Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Who?
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2024 13:48:41 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 74
Message-ID: <vaf5kr$1s50h$1@dont-email.me>
References: <CBAARt4EEHThxO17L5beYQ9mMWI@jntp> <vadbad$1gllh$1@dont-email.me>
 <0sAbsqFI52cGATcKfyoKTJ3cyYo@jntp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2024 13:47:39 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d3cf223f9eef8b2546155b721076b31d";
	logging-data="1971217"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18EZcD+SGyBXw0VTDRE90j2"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:DD3OOndkNRR8worR+ywcVYb7eas=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <0sAbsqFI52cGATcKfyoKTJ3cyYo@jntp>
Bytes: 3814

Den 24.08.2024 22:14, skrev Richard Hachel:
> Le 24/08/2024 à 21:12, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit :
>> Den 24.08.2024 14:24, skrev Richard Hachel:
>>>
>>> What happens if I set two identical watches (same chronotropy) on my 
>>> table and I slowly move one of them towards the moon
>>> (let's say in three weeks to avoid a v²/c² ratio very different from 1)?
>>
>> So the two clocks on your desk are synchronous.
> 
> Absolutely >
>> If we ignore the gravitational blue shift, and pretend that
>> the ECI frame is a true inertial frame, then the lunar clock will
>> lag 0.45 μs on the Earth clock.
>> 
>> Which we will ignore, as you said we should.
>> 
>> So we will consider the clocks to be synchronous (within 1 μs).

>>> I notice in my telescope that when my watch marks
>>> 00:00'08" the lunar clock is desynchronized and marks 00:00'07".

>>
>> Don't be ridiculous.
>> 
>> In the telescope you will see the clock showing 00:00'06.72".
>> Unless you are a complete moron, you will understand that
>> the lunar clock must have advanced 1.28" since the light
>> you see in the telescope was emitted.
>> So the clock is really 00:00'06.72" + 1.28" = 00:00'08".
>> 
>> The clocks are still synchronous.

> 
> No, they don't.
> That's why I'm an exceptional being.
> The greatest relativistic theorist in the entire history of humanity.
> That's what makes the difference between a remarkably intelligent being 
> like you (I've read your pdfs on the theory of relativity, and I've 
> rarely found better presentations), and the degree above, that of a 
> genius like me.

You don't have to be remarkable intelligent to understand that
the proper time shown by a clock won't change by being looked at.

But you have to be remarkable stupid if you don't understand that
the proper time shown by a clock won't change by being looked at.

> A remarkably intelligent being will ask himself the same question, but a 
> supremely brilliant being will not have the same answer: Why does my 
> watch show 00:00'08" and the moon's 00:00'07".
> It's one second slow, it's out of sync.
> It's a strange oddity, isn't it?
> But yet, it is MY answer, probably so great that we may have to wait 10, 
> 30, or 50 years for another human being on earth to understand my 
> incredible genius and validate all the relativistic equations that I 
> have written (about 200).
> 
> Well yes, sir, that is what I say, they are out of sync, they no longer 
> mark the same time.
> 
> It is strange, huh, sir?

Richard, you are babbling.

You do understand that you can't make the lunar clock
change its reading by looking at it, don't you?
Or don't you?

-- 
Paul

https://paulba.no/