Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!glou.org!news.glou.org!pi2.pasdenom.info!from-devjntp
Message-ID: <St3rIg5qrqtiPG8b8Py_sNcS3ew@jntp>
JNTP-Route: nemoweb.net
JNTP-DataType: Article
Subject: Re: What is "local =?UTF-8?Q?time=22=3F=20?=
References: <M0ZS0z9of5m3zPojotZe3TGunn4@jntp> <1aec54a219198abeee623f4762a3f105@www.novabbs.com>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
JNTP-HashClient: mnAGpKNqFGtHzAthH9gjzyS8KMU
JNTP-ThreadID: -D6LOzWQs9eNxLCiLkhFDtCIJBk
JNTP-Uri: https://www.nemoweb.net/?DataID=St3rIg5qrqtiPG8b8Py_sNcS3ew@jntp
User-Agent: Nemo/1.0
JNTP-OriginServer: nemoweb.net
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 24 15:09:42 +0000
Organization: Nemoweb
JNTP-Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/129.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Injection-Info: nemoweb.net; posting-host="e8cbf2474b472b9bb79db3dccb6a856bc1d05409"; logging-data="2024-10-15T15:09:42Z/9061940"; 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: 2710
Lines: 36

Le 15/10/2024 à 14:52, hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) a écrit :
> 
> Before you talk about "local time" you must first understand
> "time."  What is "time"?  Or maybe, the question is: WHY is
> time?  Does space have time, or do just masses have time?  Is
> there more than one dimension of time?  It appears to be a
> quantum thing/process; we use it, and are ruled by it, but we
> just don't know very much about it.

I even have the impression that we don't know anything about it at all.

But we brag, we brag.

And we know nothing.

Worse, what we think we know is often wrong.

Is the notion of simultaneity relative by change of frame of reference? 
Physicists will all answer in unison: "yes".

And they are wrong, they confuse simultaneity and chronotropy.

Is the notion of simultaneity relative by change of position

in a stationary medium? Physicists will all answer in unison: "no". And 
they are wrong, they confuse relativistic frame of reference and Newtonian 
frame of reference.

And I'm not talking about their completely wrong calculation on the proper 
times and instantaneous speeds of accelerated frames of reference, nor the 
stupidities they sing when describing rotating frames of reference.

The world is crazy.

It is man's navel more than his intelligence that has made him crazy.

R.H.