Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connectionsPath: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Mikko Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity Subject: Re: [SR and synchronization] Cognitive Dissonances and Mental Blockage Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2024 10:06:36 +0300 Organization: - Lines: 75 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2024 09:06:36 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="45ebeb6f5214096d9cd295140b7b6728"; logging-data="2494590"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19zfZ+INXVDH/y800BvAwkx" User-Agent: Unison/2.2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:pXcFb3jm7wegG7sx67rUfediSHM= Bytes: 4367 On 2024-08-18 09:57:35 +0000, Thomas Heger said: > Am Samstag000017, 17.08.2024 um 14:52 schrieb Python: >> **An Interesting Case of Mental Blockage and Cognitive Dissonance:** >> >> *Einstein-Poincaré Synchronization Procedure and Dr. Lengrand* >> >> What’s fascinating about certain cranks is that just when you think >> you’ve seen all the absurdities they can come up with, they manage to >> produce something even worse. Their cognitive dissonance and ability to >> pull out bizarre notions from who knows where, on top of a perfectly >> well-defined technical procedure, is astonishing. We’ve seen this >> before with GPS, where Hachel invents all sorts of fantasies, like >> atomic clocks in the receivers or synchronization with a clock >> infinitely far away in a fourth spatial dimension... >> >> This is a report of exchanges on the synchronization procedure >> described by Einstein in his 1905 paper, discussions that took place 17 >> years ago and more recently on sci.physics.relativity and >> fr.sci.physique. >> >> https://groups.google.com/g/fr.sci.physique/c/KgqI9gqTkR8/m/oMc9X0XjCWMJ >> >> *Reminders on the Procedure:* >> >> Two identical clocks, A and B, are stationary relative to each other at >> a certain distance. Their identical functioning (within measurement >> accuracy) allows us to assume that they "tick at the same rate." >> NOTHING more is assumed, especially regarding the time they display; >> the purpose is PRECISELY to adjust one of these clocks by applying a >> correction after a calculation involving the values indicated on these >> clocks during specific events, events that occur AT THE LOCATION OF >> EACH CLOCK. >> >> Einstein’s procedure is not strictly a synchronization procedure but a >> method to VERIFY their synchronization. This is the main difference >> from Poincaré’s approach. However, it can be proven that Poincaré’s >> method leads to clocks synchronized in Einstein’s sense. You can also >> transform Einstein’s verification method into a synchronization >> procedure because it allows calculating the correction to apply to >> clock A. >> >> *Steps of Einstein's Method:* >> >> When clock A shows t_A, a light signal is emitted from A towards B. >> >> When this signal is received at B, clock B shows t_B, and a light >> signal is sent from B back towards A. >> >> When the signal is received at A, clock A shows t'_A. > > Relativity requires mutally symmetric methods. So if you synchronize > clock B with clock A, this must come to the same result, as if you > would synchronize clock A with clock B. No, it does not mutually symmetric methods. Such methods make the presentation of the theory easier but do not affect the theory. Einstein chose a symmetric method because otherwise his text would be harder to read and understand. > But this requirement was not fullfilled in Einstein's scheme, because > Einstein didn't take delay into consideration. So you say but cannot prove. > If A and B are located at different places in the universe and maintain > their distance (at least as long as the procedure lasts), then delay > (A->B) should be equal to delay(B->A). There is no should be. Einstein simply defined that if those delays are equal then the clocks are synchronous, otherwise they aren't. -- Mikko