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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #663470 > unrolled thread

Should we synchronize clocks?

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Contents

  Should we synchronize clocks? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-05-10 11:40 +0200
    Re: Should we synchronize clocks? Python <jp@python.invalid> - 2025-05-10 13:23 +0000
      Re: Should we synchronize clocks? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-05-10 17:38 +0200
      Re: Should we synchronize clocks? nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2025-05-11 12:46 +0200
        Re: Should we synchronize clocks? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-05-11 14:05 +0200
    Re: Should we synchronize clocks? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-05-10 09:40 -0700
      Re: Should we synchronize clocks? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-05-10 20:17 +0200
        Re: Should we synchronize clocks? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-05-10 12:54 -0700
          Re: Should we synchronize clocks? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-05-11 10:41 -0700
            Re: Should we synchronize clocks? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-05-11 20:14 +0200
      Re: Should we synchronize clocks? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-05-10 13:03 -0700

#663470 — Should we synchronize clocks?

Time is what clocks indicate.

If we synchronize clocks - they're
indicating t'=t; that's what clock
synchronization means.

We can do it - that  doesn't have to
be obvious or easy, but that's definitely
something we can manage in most
circumstances (with a good accuracy).

Now should we do it - and make "what
clocks indicate" to be t'=t - or should
we rather give up and obey "Laws of
Nature" announced by a mumbling crazie?
Maybe GPS wouldn't work if we didn't,
but what a magnificient symmetry we
would have instead it.

That is the question. Isn't it?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#663472

Le 10/05/2025 à 11:40, Maciej Woźniak a écrit :
> Time is what clocks indicate.
> 
> If we synchronize clocks - they're
> indicating t'=t; that's what clock
> synchronization means.

This looks like a very fuzzy definition. I do have two clocks at my place 
that may or not be synchronized. Each is showing a lot of different values 
for t and t'. Which ones am I supposed to compare in order to check if 
they are synchronized?

Of course if both clocks are broken i.e. are stopped I could compare two 
constants values, but it would be pointless, as such clocks are not really 
clock anymore, wouldn't it ?

> We can do it - that  doesn't have to
> be obvious or easy, but that's definitely
> something we can manage in most
> circumstances (with a good accuracy).

Could you describe at least one way to do it in a simple case? And how to 
check accuracy of the applied procedure?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#663474

On 5/10/2025 3:23 PM, Python wrote:
 > Le 10/05/2025 à 11:40, Maciej Woźniak a écrit :
 >> Time is what clocks indicate.
 >>
 >> If we synchronize clocks - they're
 >> indicating t'=t; that's what clock
 >> synchronization means.
 >
 > This looks like a very fuzzy definition.

Doesn't look like any definition for me.


 > Of course if both clocks are broken i.e. are stopped I could compare 
two constants values, but it would be pointless

Right, it would be.


 >> We can do it - that  doesn't have to
 >> be obvious or easy, but that's definitely
 >> something we can manage in most
 >> circumstances (with a good accuracy).
 >
 > Could you describe at least one way to do it in a simple case? And 
how to check accuracy of the applied procedure?

Why won't you check GPS documentation for
that.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#663495

Python <jp@python.invalid> wrote:

> Le 10/05/2025 à 11:40, Maciej Wo?niak a écrit :
> > Time is what clocks indicate.
> > 
> > If we synchronize clocks - they're
> > indicating t'=t; that's what clock
> > synchronization means.
> 
> This looks like a very fuzzy definition. I do have two clocks at my place
> that may or not be synchronized. Each is showing a lot of different values
> for t and t'. Which ones am I supposed to compare in order to check if
> they are synchronized?
> 
> Of course if both clocks are broken i.e. are stopped I could compare two
> constants values, but it would be pointless, as such clocks are not really
> clock anymore, wouldn't it ?
> 
> > We can do it - that  doesn't have to
> > be obvious or easy, but that's definitely
> > something we can manage in most
> > circumstances (with a good accuracy).
> 
> Could you describe at least one way to do it in a simple case? And how to
> check accuracy of the applied procedure?

A simple case for simple minds, avoiding all unnecessary complications:
consider the  Indian Regional Navigation Satellite System. (IRNSS)
It (also) operates geostationary satellites.

The clock for such a geostationary navigation satellite
is set before launch to 10.229999994484488852 MHz
Once launched and in position the sat is stationary
with respect to someone on the ground below it, anywhere in India.

It is predicted by general relativity, and observed in practice,
that the clock in the sat is, and remains, synchronous
with an identical clock on the ground set to 23.00000000000000 Mhz.

What more could you want, clocks preset to different rates,
being at rest with respect to each other,
and being found to remain synchronous, pulse for pulse,
once the slower one is up in space?

