Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2024 15:05:21 +0200
Mime-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [SR and synchronization] Cognitive Dissonances and Mental Blockage
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
References: <v9q6eu$1tlm9$1@dont-email.me> <liduroFtbroU2@mid.individual.net> <vah9hs$2c43u$1@dont-email.me> <lj56luFe0luU3@mid.individual.net> <M4vxPZKxPU6U7NDCGNWCGCM0lRc@jntp> <ljahm9F9dfdU2@mid.individual.net> <vapd5l$3tffr$1@dont-email.me> <ljd51mFl74gU4@mid.individual.net> <vas655$e2la$2@dont-email.me> <o63FO6ufY9csAokzvXMpjto87yU@jntp> <vas7rr$e2la$4@dont-email.me> <17f07ef6b2cab9eb$615722$546728$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com> <vasnba$e2la$22@dont-email.me> <17f093a70d87b977$760537$505029$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com> <vav1pe$109ac$3@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: pl
From: Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl>
In-Reply-To: <vav1pe$109ac$3@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 41
Path: ...!news-out.netnews.com!s1-1.netnews.com!tr1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.eu1.usenetexpress.com!news.newsdemon.com!not-for-mail
Nntp-Posting-Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2024 13:05:21 +0000
X-Received-Bytes: 2323
X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com
Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com
Message-Id: <17f0d1f84336d9cd$768489$505029$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com>
Bytes: 2667

W dniu 31.08.2024 o 14:19, Python pisze:
> Le 30/08/2024 à 20:03, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
>> W dniu 30.08.2024 o 17:09, Python pisze:
>>> Le 30/08/2024 à 13:44, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
>>> ...
>>>> No theory of mathematics include clocks.
>>>
>>> Sure! But a model of clocks can appear in a mathematical
>>> theory.
>>
>> It can
> 
> Good to know. We agree then.
> 
>> and, what's more important - a
>> relativistic idiot like to invoke
>> the auyhority of mathematics for
>> excusing his mad claims.
>> BTW - is Pythagorean theorem a
>> "hard mathematical fact"?
>> Yes or not?
> 
> The hard mathematical fact is: Euclid's Axioms => Pythagorean theorem.
> 
> Another question?

Here it comes, poor stinker:
Quoting:
 >> Paragraph I.1. describes a procedure that looks non symmetric at
 >> first sight: clocks A and B are not treated exactly the same way
 >> (two measures for A, one for B for instance), nevertheless at the
 >> end of the day one can *prove* that the results are symmetric and
 >> that inverting A and B would lead to the same result.
 >
This is hard mathematical facts Richard. Something beyond your head.
End of quoting.

No axioms now implying that? Just a hard
mathematical fact?