OK good, that's what I assumed you meant.

BUT now take the two twins at rest standing on opposite sides of the earth, 
and then they each start walking in different directions. By your criterion 
you then have to say that suddenly and instantly there is NO more 1:1 
correlation of their ages, that they COMPLETELY AND ABSOLUTELY lose their 
1:1 age correlation they had at rest even if they take a SINGLE STEP!

The way you state it this is EITHER OR. Either there is a 1:1 at rest, but 
if they are NOT at rest in the very slightest amount then they COMPLETELY 
AND ABSOLUTELY lose any 1:1 age correlation.

Now if you do NOT agree to that then you are forced to try to claim that 
it's a matter of degree then you have to come up with some mathematical 
function that tells us what VARYING AMOUNT of 1:1 age correlation holds 
with what amount of relative motion. What defines the degree of 1:1 age 
correlation or lack thereof? I certainly don't think relativity theory has 
any such function. For relativity it is absolutely either or. Is this not 

Or, on the other hand if you use simple logic from my many proofs you just 
admit that any two twins ALWAYS have a 1:1 actual real proper age 
correlation in all situations. And that is is always unambiguously 
calculable in a manner that all observers agree to, but that is not in 
general observable. And this problem and all the other problems simply go 

Which is it?


On Sunday, March 2, 2014 7:13:31 PM UTC-5, jessem wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Jesse Mazer <<javascript:>
> > wrote:
>> No, of course I wouldn't agree that there is any unique "actual" truth 
>> about their ages in this case, nor would any mainstream physicist. 
> Sorry, I wrote too quickly here--what I meant is that I don't agree there 
> is any unique "actual" truth about the CORRELATION between their ages, i.e. 
> whether or not they reach the same age simultaneously (of course there is 
> still a unique truth about each one's age at any specific event on his 
> worldline). They do reach the same age simultaneously in their comoving 
> inertial frame, but this frame's judgments can't be considered any more 
> "valid" than a different inertial frame.
> Jesse

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
To post to this group, send email to
Visit this group at
For more options, visit

Reply via email to