Jan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#663496

On 5/11/2025 12:46 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Python <jp@python.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> Le 10/05/2025 à 11:40, Maciej Wo?niak a écrit :
>>> Time is what clocks indicate.
>>>
>>> If we synchronize clocks - they're
>>> indicating t'=t; that's what clock
>>> synchronization means.
>>
>> This looks like a very fuzzy definition. I do have two clocks at my place
>> that may or not be synchronized. Each is showing a lot of different values
>> for t and t'. Which ones am I supposed to compare in order to check if
>> they are synchronized?
>>
>> Of course if both clocks are broken i.e. are stopped I could compare two
>> constants values, but it would be pointless, as such clocks are not really
>> clock anymore, wouldn't it ?
>>
>>> We can do it - that  doesn't have to
>>> be obvious or easy, but that's definitely
>>> something we can manage in most
>>> circumstances (with a good accuracy).
>>
>> Could you describe at least one way to do it in a simple case? And how to
>> check accuracy of the applied procedure?
> 
> A simple case for simple minds, avoiding all unnecessary complications:
> consider the  Indian Regional Navigation Satellite System. (IRNSS)
> It (also) operates geostationary satellites.
> 
> The clock for such a geostationary navigation satellite
> is set before launch to 10.229999994484488852 MHz
> Once launched and in position the sat is stationary
> with respect to someone on the ground below it, anywhere in India.
> 
> It is predicted by general relativity

A lie, as expected from a relativistic idiot.
The Shit is predicting all clocks running the
same rate.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#663476

=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_Wo=C5=BAniak?= wrote:
> 
> Time is what clocks indicate.
> 
> If we synchronize clocks - they're
> indicating t'=t; that's what clock
> synchronization means.
> 
> We can do it - that  doesn't have to
> be obvious or easy, but that's definitely
> something we can manage in most
> circumstances (with a good accuracy).
> 
> Now should we do it - and make "what
> clocks indicate" to be t'=t - or should
> we rather give up and obey "Laws of
> Nature" announced by a mumbling crazie?
> Maybe GPS wouldn't work if we didn't,
> but what a magnificient symmetry we
> would have instead it.
> 
> That is the question. Isn't it?


What do you mean by "synchronize clocks" if i dare to ask?

Do you mean synchronize ...the time?

or

synchronize ...duration?


synchronize ...simultaneous?

synchronize ...events?



I don't think it's even possible to synchronize a horse race! Some horse
is going to get out
of the gate sonner than the other horse, and some horse will
win because he got a bigger nose.

Is the clock hands...synchronized?

Have you ever heard a bunch of cuckoo clocks synchronize cuckoos????

They should sing in harmony.

cukoocukoocukoocukoocukoocukoocukoocukoocukoocukoocukoocukoocukoooooocukoocukoocukoocukoo
cukooooooooooooocukoocukoocukooooooooooo
cukoo
cukoooooooooooo
cukoooooo
    cukoo?

Whoever invented the cuckoo clock was...cuckoo.


There are a lot of cuckoos in here.


Should we synchronize cuckoo clocks?


An atomic cuckoo clock?






 




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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#663479

On 5/10/2025 6:40 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> =?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_Wo=C5=BAniak?= wrote:
>>
>> Time is what clocks indicate.
>>
>> If we synchronize clocks - they're
>> indicating t'=t; that's what clock
>> synchronization means.
>>
>> We can do it - that  doesn't have to
>> be obvious or easy, but that's definitely
>> something we can manage in most
>> circumstances (with a good accuracy).
>>
>> Now should we do it - and make "what
>> clocks indicate" to be t'=t - or should
>> we rather give up and obey "Laws of
>> Nature" announced by a mumbling crazie?
>> Maybe GPS wouldn't work if we didn't,
>> but what a magnificient symmetry we
>> would have instead it.
>>
>> That is the question. Isn't it?
> 
> 
> What do you mean by "synchronize clocks" if i dare to ask?

By "synchronize clocks" I mean sychronize
clocks.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#663483

=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_Wo=C5=BAniak?= wrote:
> 
> On 5/10/2025 6:40 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> > =?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_Wo=C5=BAniak?= wrote:
> >>
> >> Time is what clocks indicate.
> >>
> >> If we synchronize clocks - they're
> >> indicating t'=t; that's what clock
> >> synchronization means.
> >>
> >> We can do it - that  doesn't have to
> >> be obvious or easy, but that's definitely
> >> something we can manage in most
> >> circumstances (with a good accuracy).
> >>
> >> Now should we do it - and make "what
> >> clocks indicate" to be t'=t - or should
> >> we rather give up and obey "Laws of
> >> Nature" announced by a mumbling crazie?
> >> Maybe GPS wouldn't work if we didn't,
> >> but what a magnificient symmetry we
> >> would have instead it.
> >>
> >> That is the question. Isn't it?
> >
> >
> > What do you mean by "synchronize clocks" if i dare to ask?
> 
> By "synchronize clocks" I mean sychronize
> clocks.

Oh, I'm sorry...sychronize??? It dat how the british spel it? 




