Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Sync two clocks
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2024 15:21:01 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <va9urd$tisc$1@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$1@dont-email.me> <aeuL_3xao9-_kSf51ssMUTgW-s8@jntp> <va6rjs$c7ca$1@dont-email.me> <66c6fe9d$0$3360$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <va72t9$blq6$4@dont-email.me> <omIg9w0Iy0ZX5hSc9cLG74AlKY0@jntp> <f15x-DXi9mk6sbBPa_gf0bWPArc@jntp> <va7veu$hfcs$1@dont-email.me> <Kjl4WjK9KQqBWo5XbMcErn2fRTY@jntp> <va9rek$t321$1@dont-email.me> <F40JMlmiKMAdWZPU3lor7AoXO4Q@jntp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2024 14:21:02 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="bfc65ec5aa48ce91b41c9d094026f89c";
	logging-data="969612"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX185ygTcAoys/n/2Uy8v5KhH"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:d8z2v9oXELuzvgS3TC8bH8kjbxs=
Bytes: 2939

On 2024-08-23 11:45:50 +0000, Richard Hachel said:

> Le 23/08/2024 à 13:23, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit :
>> 
>> https://paulba.no/paper/Electrodynamics.pdf
>> Quote from § 1. Definition of Simultaneity:
>> -------------------------------------------
>> "If at the point A of space there is a clock, an observer at
>> A can determine the time values of events in the immediate
>> proximity of A by finding the positions of the hands which
>> are simultaneous with these events.
>> If there is at the point B of space another clock in all
>> respects resembling the one at A, it is possible for an observer
>> at B to determine the time values of events in the immediate
>> neighbourhood of B.
>> But it is not possible without further assumption to compare,
>> in respect of time, an event at A with an event at B.
>> We have so far defined only an “A time” and a “B time.”
>> We have not defined a common “time” for A and B, for
>> the latter cannot be defined at all unless we establish
>> by definition that the “time” required by light to travel
>> from A to B equals the “time” it requires to travel from B to A.
>> "
>> 
>> If you can read, you will see that Einstein did say what I said.
> 
> Here is finally a solid basis.
> And that is very well said.
> The small drawback that remains is that Einstein proposes a definition,
> but without explaining which observer will be able to consider the 
> proposition as true.

What is not explained in the quoted text is explained later in the
same article.

-- 
Mikko