Contradictions in Einstein Schizophrenic World

[Pentcho Valev]

In Einstein schizophrenic world contradictions take the form of doublethink - thesis and antithesis are both profitable in the pursuit of career and money. So "The future already exists", the idiotic consequence of Einstein's 1905 false constant-speed-of-light postulate, feeds a lot of Einsteinians, but "The future does not exist" sounds revolutionary and is not less nutritious:

http://www.bourbaphy.fr/damourtemps.pdf
Thibault Damour: "The paradigm of the special relativistic upheaval of the usual concept of time is the twin paradox. Let us emphasize that this striking example of time dilation proves that time travel (towards the future) is possible. As a gedanken experiment (if we neglect practicalities such as the technology needed for reaching velocities comparable to the velocity of light, the cost of the fuel and the capacity of the traveller to sustain high accelerations), it shows that a sentient being can jump, "within a minute" (of his experienced time) arbitrarily far in the future, say sixty million years ahead, and see, and be part of, what (will) happen then on Earth. This is a clear way of realizing that the future "already exists" (as we can experience it "in a minute")."

https://www.quantamagazine.org/20160719-time-and-cosmology/
"...said Avshalom Elitzur, a physicist and philosopher formerly of Bar-Ilan University. “I don’t think that next Thursday has the same footing as this Thursday. The future does not exist. It does not! Ontologically, it’s not there.” [...] In the latter work, mirroring Elitzur’s sentiments about the future’s lack of concreteness, Smolin wrote: “The future is not now real and there can be no definite facts of the matter about the future.” What is real is “the process by which future events are generated out of present events,” he said at the conference."

In Einstein schizophrenic world one is free to reject either thesis or antithesis as false but it is absolutely forbidden to infer that the underlying premise (postulate) is false as well (postulates are sacred, consequences are not). So Avshalom Elitzur and Lee Smolin readily admit that "The future already exists" is false but would not even think of the simple logical rule saying that Einstein's 1905 constant-speed-of-light postulate, from which the falsehood is derived, cannot be true:

http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/o/orwell/george/o79n/chapter2.9.html
"Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are inimical to Ingsoc, and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity."

Pentcho Valev

[Pentcho Valev]

Einstein's special relativity predicts that either twin ages more slowly than the other, as judged from the other twin's system:

http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~djmorin/chap11.pdf
David Morin, Introduction to Classical Mechanics With Problems and Solutions, 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..."

Since either twin sees his brother aging more slowly, an absurd conclusion awaits them at the end of the trip unless "enough strangeness occurs during the turning-around period to make A end up older". However the turning-around occurs very far away from the stationary twin so the idea that the turning-around acceleration produces "enough strangeness" and this "enough strangeness" miraculously speeds up the aging of the distant stationary twin is even more idiotic than the original special relativistic conclusion. Still this is not the end of the story - there is a last idiocy that lands the final blow to a student's mind (this mind will never be sane again): Although the turning-around acceleration is crucial (it produces the "enough strangeness"), a discussion of it "is not required to quantitatively understand the paradox".

The turning-around-acceleration idiocy was devised by Einstein in 1918, in a (successful) attempt to camouflage the absurd conclusions of his special relativity (Einstein refers to the acceleration as "gravitational field"):

http://sciliterature.50webs.com/Dialog.htm
Albert Einstein 1918: "A homogeneous gravitational field appears, that is directed towards the positive x-axis. Clock U1 is accelerated in the direction of the positive x-axis until it has reached the velocity v, then the gravitational field disappears again. An external force, acting upon U2 in the negative direction of the x-axis prevents U2 from being set in motion by the gravitational field. [...] 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."

Pentcho Valev