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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#663502

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> =?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_Wo=C5=BAniak?= wrote:
> >
> > On 5/10/2025 6:40 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> > > =?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_Wo=C5=BAniak?= wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Time is what clocks indicate.
> > >>
> > >> If we synchronize clocks - they're
> > >> indicating t'=t; that's what clock
> > >> synchronization means.
> > >>
> > >> We can do it - that  doesn't have to
> > >> be obvious or easy, but that's definitely
> > >> something we can manage in most
> > >> circumstances (with a good accuracy).
> > >>
> > >> Now should we do it - and make "what
> > >> clocks indicate" to be t'=t - or should
> > >> we rather give up and obey "Laws of
> > >> Nature" announced by a mumbling crazie?
> > >> Maybe GPS wouldn't work if we didn't,
> > >> but what a magnificient symmetry we
> > >> would have instead it.
> > >>
> > >> That is the question. Isn't it?
> > >
> > >
> > > What do you mean by "synchronize clocks" if i dare to ask?
> >
> > By "synchronize clocks" I mean sychronize
> > clocks.
> 
> Oh, I'm sorry...sychronize??? It dat how the british spel it?

Okay, I will tell you How clocks should be...synchronized.



Everyone on Earth simply needs to synchronize their clock to the time on
MY clock.

In other words, if the time on your clock doesn't match mine, you got
the wrong time. And you will be shot.

problem solved.


Anybody wants to know "What time is it?", ask me...I got the correct
time.

Go on my website for the correct time.




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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#663503

On 5/11/2025 7:41 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> The Starmaker wrote:
>>
>> =?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_Wo=C5=BAniak?= wrote:
>>>
>>> On 5/10/2025 6:40 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
>>>> =?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_Wo=C5=BAniak?= wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Time is what clocks indicate.
>>>>>
>>>>> If we synchronize clocks - they're
>>>>> indicating t'=t; that's what clock
>>>>> synchronization means.
>>>>>
>>>>> We can do it - that  doesn't have to
>>>>> be obvious or easy, but that's definitely
>>>>> something we can manage in most
>>>>> circumstances (with a good accuracy).
>>>>>
>>>>> Now should we do it - and make "what
>>>>> clocks indicate" to be t'=t - or should
>>>>> we rather give up and obey "Laws of
>>>>> Nature" announced by a mumbling crazie?
>>>>> Maybe GPS wouldn't work if we didn't,
>>>>> but what a magnificient symmetry we
>>>>> would have instead it.
>>>>>
>>>>> That is the question. Isn't it?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What do you mean by "synchronize clocks" if i dare to ask?
>>>
>>> By "synchronize clocks" I mean sychronize
>>> clocks.
>>
>> Oh, I'm sorry...sychronize??? It dat how the british spel it?
> 
> Okay, I will tell you How clocks should be...synchronized.
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone on Earth simply needs to synchronize their clock to the time on
> MY clock.
> 
> In other words, if the time on your clock doesn't match mine, you got
> the wrong time. And you will be shot.
> 
> problem solved.
> 
> 
> Anybody wants to know "What time is it?", ask me...I got the correct
> time.
> 
> Go on my website for the correct time.
> 
And "Laws of Nature" announced by some idiot
guru can kiss our ass.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#663484

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> =?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_Wo=C5=BAniak?= wrote:
> >
> > Time is what clocks indicate.
> >
> > If we synchronize clocks - they're
> > indicating t'=t; that's what clock
> > synchronization means.
> >
> > We can do it - that  doesn't have to
> > be obvious or easy, but that's definitely
> > something we can manage in most
> > circumstances (with a good accuracy).
> >
> > Now should we do it - and make "what
> > clocks indicate" to be t'=t - or should
> > we rather give up and obey "Laws of
> > Nature" announced by a mumbling crazie?
> > Maybe GPS wouldn't work if we didn't,
> > but what a magnificient symmetry we
> > would have instead it.
> >
> > That is the question. Isn't it?
> 
> What do you mean by "synchronize clocks" if i dare to ask?
> 
> Do you mean synchronize ...the time?
> 
> or
> 
> synchronize ...duration?
> 
> synchronize ...simultaneous?
> 
> synchronize ...events?
> 
> I don't think it's even possible to synchronize a horse race! Some horse
> is going to get out
> of the gate sonner than the other horse, and some horse will
> win because he got a bigger nose.
> 
> Is the clock hands...synchronized?
> 
> Have you ever heard a bunch of cuckoo clocks synchronize cuckoos????
> 
> They should sing in harmony.
> 
> cukoocukoocukoocukoocukoocukoocukoocukoocukoocukoocukoocukoocukoooooocukoocukoocukoocukoo
> cukooooooooooooocukoocukoocukooooooooooo
> cukoo
> cukoooooooooooo
> cukoooooo
>     cukoo?
> 
> Whoever invented the cuckoo clock was...cuckoo.
> 
> There are a lot of cuckoos in here.
> 
> Should we synchronize cuckoo clocks?

I mean, if you people were into Truths..
the kind of clocks Einstein was reffering to were
the makings of ...cuckoo clocks.


But, I have yet seen anyone here mentioned that
Einstein was influenced by how cuckoo clocks works.

I mean, Relativtiy comes from...cuckoo clocks.

At Albert Einstien time..the mosct accurate clocks then were...cuckoo
clocks!


I find it hard to believe in this so-called newsgroup nobody ever
mentioned that?


You people know NOTHING about ...Relativity! 


I'm flabbagasted!





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

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web