Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #651891

Re: Einstein synchronisation

Show all headers | View raw

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> Ross Finlayson wrote:
> >
> > On 02/29/2024 09:07 AM, The Starmaker wrote:
> > > Ross Finlayson wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On 02/26/2024 09:12 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> > >>> Richard Hachel wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> https://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/specrel.pdf
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The problem with Einstein's synchronization is that it is defined in a
> > >>>> Galilean way.
> > >>>> Einstein presupposes in his frame of reference, a flat and absolute
> > >>>> present time, and therefore goes very quickly to definition, to move on to
> > >>>> the next paragraph.
> > >>>> What is he really saying new? Nothing.
> > >>>> The great thing is to say:
> > >>>> tA'-tA=2AB/c
> > >>>> I can also add, in the same sense, that a swallow is a swallow.
> > >>>> Then Einstein will commit the enormous relativistic error of immediately
> > >>>> and without paying attention to t(AB)=t(BA), a proposition which can only
> > >>>> be true for a neutral observer placed at an equal distance from A and B,
> > >>>> and having to take into account only identical anisochrony, and perfect
> > >>>> simultaneity of the two watches.
> > >>>> The equality that he posits is therefore completely false, intellectually
> > >>>> false, physically false, for the enormous majority of points in his space
> > >>>> that he will take as reference.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> His synchronization method, but he does not say it, is ONLY valid for a
> > >>>> given point P, and the simultaneity of various events occurring in the
> > >>>> frame of reference is ONLY valid for this point and not the integrity of
> > >>>> the frame of reference.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> He doesn't explain this.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Or worse, he doesn't know it.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> R.H.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Nature forgot to synchronize.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Nature does not display any...clocks.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> The old story is that man, or a woman,
> > >> invented time-keeping, humming a tune,
> > >> tossing a pile of rocks.
> > >>
> > >> The sun-dial, is the traditional apparatus.
> > >>
> > >> Foucault's pendulum, and the Allais pendulum,
> > >> both measure not only time, also cosmic alignment.
> > >>
> > >> An atomic clock lattice detects hand-waving.
> > >>
> > >> Time symmetry's never been falsified.
> > >>
> > >> There are no closed time-like curves.
> > >>
> > >> Einstein's total field theory includes
> > >> a clock hypothesis, that nature _is_ a clock.
> > >
> > >
> > > I need a little time to figure out this "nature _is_ a clock" business...
> > >
> > > in the meantime Ross, you mentioned you 'write software programs'...
> > >
> > > could you give me the name of one of them so that I can download it and
> > > see if I can crack it, get the serial number or extend the trial to
> > > forever? It would be fun for me, (of course i will ask ChatGPT to help me
> > > with it, we are hacking and cracking friends now).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Can't help you there.
> >
> > In the old days what you'd do is put a bit of tape
> > over the write-protect tab then write "yes" instead
> > of "no" at the right spot and then it would go, ....
> >
> > It's like, there was this engineer, and he was an
> > electrical engineer, and he was a dwarf, which is
> > secondary but it really adds to the human interest,
> > so he was a great electrical engineer, and Henry Ford
> > said "hey I just installed a huge generator at my plant
> > and it's not working so come fix it". So they guy was
> > like alright and he trundled over there. He spent a
> > few days looking it over and peeking around, he was
> > an electrical engineer so he knew how not to electrocute
> > himself, so one day he takes a piece of chalk and marks
> > one of the panels with the piece of chalk and says
> > "Ford, under that panel is your problem". So, some
> > guys opened that panel and fixed it there and it fixed it.
> > So, Ford says "send me the bill" so the guy sends him a
> > bill for $10,000. Now Ford is curious, so he says
> > "itemize the bill", so the guy itemizes the bill:
> >
> > chalk mark: 5 cents
> > knowing where: 9,999.95.
> >
> > Been looking at "how does this WebRTC work",
> > "how simple is writing an operating system these days",
> > still though sort of "implement a Usenet".
> >
> > If you want to know about relativity, consult my podcasts,
> > https youtube @rossfinlayson, under the "Reading from Einstein",
> > is a reading of "Out of My Later Years", the good parts in
> > the middle.
> >
> > I like the idea of this, "nature _is_ a clock",
> > it's usually called "clock hypothesis", and
> > what it means is there's a "universal time".
> >
> > Einstein has one in his theory called "the time",
> > in quotes, it's called ''the time'', ..., one
> > has to mime the quotes at the same time.
> 
> Okay, I looked at your 'nature clock'..
> 
> i see a lot of rocks and fire out there..
> and what 'appears' to be different time zones
> on different planets...
> but where is the machinery behind the clock?
> 
> you do know what i mean by machinery? ...the
> machinery behind a woman's warm smile.
> 
> Can you get past the strong illusion of her warm smile and
> show me the machinery behind your nature's clock?
> 
> Any kid looking at the face of a clock can tear the clock apart
> to see the machinery behind it that makes it run.
> 
> Where is the machine behind nature's clock?
> 
> I don't see it.
>


