inertia respectively causes bodies in uniform and accelerated motions not to sense the inertia of their motion.
However, the correspondence principle is the only principle of true equality among the three principles. This is because, while bodies in uniform rest and bodies in accelerated rest do not sense inertia, they also truly possess zero inertia. In other words, the correspondence principle is a principle true inertia equality.
The prime conception of the principle of inertia and the principle of non-inertia as principles of sensational equality and not true equality while the correspondence principle is the only principle of true equality is the basic background understanding you must have before you can begin to understand how post-modern physics resolves the twin paradox.
So, let me now discuss how post-modern physics resolves the twin paradox.
The Post-modern Resolution of the Twin Paradox
To describe first the twin paradox according to absolute physics, it is taken that both forms of time were the same for both twins before one of the twins traveled. Also, to make things simple, I want to first of all tell you how uniform time and accelerated time transform for both twins and gradually proceed to let you know where the asymmetry between the states of motion of the twins come from.
Okay, let’s proceed.
From the figure below, when a twin moves away from the Earth’s reference frame in uniform motion, its uniform time b dilates relative to the uniform time a of the earthbound twin which is taken to be at uniform rest as there is no flow of accelerated time.
The Travelling Twin Leaving Earth in Uniform Motion
Also, since both frames are inertial reference frames, the asymmetry arises because the traveling twin offers a proportion of resistance to uniform motion while the twin on the Earth’s reference frame offers zero resistance to uniform motion.
However, both twins are governed by the principle of inertia which causes even the traveling twin which carries inertia not to sense inertia.
On making a U-turn as shown below and due to an external action which is not gravity, the travelling twin now accelerates and then moves in accelerated space, and accelerated time d of the traveling twin may either dilate or contract relative to the accelerated time c of the twin on the Earth’s reference frame which can be assumed to be at accelerated rest because of the correspondence principle.
The Traveling Twin Making a U-Turn
Not making this necessary assumption would result in a core discontinuity between the Earthbound twin and the traveling twin. Also, because the Earthbound twin is now assumed to be at accelerated rest, it now happens that both the Earthbound twin at accelerated rest and the travelling twin in accelerated motion are governed by the principle of non-inertia.
However, in this case, the principle of non-inertia would manifest weakly because the accelerating twin is not under the influence of gravity and can thus sense inertia. Notwithstanding, you must realize that the principle of non-inertia is a governing principle which is as pervasive and fundamental as the principle of inertia, and that it governs the twins when they accelerate.
So, if the traveling twin had made the u-turn due to the influence of gravity, he will still carry inertia but he won’t be able to sense it as the principle of non-inertia becomes strongly manifested.
With this in mind, acceleration cannot, therefore, be the basis for asymmetry between the twins as asserted by modern physics. We are not just looking at acceleration but at inertia, and how these three fundamental governing principles which are beyond modern physics cause bodies in motion to sense or not to sense inertia.
In the diagram above when the travelling twin makes a u-turn, it is taken that accelerated time d dilates (even though it can contract) relative to the Earth’s frame, and when the traveling twin accelerates uniform times a and b for both frames flow the same.
Also, since both frames are accelerated frames, the asymmetry arises because the traveling twin offers resistance in accelerated space while the twin on the Earth’s reference frame offers zero resistance in accelerated space.
Now, when the twin moves towards the Earth’s reference frame in uniform motion as shown below, its uniform time b again dilates relative to the uniform time a of the twin on the Earth’s reference frame. The Earth’s reference frame is then taken to be at uniform rest and there is no flow of accelerated time.
The Travelling Twin Returning to Earth in Uniform Motion
The same form of time and space does not apply to the traveling twin when he moves in uniform motion and when he moves in accelerated motion, therefore, as I have aforesaid, without the correspondence principle, there would be a real discontinuity between the Earthbound twin and the traveling twin.
Also, to accommodate these two forms of motion, one has to assume that both forms of absolute time were synchronized for the twins before the trip of one of the twins commenced. This synchronization of the two forms of absolute time is similar to how we synchronize clocks or physical time in special relativity.
Special relativity according to relative physics takes that the traveling twin solely experiences physical time dilation because he leaves the Earth’s reference frame and thus experiences acceleration.
