Why did the physics community abandon the Lorentz Ether Theory in favor of Einstein’s theory of relativity? Some people incorrectly state that the Lorentz Ether Theory was abandoned because the ether was an unnecessary add-on, but that claim is clearly false because the ether's absolute frame of reference is needed in order to solve the twin’s paradox, which Einstein’s theory of relativity cannot solve. Considering the fact that the Lorentz Ether Theory solves the twins paradox, but Einstein's theory of relativity cannot, shouldn't the Lorentz Ether Theory be the leading theory?
>>16950472I don't think they could detect the ether against the sun.
>>16950472The ether thing is highly misunderstood.They stopped calling it an “ether” because that definition implied that space was composed of intermingling pieces like it was a gas or a fluid. But space is a sort of grid of points that move about each other all together fixed in a pattern. Spacetime is still the medium of propagation for energy and whatnot.Relativity does solve the twins paradox. You don’t need an absolute reference point, just a common reference point for comparison. The earth is the reference point in the paradox because it refers to the twins age, aka solar years.
>>16950488In principle, couldn't you arbitrarily choose a different stationary frame of reference and then conclude that a different twin was the more aged twin? Isn't that the whole point of relativity, all frames of reference are allegedly equally valid, so there cannot be an absolute common reference point for comparison, instead such a common reference point can be arbitrarily selected and thus make different predictions for which twin will be the older twin. The ether doesn't have this problem.
>>16950492No
>>16950472they had to abandon luminiferous aether because the Michelson-Morley experiment showed Earth is stationary with respect to it. that would imply a special place for Earth in the universe - how can we be at rest with respect to a universal frame of reference unless there's something special about us? this leads to problematic ideas like intelligent design which of course the scientific community doesn't want to entertain. so instead the leading theory is a Jew telling us everybody's truth is different and spacetime contracts and expands depending on how fast you move. you can't make this shit up
>>16950558How so? The twin paradox is just a variation on the concept of relativity of simultaneity. That being, different frames of reference can disagree on the sequence of events (ie the age of the twins) depending on what frame of reference is defined as being the stationary frame of reference, which is an arbitrary choice that can produce absurd results as demonstrated by the twin paradox.
>>16950472> the twin’s paradox, which Einstein’s theory of relativity cannot solve.What can't it solve about it? The entire scenario wouldn't exist without relativity. It's a literal consequence of the theory. It's not even a paradox, just a lack of understanding by normies.
>>16950590see>>16950583The Lorentz Ether Theory solves the twin paradox by having a preferred absolute frame of reference (ie the ether) that determines which twin will be the older twin.
>>16950583Yes, that's wrong. Read the simple wiki article on it first, run it trough an AI and ask it to explain if you need to instead of posting garbage opinions like this here.
>>16950604AI agrees with >>16950583 and the OP. Lorentz Ether Theory is the leading theory. Einstein's theory of relativity is BTFO by the twins paradox.
>>16950611I asked you to read the article about the actual thing and to ask AI to summarize the simple wiki article for you if you don't understand, not hallucinate with your AI buddy.
>>16950599That's not a paradox. The whole concept of "older" is meaningless when separated, it's not relevant until both can be compared locally.
>>16950492Age itself is relative. But let’s try it. Instead of using the reference point of the earth, let’s use the reference point of the andromeda galaxy. To begin with, the twins are both moving at the same speed relative to andromeda. This motion is relative and so because both twins are in the same frame we can just negate it and say they aren’t moving at all, since they are stationary relative to each other.So now when one twin moves off the earth, we still get the same relativistic effects.It doesn’t matter where you put your reference point because you’re actually comparing the two twins and their ages.
>>16950611On the reference frame thing. GR does have a sort of universal reference frame, it’s based on the distribution of all mass and gravity in the universe. Look up Mach’s principle. So all movement effectively happens relative to that distribution which creates a pretty consistent reference frame for everything else. Mach wasn’t fully correct but his concepts influenced GR and the concept of “frame dragging” which is essential for relativistic rotation.
>>16950472ether detection was more difficult than expected for (((some reason)))
>>16950814"In 1916, after Einstein completed his foundational work on general relativity, Lorentz wrote a letter to him in which he speculated that within general relativity the aether was re-introduced. In his response Einstein wrote that one can actually speak about a "new aether", but one may not speak of motion in relation to that aether. "Interesting. Not a good look for Einstein.
>>16950727The paradox twin paradox in SR is that both twins could claim the other one is the younger one. See >>16950611
>>16950977Not with absolute acceleration, which is measurable with accelerometers.
>>16950472does ether theory make any measurable prediction that isn't a high school level thought experiment?
>>16951036Nope. That's why it's so stupid. Relativity works, explains everything, and doesn't require some impossible to observe magical medium. But no, let's not accept that because ""reasons"".
>>16950977That's not a paradox. It is merely counter-intuitive to our everyday experiences.
>>16950977This a misunderstanding of the geometry of spacetime. Pick two points in Euclidean space - you can draw a straight line between the two and that's the shortest line between the two points. All other lines joining the two points have different length than the straight line. This is completely independent of what coordinates you use in the space. You would need two metric tensors in spacetime for there to be any ambiguity about which twin is the younger one.
>>16950472Reminder that you only care about this because Einstein was a Jew.
