Troubling aspects revisited

hello test

1234

I wonder too if anyone might suggest a science forum he has used and likes. Come on guys, surely somebody...

With many thanks

If you made your question clear I'd try to help. However there's no what that I, or anybody else for that matter, would go read an entire long thread just to be able to understand your question. It's too much to ask of us. We have better ways of spending our time. No offence meant here. I'm just explaining how I look at such questions where someone asks me a question and I'm required to do a lot of heavy reading before I understand the question. See what I mean?

Can you simply state what it is you want to ask?

Sorry Phil, I had hoped to attract some of the others having previously participated

"Reference frames" figure strongly into the twin paradox, which (as I understand it) has supposedly been "resolved" by reference to a "stationary reference frame"--not a reality (absoluteness?) that can be pinpointed but a supposed instantaneous "average" of some sort to which all other velocities can be compared. Whether there can be said to be only a single one or a large number of smaller ones seems to be a controversial issue. Yet I gather that some still maintain it's perfectly "real"

I get the feeling from accounts by L. Marder in "Time and the Space Traveler" that it's still a bit uncertain, or at least it was around 1970

Accounts I've read, including hereabout, seem to indicate that even Einstein didn't seem absolutely sure. But I'm sort of shifting around in a fog, hoping someone might resolve or at least explain the whole thing in everyday words arranged in a common order, as for your Average Clod (me)