Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!pasdenom.info!from-devjntp
Message-ID: <6s8YJGP42H0C-4FoL8dk0ahw7GU@jntp>
JNTP-Route: nemoweb.net
JNTP-DataType: Article
Subject: Re: Relativistic synchronisation method
References: <4-GlI_h7vkz4Ndsd_KixgDLS7Gg@jntp> <1811b1bbc2b0581a$4009$1258271$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com>
 <EQHypnRrrfm9KIsfn1hoIuNDvWw@jntp> <vjrvi5$1or3g$1@dont-email.me> <q2T1xxfs2anW3avnE-Mbv6h_TtQ@jntp>
 <vk6it0$2j18$1@dont-email.me> <y6NFsdinreqq-hxcRLvq7hZ4gpc@jntp> <vk92ht$kijv$1@dont-email.me>
 <HQFxpJvcwIpLhNIeMKqLNQ292YE@jntp> <vk9qtr$p308$1@dont-email.me>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
JNTP-HashClient: E7u61MZHX6muGq6Z7paOQ9275zE
JNTP-ThreadID: YYnLTqUhhEGH779uk7wevDN2vH4
JNTP-Uri: https://www.nemoweb.net/?DataID=6s8YJGP42H0C-4FoL8dk0ahw7GU@jntp
User-Agent: Nemo/1.0
JNTP-OriginServer: nemoweb.net
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 24 21:15:56 +0000
Organization: Nemoweb
JNTP-Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Injection-Info: nemoweb.net; posting-host="e8cbf2474b472b9bb79db3dccb6a856bc1d05409"; logging-data="2024-12-22T21:15:56Z/9150911"; posting-account="4@nemoweb.net"; mail-complaints-to="julien.arlandis@gmail.com"
JNTP-ProtocolVersion: 0.21.1
JNTP-Server: PhpNemoServer/0.94.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-JNTP-JsonNewsGateway: 0.96
From: Richard Hachel <r.hachel@liscati.fr.invalid>
Bytes: 8165
Lines: 178

Le 22/12/2024 à 20:56, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit :
> Den 22.12.2024 14:35, skrev Richard Hachel:
>> Le 22/12/2024 à 14:00, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit :
>>>
>>> I want you to answer my simple questions in a way I can understand.
>>>
>>> I will reformulate my question so you will only have to
>>> answer "YES" or "NO".
>>>
>>> Here we go:
>>>
>>> Richard, do you own a watch of some kind?
>>>   'yes' or 'no', please!
>>>
>>> Do you use the internet to set your watch?
>>> (or is your watch a computer on the net?)
>>>   'yes' or 'no', please!
>>>
>>> Do you use a mobile network to set your watch?
>>> (or is your watch a mobile phone?)
>>>   'yes' or 'no', please!
>>>
>>> Do you use GPS to set your watch?
>>> (or is your watch a GPS-receiver?)
>>>   'yes' or 'no', please!
>>>
>>> Do you use public radio or TV to set your  watch?
>>> (or is your watch on a radio receiver or a TV?)
>>>
>>> Do you expect your watch to show the same as the clock on
>>> the wall of a railway station or an airport (within a minute or so)?
>>>   'yes' or 'no', please
>> 
>> Everything you say is true.
>> 
>> So I can answer "yes, absolutely" to all your questions.
> 
> OK. Thanks for a clear answer.
> 
> You expect your watch to be synchronous with the clock on the wall
> of a railway station or an airport an airport within a minute or so.
> 
> That is because you know that just about all clocks in France
> are synchronous and show UTC+1 hour.
> So do the clocks in most western European countries,
> Your clock and my clock are synchronous with UTC+1h.
> (My clock within 1 second)
> 
>> 
>> The problem is that you do not understand what you are doing, and what a 
>> synchronization process consists of in our universe.
> 
>> 
>> When you synchronize all the users' watches, you synchronize them on a 
>> single watch, which is the system watch and which is located in a given 
>> place (the position of the watch is as crucial as its relative speed in 
>> the cosmos).
> 
> Quite.
> The single clock is the USNO Master Clock.
> Its position in cosmos is Washington, D.C., USA
> 
>   
> https://www.cnmoc.usff.navy.mil/Our-Commands/United-States-Naval-Observatory/Precise-Time-Department/The-USNO-Master-Clock/
> 
> 
>> This watch is an "abstract", virtual watch, which synchronizes all the 
>> watches on it, and on IT ALONE, to give coherence to the whole.
> 
> It is a very real clock, consisting of several atomic clocks.
> 
> Richard, I am in the real world.
> 
> I synchronise my clock to the master clock with this:
> 
> https://time.is/clock
> 
> It uses the internet. The delay both ways in the net is measured
> and corrected for, so the displayed  time will be correct
> within a second.
> 
> You answered yes to these questions:
> Do you use the internet to set your watch?
> Do you expect your watch to show the same as the clock on
> the wall of a railway station or an airport (within a minute or so)?
> 
> So you synchronise your clock to UTC+1h in the same way as I do, and you
> expect your clock to be synchronous with UTC+1h within a minute or so.
> (I expect it to be synchronous within a second.)
> 
> So don't tell me that you used some "abstract virtual clock"
> when you set your clock.
> 
> How did you read "the abstract virtual clock"? :-D
> 
>> 
>> This means that in fact, all the watches remain out of tune by nature, 
>> and will always remain so,
> 
> You have said that you use internet to synchronise your clock,
> so what does it mean that it still is "out of tune"?
> Is your clock a cuckoo clock with a cuckoo who is singing out of tune?
> 
> 
> Merry Christmas Richard.

