On May 6, 4:47 pm, Tom Roberts wrote:
Albertito wrote:
On May 6, 3:22 pm, Tom Roberts wrote:
Albertito wrote:
I can imagine the twin paradox resolved if [...]
"Imagination" is useless -- I can IMAGINE the cow jumping over the moon.

What science requires is understanding the theory and then CALCULATING
what happens. Do this for SR and the twin scenario, and one obtains
agreement with experiments. Nothing more can be expected of a theory.

I don't agree. Einstein was overly imaginative

His imagination was guided by experimental evidence, not just flopping
around like yours.

My imagination is not flopping around. I know
very well Einstein's relativity is not the ultimate
theory. The problem is the people that worship it,
not the theory itself. Worshippers are the only
serious obstacle for the advance of science.
Worshipping is closing your eyes, and trying to
refute anything that sounds heretic.

And he became famous because he turned his imaginings
into a real theory in which he CALCULATED things. Had he not done that,
he would not be remembered.


What the hell is a "real theory"? I thought all tneories,
once they exist, are real. What do you mean by a
"real theory"? Are there theories more real than others?

Why are you so sure time contraction is not a real
phenomenon? Because Einstein said that's impossible?
Can you please tell at what rate a clock is running
in a distant galaxy wrt your clock?