| Deutsch English Français Italiano |
|
<mi8jivrFcigra2axpPaQXJiogwg@jntp> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!pasdenom.info!from-devjntp Message-ID: <mi8jivrFcigra2axpPaQXJiogwg@jntp> JNTP-Route: news2.nemoweb.net JNTP-DataType: Article Subject: Re: Sync two clocks References: <u18wy1Hl3tOo1DpOF6WVSF0s-08@jntp> <vPP1Z1BJfE1Dt7SYhCzEo7ZQWFI@jntp> <va0a4f$30p95$1@dont-email.me> <Q5uRIW04EcKQUaDhHF3BgLlhTEc@jntp> <va2604$3cvm9$2@dont-email.me> <va26au$3c12c$8@dont-email.me> <DBY62RW1eKeJ1CBElubh-FukMnE@jntp> <va5cd7$3vdmg$1@dont-email.me> <liqlo1Fr49eU1@mid.individual.net> <va9iq3$rsla$1@dont-email.me> Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity JNTP-HashClient: 0wyAeQuXExcIHV1dgMeW6614pQk JNTP-ThreadID: KqCy9G15x7A9xZN_JLsoNRe49xU JNTP-Uri: http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=mi8jivrFcigra2axpPaQXJiogwg@jntp User-Agent: Nemo/0.999a JNTP-OriginServer: news2.nemoweb.net Date: Fri, 23 Aug 24 11:30:06 +0000 Organization: Nemoweb JNTP-Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/127.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Injection-Info: news2.nemoweb.net; posting-host="e8cbf2474b472b9bb79db3dccb6a856bc1d05409"; logging-data="2024-08-23T11:30:06Z/8997462"; posting-account="4@news2.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@tiscali.fr> Bytes: 3066 Lines: 35 Le 23/08/2024 à 10:55, Mikko a écrit : >> >> This is not, what 'invariant' means in the context of relativity. > > Yes, it is. > >> Meant is, that time would not change, if you switch from one frame of >> reference to another. > > No, it means that whatever is called "invariant" is the same for all > frames. In the current case, the number wirtten on the paper is invariant. > > Mikko Here is yet another proof of what I am saying, and of the need to re-explain things correctly. When I say "I bought a white horse, and I gave it to Father François; he will take care of it because he is retired, and he owns a field", everyone understands what I am saying. But if I say: "All the watches will be desynchronized", it is clear that no one will clearly understand what that means, and so on for a great many terms used. For a while, we will be able to bluff, and say: "I understand the first sentence as clearly as the second". But if we scratch a little, we see that it is pure bluff. What do you understand clearly in "the round squares if they are scarlet white in color remain more voluntary than watches synchronized on a vast Friday"? Nothing. A pure nothingness. "I synchronize A and B": when, how, with what, seen from where? All this must be defined, and if possible with a prose as obvious as: "I bought a white horse, and I gave it to Father François; he will take care of it because he is retired, and he owns a field". R.H.