Hey, this all looks familiar!
Madman, there's no
real paradox in the twin paradox. You're making the same mistake that Sam5 makes in dealing with it, and that is that failing to understand that a single object can experience a change in its own relative motion - that is, not only can one twin be in motion relative to the other, but one twin can be in motion
now relative to itself
then.
In order for the two twins to get back together, at least one of them has to change its relative motion, and thus symmetry is broken. There's no paradox, in the sense that
both twins should expect the
other to be younger, because that one twin changing its own relative motion is an absolute, not a relativity.
(How's it going, Sam? Did you ever decide by what factor an accelerating atomic clock should be slowed in GR?)