| Deutsch English Français Italiano |
|
<Kjl4WjK9KQqBWo5XbMcErn2fRTY@jntp> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!fdn.fr!usenet-fr.net!pasdenom.info!from-devjntp Message-ID: <Kjl4WjK9KQqBWo5XbMcErn2fRTY@jntp> JNTP-Route: news2.nemoweb.net JNTP-DataType: Article Subject: Re: Sync two clocks References: <u18wy1Hl3tOo1DpOF6WVSF0s-08@jntp> <Zwwc8OsxqpAwTzvPkie6NmgxmY8@jntp> <va1tp9$3c0qh$1@dont-email.me> <aeuL_3xao9-_kSf51ssMUTgW-s8@jntp> <va6rjs$c7ca$1@dont-email.me> <66c6fe9d$0$3360$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <va72t9$blq6$4@dont-email.me> <omIg9w0Iy0ZX5hSc9cLG74AlKY0@jntp> <f15x-DXi9mk6sbBPa_gf0bWPArc@jntp> <va7veu$hfcs$1@dont-email.me> Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity JNTP-HashClient: CwqjOxsLdzP9HTIMhjcWs7NSGPI JNTP-ThreadID: KqCy9G15x7A9xZN_JLsoNRe49xU JNTP-Uri: http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=Kjl4WjK9KQqBWo5XbMcErn2fRTY@jntp User-Agent: Nemo/0.999a JNTP-OriginServer: news2.nemoweb.net Date: Thu, 22 Aug 24 19:12:36 +0000 Organization: Nemoweb JNTP-Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/127.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Injection-Info: news2.nemoweb.net; posting-host="e8cbf2474b472b9bb79db3dccb6a856bc1d05409"; logging-data="2024-08-22T19:12:36Z/8996781"; posting-account="4@news2.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@tiscali.fr> Bytes: 3352 Lines: 36 Le 22/08/2024 à 20:19, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit : > Den 22.08.2024 13:09, skrev Richard Hachel: > | But Einstein showed that there is no absolute simultaneity, > | and clocks can't be absolutely synchronised. Let's admit it, Paul. You're wrong, Einstein didn't say anything at all, and always just repeated what Poincaré said, but hey, it doesn't matter, we'll admit that you're right. There's just one thing I don't understand in your grievances and mockery. What do you mean by: "I, Paul B. Andersen, think that there is no absolute simultaneity, and that not all watches can be synchronized"? Python said that the terms had to be clear (for once, he's not lying). The terms have to be clear. In the introduction to my pdf, I wrote two A4 pages (in a compressed handwriting) and without putting a single equation, just to talk about the notion of simultaneity, proof that it's not so obvious (even if it makes you laugh). I too am talking about the notion of simultaneity, but am I sure we are talking about the same thing? Is Einstein talking about the same thing? Can you explain to me, in the greatest clarity, as Python recommends, what you mean, what you understand by the following words: "In special relativity, the notion of simultaneity is relative"? This is very important, and it is the very basis of the theory as it actually exists in nature. What do you mean by these words? Do you mean that the internal chronotropy of watches is relative? Do you mean that the notion of instant is relative to position (spatial anisochrony)? Do you mean something else? Personally, I define my words, and I explain what I consider clearly. I would be very happy to understand you and for you to be able to define your words. R.H.