| Deutsch English Français Italiano |
|
<va2h20$3c12c$24@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Python <python@invalid.org> Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity Subject: Re: Sync two clocks Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2024 18:42:40 +0200 Organization: CCCP Lines: 40 Message-ID: <va2h20$3c12c$24@dont-email.me> References: <u18wy1Hl3tOo1DpOF6WVSF0s-08@jntp> <v9nant$1d2us$1@dont-email.me> <vPP1Z1BJfE1Dt7SYhCzEo7ZQWFI@jntp> <va0a4f$30p95$1@dont-email.me> <Zwwc8OsxqpAwTzvPkie6NmgxmY8@jntp> <va1tp9$3c0qh$1@dont-email.me> <lvwOM_tj8NJtPtaduqcmSRprOtk@jntp> <va2b62$3c12c$15@dont-email.me> <gQSP7T04xKx9wgapoySeijcbJi4@jntp> <va2cu7$3c12c$17@dont-email.me> <-RLU4Hb-vC0H6CrJfdC09_wtGwc@jntp> <va2fsa$3c12c$22@dont-email.me> <17ed7d30c4e76fab$456468$546728$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2024 18:42:40 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e7766270ddb83778ad61a74e624af08e"; logging-data="3540044"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18efW6iRxAaKlmFokc0nao1" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:M6fmUkMbvrgDBGUWVFNA1C8vanQ= In-Reply-To: <17ed7d30c4e76fab$456468$546728$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com> Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 2723 Le 20/08/2024 à 18:38, Maciej Wozniak a écrit : > W dniu 20.08.2024 o 18:22, Python pisze: >> Le 20/08/2024 à 18:18, M.D. Richard "Hachel" Lengrand a écrit : >>> Le 20/08/2024 à 17:32, Python a écrit : >>> >>>>> In short, for A, tB and tA' are simultaneous. >>>>> I repeat, for A, tB and tA' are simultaneous. >>>> >>>> Numbers like t_B or t'_A cannot be "simultaneous". Events >>>> like e1 = "B sends back a light signal to A" or e2 = "A receives >>>> this signal" can be. >>>> >>>> If this is what you meant, which is likely, then, according >>>> to Einstein-Poincaré *definition* of simultaneity: >>>> >>>> e1 and e2 are NOT simultaneous for A (nor for B) >>> >>> No. >> >> According to Einstein-Poincaré definition of simultaneity >> they are not simultaneous. >> >> However you like or not this *definition* this is something >> you CANNOT deny. >> >> A definition cannot be false. > > If your idiot guru defined a cow as a 6 leg > small animal with chitine armour - would it > be "not false" to you as well, poor halfbrain? > Who knows? If you were in an "everything goes" day it would not be false. But if are in a "nothing goes" day, nothing is not false, even defining a cow as a four legs mammal usually grown in farms is false.