I understand this question might be difficult for you to come up with..

but can you point to one aspect in "nature's clock" that resembles to you
the workings of a clock?

To be clear, maybe I misunderstood you, but "nature _is_ a clock", do you mean

beyond Earth, or just on Earth?

I thought you meant 'out there' is a clock, not your pulse.


Where out there resembles to you
the workings of a clock????

Point to something...













-- 
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, 
and challenge the unchallengeable.

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Einstein synchronisation Richard Hachel <pourquoi-pas@tiscali.fr> - 2024-02-26 17:23 +0000
  Re: Einstein synchronisation "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2024-02-26 20:17 +0100
    Re: Einstein synchronisation Rózsa Erdős Kálmán <nemor@rnedds.hu> - 2024-02-26 21:16 +0000
      Re: Einstein synchronisation trolidous <trolidous@go.com> - 2024-02-26 17:39 -0800
    Re: Einstein synchronisation Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-02-26 13:49 -0800
      Re: Einstein synchronisation Richard Hachel <pourquoi-pas@tiscali.fr> - 2024-02-27 00:29 +0000
        Re: Einstein synchronisation Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-02-27 01:46 +0100
          Re: Einstein synchronisation "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2024-02-27 11:42 +0100
            Re: Einstein synchronisation Vernon Romão Simões <rrvvo@om.pt> - 2024-02-27 21:45 +0000
      Re: Einstein synchronisation Richard Hachel <pourquoi-pas@tiscali.fr> - 2024-02-27 01:02 +0000
        Re: Einstein synchronisation Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-02-27 12:02 +0200
          Re: Einstein synchronisation Richard Hachel <pourquoi-pas@tiscali.fr> - 2024-02-27 10:56 +0000
          Re: Einstein synchronisation Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-02-27 12:16 +0100
      Re: Einstein synchronisation Richard Hachel <pourquoi-pas@tiscali.fr> - 2024-02-27 01:11 +0000
        Re: Einstein synchronisation Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-02-26 21:56 -0800
      Re: Einstein synchronisation Richard Hachel <pourquoi-pas@tiscali.fr> - 2024-02-27 01:23 +0000
      Re: Einstein synchronisation Richard Hachel <pourquoi-pas@tiscali.fr> - 2024-02-27 01:41 +0000
  Re: Einstein synchronisation The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-02-26 21:12 -0800
    Re: Einstein synchronisation The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-02-26 22:01 -0800
    Re: Einstein synchronisation Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-02-26 22:14 -0800
      Re: Einstein synchronisation The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-02-29 09:07 -0800
        Re: Einstein synchronisation Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-02-29 10:37 -0800
          Re: Einstein synchronisation The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-03-02 12:33 -0800
            Re: Einstein synchronisation The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-03-05 10:23 -0800
              Re: Einstein synchronisation Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-03-06 09:26 -0800
    Re: Einstein synchronisation trolidous <trolidous@go.com> - 2024-02-27 08:35 -0800
  Re: Einstein synchronisation Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-02-27 11:58 +0200
    Re: Einstein synchronisation Richard Hachel <pourquoi-pas@tiscali.fr> - 2024-02-27 10:47 +0000
      Re: Einstein synchronisation Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2024-02-27 09:11 -0500
        Re: Einstein synchronisation Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2024-02-27 16:27 +0100
        Re: Einstein synchronisation Richard Hachel <pourquoi-pas@tiscali.fr> - 2024-02-27 19:09 +0000
          Re: Einstein synchronisation Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-02-27 11:25 -0800
        Re: Einstein synchronisation Cecilio San Kwang <lcil@son.kr> - 2024-02-27 22:27 +0000
      Re: Einstein synchronisation Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-02-29 12:40 +0200

csiph-web