The last paragraph of http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/pdf/0006/0006039.pdf states this conclusion:

 

Thus in Friedmann–Lemaıtre universes, (i) the expansion of the universe and (ii) the existence of a non–trivial topology for the constant time hypersurfaces both break the Poincare invariance and single out the same “privileged” inertial observer who will age more quickly than any other twin: the one comoving with the cosmic fluid – although aging more quickly than all her travelling sisters may be not a real privilege!

See these references also:

 

http://physics.ucr.edu/Active/Abs/abstract-13-NOV-97.html

http://www.everythingimportant.org/viewtopic.php?t=79

http://cornell.mirror.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v8/i6/p1662_1

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/0101/0101014.pdf

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/0503/0503070.pdf

http://www.everythingimportant.org/viewtopic.php?t=605

http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/simultaneity.htm

 

I'm delighted that common sense is finally being recognized in the physics community. When do you think it will be realized that an absolute time order precludes the possibility of anything falling into a black hole?

WHOOSH.

 

That was the sound of that post going over my head.

common sense because uhmm what

Thank you for listing some papers. Now if you´d also tell me what your post is about at all I might even consider reading one or two of them to debate with you. I hope that´s not too much to ask for.

The first reference says it best:

 

Colloquium for 13-NOV-97 Abstract

Absolute Space and Time in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity

 

The Special Theory of Relativity, we teach our students, did away with Absolute Space and Absolute Time, leaving us with no absolute motion or rest, and also no absolute time order. General Relativity is viewed as extending the "relativity of motion" applicable to curved spacetimes, and General Relativity's most probable models of our actual spacetimes (the big-bang models) appear to re-introduce a privileged "cosmic" time order, and a definite sense of absolute rest. In particular, some of the same kinds of effects whose *absence* led to rejection of Newtonian absolute space are present in these models of GTR.

I´m not completely convinced that the standard geometry assumed for our universe fits the periodicity-conditions I saw in two of the papers. The black hole metric certainly doesn´t which is why I didn´t understand your initial post.

hello, i dont have time to go thru all that links, but wat i think u are talkin about is that the universe is expanding, i hold a contrary opinion, i think the universe is contracting ( the big collapse). See it this way, the universe is shrinkin in volume energy and the resultant effect of this is seen in the increased surface area energy

What are any of you talking about?

I'm with gib65 on this thread what is everyone talking about.

 

As far as I can see your links are talking about resolving the twin paradox in special relativity for a universe with at least 1 compact dimension. Apart from a relatively (pardon the pun) interesting read, what is your point???

what exactly dont you understand, let me know

How are you going to evade the equation for proper time in a gravitational field being directly comparable with the topologically distinguished, universally applicable background time that characterizes spatially compact spacetime? Take the spacetime cylinder for example. All observers agree on the simultaneity of events. Clock rates everywhere, in this instance, are all physically tied together. Why should a global sense to the order of all spacetime events for all observers miraculously disappear in a spatially compact universe if we were to add the extremely faint gravitational field of an electron to it? Let the radius of the electron shrink to zero. At what step in the limiting process does the universally agreed upon cosmic everywhere present "now" suddenly disappear?