Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2024 19:44:46 +0000
Subject: Re: What is "present time" in physics?
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
References: <Ui5QIab4-uknPHltT14hSGMQfrA@jntp>
 <CtycnSXnotLrCUX7nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@giganews.com> <66D945A2.176@ix.netcom.com>
 <66D9DF1B.4160@ix.netcom.com>
From: Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2024 12:44:50 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <66D9DF1B.4160@ix.netcom.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <ceSdnfTqvaOzl0f7nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 117
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-MfvLFsHUGo258oKgdV/tR+zgmumB5tPyR0YNeVMWCOV+xM1RiCgnUSUXuY41ZQYz4sUgzOAto4KF0+j!UmwpuJhpTX9fx70oQvq5ob2xIMwC/9cGd+ipYfrs27fpUPpjwSZHY6ZQ0B7buT3UZ7t/5E7cwmSy!KA==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 6922

On 09/05/2024 09:40 AM, The Starmaker wrote:
> The Starmaker wrote:
>>
>> Ross Finlayson wrote:
>>>
>>> On 09/04/2024 08:10 AM, Richard Hachel wrote:
>>>> The problem of relativity is the understanding of the notion of present
>>>> time, that is to say the notion of simultaneity (which should not be
>>>> confused with the notion of chronotropy).
>>>> Is there on the planet Fomalhaut IV, a princess Alexandra who lives
>>>> there, at the same time as me; me who is here on earth?
>>>> That is to say in the same present moment?
>>>> It must be said that yes, since whatever procedure of universal
>>>> synchronization I adopt, whether mine or that of Albert Einstein, there
>>>> is necessarily a LABEL, and only one, to characterize the existence of
>>>> Alexandra simultaneous with mine.
>>>> But according to the method of "synchronization of present time", we
>>>> will not have the same label.
>>>> Einstein uses procedure M, Hachel procedure H.
>>>> Procedure M is the most practical, procedure H is the most true.
>>>> Procedure M is the most practical, because it derives from the
>>>> synchronization of the present time on a point M placed very far away in
>>>> an imaginary fourth dimension, and at an equal distance from all the
>>>> points constituting our universe. This gives an abstract universal time,
>>>> but very useful, where the notion of universal present time is flat, and
>>>> reciprocal. If A exists at the same time as B for M, then B exists at
>>>> the same time as A for M. It is very practical.
>>>> Procedure H proposed by Richard Hachel is less practical, but truer. It
>>>> is less practical, because the notion of symmetry of the present time
>>>> will not be absolute. But it is truer, physically more accurate, and
>>>> more beautiful. It will remain eternally true experimentally, and
>>>> eternally more beautiful philosophically. What could be more beautiful
>>>> than saying to a child: "This horse in this meadow, this moon in the
>>>> sky, this galaxy in this telescope, you see them instantly, as they are
>>>> today, live-live".
>>>> What is uglier than human thought, which thinks it is intelligent,
>>>> even though it is full of stupid mockery, conceptual imbecilities,
>>>> simply because it can say, as all morons say: "The speed of light is c,
>>>> we know it, we have measured it, experimented with it, and we get
>>>> 3.10^8m/s".
>>>> This is the most stupid reflection in the history of humanity, proposed
>>>> by mocking morons (Python, John Baez) who think they are funny and
>>>> intelligent, authorized mockers, but who have not understood anything
>>>> about the notion of universal anisochrony and the two possible ways in
>>>> which we can (or even MUST be able to) synchronize the clocks of the
>>>> universe.
>>>>
>>>> R.H.
>>>
>>> The (physical) space-time is a (mathematical) coordinate space, and
>>> the (physical) Space-Time is the continuous manifold of the field number
>>> formalism of QM combined with the inertial-systems'
>>> differential-system GR, where according to Einstein the GR is
>>> a differential-system parameterized by a "the time", and in
>>> QM the time-reversibility has never been falsified, with the
>>> time-ordering of the path-integral being pretty much classical,
>>> a "clock hypothesis" is not un-usual, that with respect to a
>>> coordinate space, yet there's only a forward-pointing ray of time,
>>> between zero and one a vector field over the entirety of Space-Time,
>>> that in deep space in absolute vacuum at absolute zero equals one.
>>>
>>> Clocks either slow or meet, ....
>>>
>>> That "there are no closed time-like curves" and "time reversibility
>>> has never been falsified" then as with regards to null geodesics
>>> and any usual ideas about using the time-like as simply an extra
>>> "Fourth Dimension" for only mathematical extrapolation, has that
>>> physically it might as well just be considered "the gradient" as
>>> with regards to "t" everywhere universally parameterizing the
>>> differential-system and time-ordering of GR and QM.
>>>
>>> This sort of theory can for example reduce functional freedom
>>> from 10^120 to approximately 1, while that "time dilation plus
>>> length contraction equals space contraction" is simply enough
>>> as of the FitzGeraldian and associated considerations of the
>>> Heaviside and Larmour with respect to Lorentz, while in QM
>>> there are both low-energy and high-energy supersymmetry, as
>>> whether "virtual" particles are just another model of continuum
>>> dynamics.
>>>
>>> I.e., all one theory, all one manifold, all one t.
>>>
>>> The d'Espagnat on a model philosopher's model physicist's
>>> model philosophy's model physics, "objective realism",
>>> with Broglie-Bohm and Aspect-like extra-locality, as
>>> with regards to "anti-realist model physics", helps
>>> explore then why making for a clock hypothesis and
>>> a "the time" as Einstein does in "Out of My Later Years",
>>> why curved space-time is just a model in the Cartesian
>>> for "space contraction" then that though its consideration
>>> as a "Fourth Dimension" asks a bit much of a simple numerical
>>> resource of a mathematical/physical continuum, continuous
>>> manifold.
>>>
>>> What time is now?
>>
>> Now here or now, or here and now??? where? here? now? is it here now?
>>
> The question nobody wants to ask is..Where is Now? and
>
> where is Here?
>
> Is Here and Now the same place or are they two different places?
>
> Here
>
> Now
>
>
>
>
>
>

"Do you know who ...?"   "Yeah"