Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!pasdenom.info!from-devjntp
Message-ID: <kUWvT_EEqhHVAYrxetfJ6kARfrk@jntp>
JNTP-Route: nemoweb.net
JNTP-DataType: Article
Subject: Re: Relativistic synchronisation method
References: <4-GlI_h7vkz4Ndsd_KixgDLS7Gg@jntp> <vk9qtr$p308$1@dont-email.me> <6s8YJGP42H0C-4FoL8dk0ahw7GU@jntp>
 <vkrfq7$vgn7$1@dont-email.me> <aPHxGjD_dpkbBzSp5qyOiHozthM@jntp> <vkv0i5$1pqpi$1@dont-email.me>
 <_CYXv7AxHmksXdC3qC_LVC1ERDY@jntp> <vl0g4p$26cgn$2@dont-email.me> <MY2rAPs--8tACK2xmT07V_aMmMI@jntp>
 <vl39ac$2opud$1@dont-email.me>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
JNTP-HashClient: pbzWOBf2xG-ka4B5ie8QUTtu9vs
JNTP-ThreadID: YYnLTqUhhEGH779uk7wevDN2vH4
JNTP-Uri: https://www.nemoweb.net/?DataID=kUWvT_EEqhHVAYrxetfJ6kARfrk@jntp
User-Agent: Nemo/1.0
JNTP-OriginServer: nemoweb.net
Date: Wed, 01 Jan 25 17:55:08 +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="2025-01-01T17:55:08Z/9160008"; 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: 3711
Lines: 53

Le 01/01/2025 à 12:35, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit :
> OK. So we can sum it up:
> 
> At home you "tune" your clock to show UTC+1h.
> You know the station clock is "tuned" to show UTC+1h.
> Since your clock and the station clock are well "tuned",
> you expect the clocks will show the same when you arrive
> at the station.
> 
> It would be ridiculous to claim that the clocks were not
> "tuned" to show the same when you were at home, but in some
> mysterious way became "tuned" to show the same when you arrived
> at the station. The clocks which side by side show the same
> must by definition be "tuned".
> 
> 
> If the reader thinks that "being tuned" is the same as
> "being synchronous", he is wrong, as Richard will explain below:

No, what I say is not ridiculous at all.

It is you who do not understand what I have been saying for several years 
now.

I was already saying the same thing forty years ago, and I have never 
changed an inch.

You are like a man who is given a magnificent book on "The notion of 
integration in Leibniz" but which is written in Chinese.

They tell you: "This book is magnificent" and you answer "no, no, it is 
all wrong, because I do not understand it, I do not know how to read 
Chinese".

It is you who are absurd without knowing it.

I can explain things as clearly as possible, you do not want to 
understand, your desire is in the obscurantism which saves you from having 
to think and understand things in such a precise and distinct way that 
your mind would be upset.

The same for all those who read, with this formidable pretension: he is 
alone, we are many, therefore we hold the truth, therefore his words 
(anisochrony, relativity of chronotropies) mean nothing.

You still do not understand why two watches placed in two different places 
will never be able to agree on the time, nor why two simultaneous events 
for one will not be for the other.

If in addition, they are in motion, the disorder becomes worse. Not only 
will they not agree on the time, but they will no longer agree on the 
speed of the beating of their internal mechanism.

R.H.