Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.math
Subject: Re: ? ? ?
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2024 09:12:30 +0100
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <l4vv9tFhbj7U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <1HWE6H1jV8YTvxfaaL7fnCCcpe8@jntp> <l3qubtFoko5U1@mid.individual.net> <OUBwWk7nMWGNJZmcRmw2PSfJVnw@jntp> <uraf1j$k54i$1@dont-email.me> <l3tl1lF7v86U1@mid.individual.net> <urcb9o$14049$1@dont-email.me> <H8rfjmuhUKt3d2dH4AwyunFLrCQ@jntp> <l4060uFjpt5U1@mid.individual.net> <L_G9QLYwTstxrFecTVopJTtYH98@jntp> <EwNCN.10443611$ee1.4526609@fx16.ams4> <l42p7pF1fdhU1@mid.individual.net> <uriu05$3kjja$1@paganini.bofh.team> <l45ek0Fe0s6U1@mid.individual.net> <urobnk$3v1g$1@dont-email.me> <l4ak2fF7mb7U1@mid.individual.net> <abd1af5f6c6e172db813996bbc8a1fbd@www.novabbs.com> <l4pd6iFh9qrU1@mid.individual.net> <17ba17198d38202d$39429$138080$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com> <65E8186D.2220@ix.netcom.com> <65E81BB3.3B9B@ix.netcom.com> <65E81EFB.3C55@ix.netcom.com> <l4qmlfFn6jmU1@mid.individual.net> <17ba368e6628ddbc$38447$141478$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com> <l4t6hpF4bo3U1@mid.individual.net> <17ba8285aef2897a$523$155296$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net qW7IXREbgPAKP7m5MfVNbA4VV222qP4JL1RthoEts9cyM2SACH
Cancel-Lock: sha1:zld67v+HXq4hx2Mj2EyoriJi+6g= sha256:WHV2dbfAJ5Lg7trkN1zuMu1zRUeiLwnmIw6Ny631XzA=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
In-Reply-To: <17ba8285aef2897a$523$155296$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com>
Bytes: 3448

Am 07.03.2024 um 15:41 schrieb Maciej Wozniak:
> W dniu 07.03.2024 o 07:57, Thomas Heger pisze:
>
>>>> The flow of time is assumed to be constant,
>>>
>>> Assumed by whom?
>>> It usually is, but exceptions happen.
>>>
>>>> I personally support the idea of local time, which is always flowing
>>>> forward in the local environment, but which is not universal.
>>>
>>> You may support it, it's still stupid.
>>>
>>
>> I needed this assumption (which stems imho from Poincaré) for my 'book':
>
> And GPS staff needed the opposite assumption
> for their system to work. What do you find
> more important - your "book" or working
> GPS?

No, because the GPS does not violate my assumptions.

GPS is pyhsically connected to the Earth, hence 'lives' in the same 
'time-domain' (uses Earth time).

But remote celestial object do not necessarily do, and may eventually 
use an axis of time, which has an angle towards our time.

(To understand this picture of an 'angle of the axis of time' you would 
need to read my 'book'.)

For instance I explain the Pioneer anomaly this way:

the Pioneer probe has been acceleated heavily, due to rocket start from 
Earth and a number of fly-byes. This caused the local time-axis of the 
probe to tilt a little bit away from Earth time.

So the probe is too slow (in Earth measures), while it is perfectly ok 
in its own measures.


This is similar to e.g. two equal trains on two tracks in a small angle, 
which start parallel and then curve a little away.

Now seen from each train the other is seeminly too slow, because the 
tracks are no longer parallel, but not because the other one is slow.


TH