Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics
Subject: Re: Sync two clocks
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2024 09:36:19 -0700
Organization: The Starmaker Organization
Lines: 88
Message-ID: <66CB5D82.6162@ix.netcom.com>
References: <u18wy1Hl3tOo1DpOF6WVSF0s-08@jntp> <aeuL_3xao9-_kSf51ssMUTgW-s8@jntp> <va6rjs$c7ca$1@dont-email.me> <66c6fe9d$0$3360$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <va72t9$blq6$4@dont-email.me> <omIg9w0Iy0ZX5hSc9cLG74AlKY0@jntp> <f15x-DXi9mk6sbBPa_gf0bWPArc@jntp> <va7veu$hfcs$1@dont-email.me> <Kjl4WjK9KQqBWo5XbMcErn2fRTY@jntp> <va9rek$t321$1@dont-email.me> <pc3yEo6g72i9zStWJkdV6utrM90@jntp> <vaaork$10p78$4@dont-email.me> <66C95FBC.4DB4@ix.netcom.com>
Reply-To: starmaker@ix.netcom.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2024 18:36:13 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="5d9da0cd43ee5d8aee3326bf337bc1d0"; logging-data="2090823"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/U8835F+frN1jXh1bpG/db2wV5G04ll50="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:w8nzMML31cyit4APYh37Q0PriWI=
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U)
X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 240825-4, 08/25/2024), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Xref: csiph.com sci.physics.relativity:656383 sci.physics:889193

Now, common sense would tell you
that it is not possible to Sync two clocks...

in order to sync 2 clocks
both clocks would have to
occupy the same space...in time.

but a clock over here and
the other clock over there are
in two different points in
space and time.

There are too many forces
affecting each clock in
different direction
in space and time.


common sense would tell you
that it is not possible to Sync two clocks...


How about one clock that runs
slow and fast in sync????

(it works with einstein's theory of relativity)



The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
> >
> > Den 23.08.2024 13:57, skrev Doctor Richard Hachel:
> > > Le 23/08/2024 à 13:23, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit :
> > >
> > >> Den 22.08.2024 21:12, skrev Doctor Richard Hachel:
> > >>
> > >>> Can you explain to me, in the greatest clarity, as Python recommends,
> > >>> what you mean, what you understand by the following words:
> > >>> "In special relativity, the notion of simultaneity is relative"?
> >
> > "The notion of simultaneity" is a very basic concept in SR.
> >
> > So I seriously think that:
> > >> It is remarkable that a person who pride himself of having studied
> > >> relativity issues for 40 years is ignorant of the most basic concepts
> > >> in the Special Theory of Relativity.
> >
> > You can't expect me to teach you the basic concepts of SR in this forum.
> >
> > So:
> > >> I am not going to teach you SR (or GR).
> > >> If you really want to learn, read a book.
> >
> > This is my serious advice, I am not joking.
> >
> > >
> > > Please, a little more seriousness and dignity in your answers.
> > >
> >
> > More dignity? Should I address you with "Doctor" or "Sir"?
> 
> "Monsieur"
> 
> "Monsieur Hachelllll"
> 
> Cher Monsieur
> 
> ooh la la
> 
> Sacre le blu!
> 
> Monsieur Hachelllll
> 
> Mec Hachel
> 
> Je me casse....
> 
> --
> The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
> to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> and challenge the unchallengeable.

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