0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
One of the issues that remains controversial in special relativity is whether or not simultaneity at a distance has any meaning.
In other words, when the traveling twin (he) in the twin paradox says that the home twin's (her) current age "right now" is such-and-such, is his conclusion true, real, and meaningful?
I base that on my belief that she doesn't cease to exist just because they are separated by a vast distance.
And if she DOES currently EXIST, then she must currently be DOING something specific. And if she is currently doing something specific, her brain must currently be in a specific and unique state, which implies that she is currently some specific age.
But I THINK I may have discovered a proof that his conclusion about her current age is meaningless. If that proof is valid, that is obviously very disturbing to me (because of the above philosophical argument).
I discovered the proof while investigating a possible new simultaneity method
The strong causality principle that I've decided to impose says that the home twin's (her) current rate of ageing (relative to the traveling twin's (his) rate of ageing) can't change for some period of time after he changes his velocity.
Therefore strong causality can't be correct.
Therefore his conclusion about her current age isn't meaningful, real, or true.