Criticism to the Twin's Paradox

The so-called “twin’s paradox” is considered an important issue in special relativity theory because it implies a profound understanding of space time structure. And yet, since its original formulation in 1911 by Paul Langevin, numerous alleged explanations for this disturbing paradox have been produced; as it seems, unsuccessfully. This remains a subject for heated debate. Why? Because in all those explanations one tries to reconcile the irreconcilable, this is, what seems to be a logical conclusion (based on the phenomenon of time dilation) with what is simply unacceptable: how can it be a difference in aging from twins without breaking the fundamental equivalency between frames of coordinates? The purpose of this research is, first, to point out the basic flaws in the premises of the usual “explanations” and then to provide a consistent answer to the problem. It is proven here that there is no twin’s paradox and this despite the reality of time dilation. Proceeding without prejudice, simply following appropriate premises and mathematical equations, one finally discovers an astoundingly, wonderfully coherent resolution to the problem, and this in the frame of special relativity itself. The key to understand and finally resolve this puzzling issue is relativistic asynchrony, particularly past and future permutation. Finally, the implications of this understanding, as can be easily induced, go far beyond special relativity. If there is no different aging in inertial frames, regardless of their relative velocity, should this conclusion also apply to accelerated ones, this is, to general relativity?