You still don't understand what I'm trying to tell you (it's been four 
decades).

We breathe, we blow.

We have a little coffee, and we hold our heads in our hands.

WE CANNOT absolutely synchronize two watches with each other, because it 
is physically impossible.

This is like saying: "draw me a round square".

We must therefore synchronize the two watches on a third virtual watch for 
which the two events watch A marks noon, and watch B marks noon are 
SIMULTANEOUS.

It is on the universal simultaneity of this abstract watch that physicists 
build their usable universe.

This watch does not exist, it is virtual, although very useful.

I repeat it again and again, watches A and B cannot be tuned to each 
other. If I agree A on B (I say that the two events A1 and B1 are 
simultaneous) for A, but they will no longer be for B.

And so on for the entire universe.

A synchronization of type M is then necessary, and we imagine, without 
realizing it, a point M placed very far away in a hypothetical fourth 
dimension and at an equal distance from all points A, B, C, D, etc... of 
the universe.

This point M has its own hyperplane of present time, in which all events 
take place at the same instants and we note tM(e1)= tM(e2)=tM(e3)=etc...

And it is on this virtual point that we refer when synchronizing all the 
watches.

Synchronizing the watches (let's breathe, let's blow) does not mean 
"agreeing to say that all the watches mark noon at the same time", it is 
grotesque, false, and absurd. This is NOT what it means. Believing this is 
an idea as religious as it is false.

It simply means that for M, all events occurred at the same present 
moment.

I repeat it again because it is so important, and because it is the very 
basis of the theory of relativity well understood:
It simply means that for M, all events occurred at the same present 
moment.

Paul, Paul, I beg you to understand this concept which, I know 
unfortunately confuses 99.9% of those who read me.

Paul, Paul, I beg you to make an effort to understand, and to UNDERSTAND 
the simple notion of universal anosochrony and the usefulness of this 
abstract virtual watch that the whole world uses without understanding 
that it is a useful watch, but virtual and that NEVER two events can be 
RECIPROCALLY SIMULTANEOUS.

It is only by abstract convention that we use the notion of synchronized 
watches.

If you understand French, you will see that I write in my pdf: "Just as 
all consciousness is consciousness of something, all synchronization is 
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========