Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: [SR and synchronization] Cognitive Dissonances and Mental
 Blockage
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2024 07:53:33 +0200
Lines: 69
Message-ID: <ljd51mFl74gU4@mid.individual.net>
References: <v9q6eu$1tlm9$1@dont-email.me> <liduroFtbroU2@mid.individual.net>
 <vah9hs$2c43u$1@dont-email.me> <lj56luFe0luU3@mid.individual.net>
 <M4vxPZKxPU6U7NDCGNWCGCM0lRc@jntp> <ljahm9F9dfdU2@mid.individual.net>
 <vapd5l$3tffr$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net 7NT0KHBNgrdDCYKsKxSP9we8zkWWaHqSNK2bTs3k/WgEtZxyfE
Cancel-Lock: sha1:v6s/6ffxOrcRMQEm4q1jF+KEG1Q= sha256:qxhN70vlEKHqxk/GzSbiEgNokNzMamb7J1huJG7hi94=
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: de-DE
In-Reply-To: <vapd5l$3tffr$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3214

Am Donnerstag000029, 29.08.2024 um 10:57 schrieb Python:
> Le 29/08/2024 à 08:10, Thomas Heger a écrit :
>> Am Dienstag000027, 27.08.2024 um 12:25 schrieb Richard Hachel:
>>> Le 27/08/2024 à 07:31, Thomas Heger a écrit :
>>>
>>>> The very word 'relativity' requires mutually symmetric perspectives.
>>>
>>> Absolutely.
>>>
>>>> Since both perspectives are of equal rights, we need to accept both 
>>>> views as valid, hence need mutually symmetric perspectives.
>>>
>>> Magnifico! Wunderschön !!!
>>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> But this is obvious and certainly not disputed.
>>
>> But Einstein, however, had not written about a symmetric system of 
>> clock synchronization.
> 
> Liar!
> 
> « We assume that this definition of synchronism is free from 
> contradictions, and possible for any number of points; and that the 
> following relations are universally valid:
> 
> 1.    *If the clock at B synchronizes with the clock at A, the clock at 
> A synchronizes with the clock at B*.
> 
> 2.    If the clock at A synchronizes with the clock at B and also with 
> the clock at C, the clocks at B and C also synchronize with each other.
> »
> 
> What is point 1. if not *symmetry*?

See here for instance:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCGuhcrb-qM

This is a video in German about Einstein's simultaneity , but you will 
certainly find something equivalent in English.

The trick of Einstein's method was an extra-observer in the middle 
between the two ends of a longish train.

Now this system would not require to correct the delay 'by hand'.

And this method was apparently meant by Einstein himself.

But this method is, of course, wrong, because it s based on the position 
and state of movement of the observer in the middle.


The error: there is no such thing as a man in the middle, if we have 
only two systems A and B. And even if there were somebody, this would be 
entirely irrelevant for A or B or clocks there.

TH

...
> 
>> Instead he used something, one could call 'external time' (kind of 
>> 'true time').
> 
> Definitely NOT!
> 
>> [snip nonsense]