Is Time Dilation Explained by Special Relativity, General Relativity, or Both?

[russ_watters]

If a twin can be understood to be an AI and its history can be transferred electronically between closely passing ships, then the outgoing twin has his history transferred to an incoming ship without deceleration per se. Then when the incoming ship returns home, his history is transferred to a computer at home without deceleration per se.

How did the "outgoing" twin come be "outgoing"?

 

[1977ub]

How did the "outgoing" twin come be "outgoing"?

The initial outgoing ship was accelerated to speed before t=0 and then the AI was transferred from home to the passing ship at t=0

 

[Arkalius]

If a twin can be understood to be an AI and its history can be transferred electronically between closely passing ships, then the outgoing twin has his history transferred to an incoming ship without deceleration per se. Then when the incoming ship returns home, his history is transferred to a computer at home without deceleration per se.

I like this way of subverting the acceleration requirement, but everything still works out. The AI "twin" that arrives on Earth still did not occupy a single inertial reference frame, whereas the one on Earth did. This is actually a good way of illustrating why the acceleration itself is not what is important, but the fact that one twin did not occupy a single inertial reference frame while the other did.

 

[PAllen]

I like this way of subverting the acceleration requirement, but everything still works out. The AI "twin" that arrives on Earth still did not occupy a single inertial reference frame, whereas the one on Earth did. This is actually a good way of illustrating why the acceleration itself is not what is important, but the fact that one twin did not occupy a single inertial reference frame while the other did.

Or even more simply, that time was not accumulated over a single inertial path; this statement does not even need to mention frames.