Path: ...!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Relativistic synchronisation method
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2024 21:43:32 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 68
Message-ID: <vkv0i5$1pqpi$1@dont-email.me>
References: <4-GlI_h7vkz4Ndsd_KixgDLS7Gg@jntp> <vjrvi5$1or3g$1@dont-email.me>
 <q2T1xxfs2anW3avnE-Mbv6h_TtQ@jntp> <vk6it0$2j18$1@dont-email.me>
 <y6NFsdinreqq-hxcRLvq7hZ4gpc@jntp> <vk92ht$kijv$1@dont-email.me>
 <HQFxpJvcwIpLhNIeMKqLNQ292YE@jntp> <vk9qtr$p308$1@dont-email.me>
 <6s8YJGP42H0C-4FoL8dk0ahw7GU@jntp> <vkrfq7$vgn7$1@dont-email.me>
 <aPHxGjD_dpkbBzSp5qyOiHozthM@jntp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2024 21:41:41 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="7f1b5e473e0d12c2854a86605bbfd3a2";
	logging-data="1895218"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+741PnSr5tMEmgbqcJtYpk"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:pGdZSCwB2c8qdaJRth3OgJstnWw=
In-Reply-To: <aPHxGjD_dpkbBzSp5qyOiHozthM@jntp>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 3563

Den 29.12.2024 18:59, skrev Richard Hachel:
> Le 29/12/2024 à 13:37, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit :
>>
>> Yes, your clear answer to my question was easy to understand.
>>
>> My question was:
>> "Do you expect your watch to show the same as the clock on
>>   the wall of a railway station or an airport?"
>>
>> Your answer was 'yes'.
>>
>> So you expect the clock on the railway station to be synchronous with
>> your clock.
>>
>>>
> 
> No.
> 
> I do not expect the station clock to be synchronous with mine. I have 
> told you dozens of times that two spatially separated clocks will never 
> be able to agree on the notion of simultaneity (I have been saying this 
> for forty years).

You set your clock to show UTC+1h when you were at home.
The clock on the station shows UTC+1h.
When you arrive at the station you expect the station clock
to show the same as your clock.

But you do _not_ expect the clocks to be synchronous.

In physics "synchronous" means that two clocks simultaneously
show the same.

When two clocks are side by side and show the same,
they are synchronous by definition.


> 
> I do not understand your determination to constantly destroy what I say, 
> while for my part I never stop explaining to you not only the correct 
> things, but also the things as neither Poincaré nor Einstein said them.
> 
> But you do not believe me. So we go around in circles and poison the words.
> 
> I explained to you that the current synchronization is a virtual, 
> abstract synchronization, very useful for giving a form of coherence to 
> things.
> 
> I said that it was a type M synchronization.
> 
> But that it was not the reality of things, even if it was very useful.
> 
> You have the same thing with the Mercator projection in geography, it is 
> incredibly logical, beautiful, and useful.
> 
> But completely wrong locally: Greenland is larger than Africa, which is 
> absurd for those who have been around it.
> 
> R.H.

I see. When two clocks side by side show the same, they are
"M synchronous" which is very useful, but they are not
really showing the same, exactly as a paper map is not real world.

-- 
Paul

https://paulba.no/