Path: ...!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.1
Date: Sun, 25 May 2025 06:31:38 +0200
Lines: 67
Message-ID: <m9fklvFaetiU2@mid.individual.net>
References: <100keh4$2a7u2$1@dont-email.me>
 <mLSdnaogCubAQaz1nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com>
 <100so6h$l8lc$1@dont-email.me>
 <R4ednbng7qo6mq_1nZ2dnZfqnPqdnZ2d@giganews.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net HKlkDHENqDnBytgCFi9q0wHffgBq340ksK3nsxVTkkc9w8L6gc
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Y8TXMJlU/0/37t9vs6OT/a0rmkU= sha256:suc0MniqAJ20REd1ObirNnQueKe5xn7BId1W8aTZ4P4=
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: de-DE
In-Reply-To: <R4ednbng7qo6mq_1nZ2dnZfqnPqdnZ2d@giganews.com>
Bytes: 3372

Am Samstag000024, 24.05.2025 um 19:53 schrieb Ross Finlayson:
> On 05/24/2025 08:21 AM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
>> On 24/05/2025 16:48, Ross Finlayson wrote:
>>> On 05/21/2025 04:47 AM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
>>
>>> A clock hypothesis: is a pretty usual idea, that there
>>> are no closed time-like curves and furthermore that whatever
>>> meets has whatever clocks meet. Einstein called it a, "the time",
>>
>> That's false on all accounts, including the time travel
>> side of things, you still cannot get your head around
>> which, apparently.  That said, thanks for asking:
>>
>> The "clock hypothesis", in simple terms, is the principle
>> that all working clocks tick at the same rate (the proper
>> time rate) in their own frame.  Drop that and you drop
>> any chance of doing any physics at all: together with
>> the use of light signals, clocks are fundamental to
>> contemporary physics and the very measurement process.
>>
>> It is also equivalently the hypothesis that the local
>> experience of time is universally the same for every
>> particle and every observer: and I do not actually
>> mean anything psychological, rather the rate of getting
>> old, just like the rate of atom decay, is a physics fact.
>>
>> And note that none of that is about inertial frames and
>> motion only: time proper ticks at the same rate every
>> time every place.  Indeed, time dilation and length
>> contraction are only relativistic effects, we know that,
>> don't we? "Nothing is actually slowing or shortening
>> aboard that ship", which remains canonical relativity.
>>
>> -Julio
>>
> 
> Ah, no, "clock hypothesis" is usually that there's
> a, "universal time", for example an Einstein's "the time".

'a universal time' for the entire universe does not make sense!


We need actually the concept of 'local time' and sets of locations, 
which share the same local time and build in sum what I call a 'time 
domaine'.

On-time-only-universe is plain wrong!

The reasons to think so are a little tricky.

But there exists a good book about this topic, which I like to recommend:

Alexander Franklin Meyer 'Geometry of Time'.


I can also offer my own 'book' called 'structured spacetime'.

(This can be found here and is actually free to read and download - at 
least up to now:


https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Ur3_giuk2l439fxUa8QHX4wTDxBEaM6lOlgVUa0cFU4/edit?usp=sharing 
)


TH
....