Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Python Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity Subject: Re: Sync two clocks Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2024 17:32:23 +0200 Organization: CCCP Lines: 32 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2024 17:32:24 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e7766270ddb83778ad61a74e624af08e"; logging-data="3540044"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19CsGVkVUhkMGO/a47SEHi9" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:lbbufIei4UWq6L9lUWY9e53PErQ= In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 2171 Le 20/08/2024 à 17:28, Richard "Hachel" Lengrand a écrit : > Le 20/08/2024 à 17:02, Python a écrit : > >> A clown is someone pretending that 3 can be 4 for some obervers. > > This is not exactly what I am saying. This is exactly what you wrote. > 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) If your definition of simultaneity says so, it is broken. You even noticed that is broken. Switch from your asinine definition of simultaneity, which is broken, to a correct one.