Presenting acceleration as the condition for asymmetry between both frames confronts unsatisfactorily the paradox that arises from the symmetry in the non-sensation of inertia for both frames according to relative physics, which inherently and disappointingly lacks a preferred reference frame.
However, in absolute relativity according to absolute physics, the traveling twin experiences uniform time dilation but on a different condition for asymmetry. The asymmetry arises because the Earthbound twin truly possesses zero inertia for both uniform rest and accelerated rest, while the traveling twin possesses inertia when in both uniform and accelerated motions.
What truly happens in the universe is that the principle of inertia and the principle of non-inertia cause the traveling twin to not sense the inertia of his motion, and this consequently makes him wrongly think he can arbitrarily apply his state of motion to the Earthbound twin. This is wrong science.
Furthermore, uniform and accelerated rests being limits of inertia are absolute for the Earthbound twin, thus the traveling twin truly moves relative to the Earthbound twin when either in uniform or accelerated motions.
Thus, the absence of inertia for the Earthbound twin and its underlying presence for the traveling twin determines the true condition for asymmetry between both frames and for all states of motion.
Comparing Both the Modern and Post-modern Resolutions of the Twin Paradox
Modern physics attempts to resolve the twin paradox according to our observations of the physical universe. Physical time is central to modern physics. But post-modern physics entirely resolves the twin paradox according to the subtle and non-evident laws of the metaphysical universe, so metaphysical time is central to post-modern physics.
Modern physics because of its base in the physical wrongly thinks that the transformations of relativity are inherently or unavoidable reciprocal for both twins. This is not true as post-modern physics shows us. The transformations of relativity for both twins are not truly reciprocal.
The travelling twin really experiences uniform time dilation and also the transformation of accelerated time because he inherently carries inertia due to his motion. He, however, cannot sense the inertia he carries because of the principle of inertia for uniform motion and the principle of non-inertia for accelerated motion.
In post-modern physics, both the principle of inertia and the principle of non-inertia are principles of sensational equality and not of true equality. But in modern physics, the principle of inertia which disappointingly is the only principle applied in the resolution of the twin paradox is viewed as a principle of true equality. This is why the twin paradox has not been satisfactorily resolved.
This wrong perception of the principle of inertia causes modern physicists to arbitrarily apply the transformtions of relativity to moving frames especially uniform frames. In post-modern physics, this can also be done, but it is done with the underlying understanding that the reciprocity of the transformations of relativity arises due to sensational equality and not due to true equality.
The travelling twin carries inertia while the Earthbound twin doesn’t. However, the travelling twin cannot sense his inertia because of the principles of inertia and non-inertia and not because inertia is absent. This arises in the universe because of the qualitative nature of space and time, in that they both have forms and not only proportions.
The above is contrary to modern physics which takes that both the Earthbound twin and the traveling twin do not carry inertia when they are both in inertial states of motion, but however insists that the traveling twin will carry inertia during acceleration. Modern physics wrongly asserts that acceleration is the cause of the asymmetry between both twins.
Modern physics, unlike post-modern physics, does not realize the pervasive nature of inertia for all motion. Inertia is the true quantity of all motion, both uniform motion and accelerated motion. Thus, in post-modern physics, inertia and not acceleration is the cause of the asymmetry between both twins. Let me put it better for you.
Listen and take note of this: modern physics resolves the twin paradox by taking that inertia is non-pervasive for all motion and that the principle of inertia is a principle of true equality. But post-modern physics resolves the twin paradox by taking that inertia is pervasive for all motion and that the principle of inertia and the principle of non-inertia are principles of sensational equality and not of true equality.
It is with this new understanding that post-modern physics resolves finally the twin paradox. You must realize today that the principles of inertia and non-inertia are principles of sensations. This profound understanding greatly simplifies and increases your understanding of the universe. I will show your more in my future articles.
Furthermore, post-modern physics brings us to the point where we are to realize that the metaphysical absolute time is the time we truly experience in the universe and it has a different nature or operation from that of physical time.
The Third Criticism and the Possibility of Time Travel
No other time in the history of physics has time travel been possible like it now is in post-modern physics. This is because we have come to the closest possible understanding of experiential absolute space and time. We now understand the true nature of time and we are no longer deceived by the false operations of our clocks.
