Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!pasdenom.info!from-devjntp
Message-ID: <vPP1Z1BJfE1Dt7SYhCzEo7ZQWFI@jntp>
JNTP-Route: news2.nemoweb.net
JNTP-DataType: Article
Subject: Re: Sync two clocks
References: <u18wy1Hl3tOo1DpOF6WVSF0s-08@jntp> <v9nant$1d2us$1@dont-email.me>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
JNTP-HashClient: 4_aEEtmi8umERqL5ArtiHJ2Gz70
JNTP-ThreadID: KqCy9G15x7A9xZN_JLsoNRe49xU
JNTP-Uri: http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=vPP1Z1BJfE1Dt7SYhCzEo7ZQWFI@jntp
User-Agent: Nemo/0.999a
JNTP-OriginServer: news2.nemoweb.net
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 24 12:24:33 +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="2024-08-16T12:24:33Z/8988860"; 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@jesauspu.fr>
Bytes: 5470
Lines: 120

Le 16/08/2024 à 12:47, Python a écrit :
> If the meaning of t_A, t_B, and t'_A are still unknown to you, you can
> refer to Einstein 1905 article.
> 
> t_A is the time shown by clock A when a light signal is emitted;
> 
> t_B is the time shown by clock B when the signal is received and re-emitted;
> 
> t'_A is the time shown by clock A when the returned signal is received.

Here's the clown continuing.

If we look closely, what he says seems sensible.

This is why all of humanity is wrong about the theory of special 
relativity as taught.

Because the more we rub our eyes, the more sensible it seems.

Except that... breathe, blow...

That clock A notes a time t1 when the signal leaves A (we don't care about 
the value by the way,
it could be t1=0 or it could be t1=153), I'm willing.

We place B at 3.10^8m, and time is measured in seconds.

That clock A notes a time t2 when the signal returns, I'm willing again, 
and as Jean-Pierre
Messager says (sometimes he says intelligent things, although it's rare), 
I'm going to say that t2=2 or that t2=155.

How will Jean-Pierre achieve this prophetic feat?

Let's not get carried away, I know how to do it too.

Here's how I do it, breathe, blow.

t2 = t1 + 2AB/c

And this is so true that it applies to the entire universe, and all 
inertial frames of reference.

But unlike Jean-Pierre, Henri or Albert, I'll stop here.

Because this is where the vast ocean of relativistic science begins.

What time is it in B when B receives the information? I don't know at all,
and first of all, depending on how I synchronized B, it could be t=4532 or 
t=-12.

So I don't know at all.

Jean-Pierre is intelligent enough to understand that it is therefore 
necessary to first synchronize B with A,
to have something coherent, because saying that tA=0 tB=4532 and tA'=2 is 
always feasible, we are not lying, but it is very unhelpful.

Except that Jean-Pierre still has not understood Hachel's thinking, and he 
remains in the hypothesis of a flat present (the horizontal plane of the 
present time), as others remain in the hypothesis of the flat earth.

Nature is not made like that, that's not how it works.

So what time is it in B?

Jean-Pierre does not bother with embellishments: "We only have to 
artificially set tB=(t2-t1)/2 and thus, everything will be very simple and 
very practical".

Except that it is an artificial synchronization.

And except that it will not be true for A, nor for B.

It will only be true for M, a point placed at an equal distance from A and 
B, and the synchronization will be called M synchronization.

Because in the universe of A, this M synchronization is completely false, 
everything that is part of the "3D present time" of M is not part, and we 
are infinitely far from it, of the present time of A, and ditto for B.

Each chosen point, A, B, or M have the same 3D inertial frame, but they 
are not part of the same 4D frame, and each can only have its own (because 
of anisochrony, and the fourth component t).

The synchronization of Einstein, Poincaré, physicists, is therefore only 
an abstract synchronization,
which represents a point M, placed very far perpendicularly, in an 
imaginary fourth dimension,
and which apprehends all the points of the 3D universe at the same 
distance and at the same present moment of M.

It is obviously totally imaginary, but it is very useful.

For this point, indeed, we can say that tB=(t2-t1)/2 but it is a 
convention M.

For A as for B, it is absolutely impossible to synchronize these two 
watches between them FOR them.

As it is also impossible to synchronize A or B with the imaginary point M.

Always, always, always, there will remain a universal anisochrony.

And always, always, always, in the reality of things, if we have practiced 
a synchronization M:

FOR A:
tB-t1=2AB/c
t2-tB=0

FOR B:
tB-t1=0
t2-tB=2AB/c

I don't know if it will take Lengruche four years to understand that 
(a+b)(a-b)=a²-b²
but it is certain that in 30 years Ybmuche will still not have understood 
what I have just detailed here.

R.H.