In the third criticism of the modern resolution of the twin paradox, I told you that modern physics fails to take into consideration the fact that both twins are non-charged bodies. If you have read the article that I suggested for you in the preliminary of this article, you would have seen that ponderable and electrical bodies experience different absolute time transformations.
We must take note of the fundamental distinctions in the experience of time for both ponderable and electrical bodies if we are to really understand time travel and the twin paradox. The post-modern resolution of the twin paradox presented in this article only recognizes their motion as ponderable bodies, which occurs at a global level.
However, the atoms and particles of their bodies are subject to a separate motion. They are moving differently in their own electrical universe in a manner that is obviously disconnected from the manner in which the whole body of the travelling twin moves in the ponderable universe, The electrical motion of the traveling twin occurs at a local level.
According to absolute relativity, when the travelling twin accelerated, he experienced the transformation of accelerated time, but if it were to be his body atoms and particles, they would experience the transformation of tau time which is the product of uniform and accelerated times and not the transformation of just accelerated time.
So, we must appropriately take note of motion in the ponderable universe and electrical universe in order for us to achieve complete and true time travel. The ponderable motion of the travelling twin at the global level and the electrical motion of the body particles of the travelling twin at the local level must be harmonized in order for true time travel to be achieved.
The successful harmonization of the ponderable and electrical motions of the traveling twin will come about by the use of the post-modern theory of gravi-electromagnetism, which deals with the study of the wave of creation.
Since Einstein published his special relativity theory, we have been looking at time travel from the inter-relationships between physical time, uniform motion and light (the electromagnetic wave).
But according to scientific truth, we should really be looking at time travel from the inter-relationships between metaphysical time, accelerated frames and gravi-electromagnetic wave. This is because the electrical bodies that constitute the body make up of the travelling twin can never move in uniform motion, they can only experience accelerated motion.
So, we must place the time traveller in accelerated motion in the ponderable universe just as his constituent atoms are only in accelerated motion. And you now know that gravi-electromagnetic wave and not light governs accelerated frames. Time travel is connected to accelerated frames and not uniform frames.
Also, when we harmonize both the ponderable and electrical motions of a time traveller, we must realize that in the ponderable universe he would experience the transformation of accelerated time, but in the electrical universe, he would experience the transformation of tau time which is the fusion or product of uniform time and accelerated time.
True time travel includes both different time experiences in the ponderable (non-charged) and electrical (charged) universes.
The more we understand gravi-electromagnetic wave just as we have understood light, we would finally touch the core of life itself and control directly how we experience the flow of time, for the gravi-electromagnetic wave is the wave of creation.
The gravi-electromagnetic wave is what is needed to harmonize the ponderable and electrical motions of a time traveller. Both forms of motion must be harmoniously experienced for time travel to be possible.
This new physics deals with the harmonics of gravi-electromagnetic wave that has been discovered in this new era of physics, and this blog establishes the first understanding of the operations of the gravi-electromagnetic wave, and upon this new knowledge shall the new industry of gravi-electromagnetism thrive.
This article reveals to you that in post-modern physics we have to deploy three absolute principles in order to completely and truly resolve the twin paradox. These three principles are the principle of inertia, the principle of non-inertia and the correspondence principle, and they are necessary because the travelling twin moves both in uniform motion and also in accelerated motion.
This new method is different from modern physics which attempts to resolve the twin paradox using only the principle of inertia. With these cogent post-modern insights that are missing in modern physics, the modern resolution of the twin paradox cannot be correct or even complete.
While modern physics understands the principle of inertia as a principle of true equality, post-modern physics recognizes the principle of inertia and the newly introduced principle of non-inertia as principles of sensational equality and not true equality.
This new understanding is accompanied by the new fact that all motion inherently contains inertia, and inertia and not acceleration is the crucial underlying and distinguishing factor between the Earthbound twin and the travelling twin.
You will definitely understand the twin paradox better as you increase your understanding of absolute science.
Time travel is possible and soon we shall travel through time!
– M. V. Echa
The two articles below will greatly show you how to understand space and time in post-modern physics. In short, take your time and read my other articles. This blog is about the universe, and all my articles are connected, even my poems.
Also, feel free to share these articles, for this new knowledge is for all of us.