Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #473779 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-10-02 09:47 +0100 |
| Last post | 2018-10-16 19:13 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 155 — 14 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 09:47 +0100
Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-02 04:20 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:21 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-02 06:02 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 14:12 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-02 12:39 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 14:08 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-07 08:40 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-07 07:22 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-07 14:42 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-07 17:41 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:19 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-02 06:56 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 14:00 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-02 07:12 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-02 07:14 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-02 07:12 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 14:15 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-02 08:49 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-02 13:31 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-03 06:06 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 06:09 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:05 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-03 07:14 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 15:38 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 16:43 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-03 08:51 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 16:06 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 09:17 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-04 07:24 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:25 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-04 08:53 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 19:22 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-04 14:38 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-04 21:47 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 22:03 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 08:30 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-05 04:26 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 15:01 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 08:11 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-06 08:32 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 20:20 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-07 07:19 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 19:19 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 01:00 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 21:40 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 16:45 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 17:10 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-02 09:15 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-02 09:18 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-03 06:41 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 19:06 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-04 07:52 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Hilton Packett <wod@wcotahr.ce> - 2018-10-02 20:28 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-10-03 03:32 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 05:18 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 05:06 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 10:51 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 09:58 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 03:19 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 12:28 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 12:44 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 05:57 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:05 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 09:16 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 19:36 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 18:59 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 19:53 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 21:56 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 04:45 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 00:06 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 09:58 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 02:46 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 10:03 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 03:31 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 12:21 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 11:49 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 05:42 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 14:46 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:25 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 09:41 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 18:26 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 11:45 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 07:15 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 06:39 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-05 00:31 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 06:53 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 08:51 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-05 00:58 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 12:17 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 14:54 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 08:10 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 19:17 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 20:20 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 05:37 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 09:17 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-07 04:57 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-07 04:59 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-07 05:39 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 20:36 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 22:59 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-04 07:13 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:25 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-04 09:00 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 12:33 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 05:38 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 11:30 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-03 06:18 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 13:41 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-03 20:01 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-03 20:00 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-04 14:28 -0400
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 06:32 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 06:44 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 09:03 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-07 08:59 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-07 07:33 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-07 16:37 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-08 12:30 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tc> - 2018-10-08 17:41 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-08 20:00 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-08 22:12 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 23:39 -0400
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-08 20:46 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-09 13:30 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-15 22:21 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-15 21:14 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-15 22:10 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-16 08:50 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-16 18:43 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-17 03:30 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-16 22:47 -0400
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-15 22:07 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-15 22:14 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-16 08:39 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-16 05:03 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-16 21:08 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-16 18:50 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-17 03:31 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 06:28 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 13:02 -0400
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 18:47 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-19 19:15 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-22 11:44 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-16 23:11 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-16 18:41 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-22 13:04 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-09 06:06 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-09 08:45 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-09 07:27 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-09 07:40 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-09 07:43 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-10 07:08 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tc> - 2018-10-09 14:04 +0000
Another Reason "Why the *Medium* Matters." Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-16 19:13 +0100
Page 5 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 09:41 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <903c6f72-1a51-4acc-b2d4-a5664e023fa7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474071 |
On Thursday, 4 October 2018 17:25:19 UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Reading the display in both frames does not tell you that this is the real > time of those events unless you can demonstrate that the clocks are > synchronized. It can surely be a problem for an insane guru or his idiot minions.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 18:26 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <73stD.743974$PJ7.291776@fx01.am4> |
| In reply to | #474084 |
On 04/10/2018 17:41, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: > On Thursday, 4 October 2018 17:25:19 UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> Reading the display in both frames does not tell you that this is the real >> time of those events unless you can demonstrate that the clocks are >> synchronized. > > It can surely be a problem for an insane > guru or his idiot minions. > You won't make converts by insulting the audience,Mr.Wozniak, But then again you won't make converts, so fair enough. They are indeed the makers of their own problems, because t' = t is just too simply for them eh! keith stein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-04 11:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <69d47e19-e320-44b5-81a1-d623186fb880@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474091 |
On Thursday, 4 October 2018 19:26:29 UTC+2, Keith Stein wrote: > On 04/10/2018 17:41, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: > > On Thursday, 4 October 2018 17:25:19 UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > > >> Reading the display in both frames does not tell you that this is the real > >> time of those events unless you can demonstrate that the clocks are > >> synchronized. > > > > It can surely be a problem for an insane > > guru or his idiot minions. > > > > > You won't make converts by insulting the audience,Mr.Wozniak, Odd is a fanatic idiot deeply believing that following this mystical mumble of his moronic gurus makes him an intellectual elite. He can't be converted. He can be only kicked into his puffed ass.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-05 07:15 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <rkDtD.329780$fy.161453@fx26.am4> |
| In reply to | #474100 |
On 04/10/2018 19:45, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: > On Thursday, 4 October 2018 19:26:29 UTC+2, Keith Stein wrote: >> On 04/10/2018 17:41, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: >>> On Thursday, 4 October 2018 17:25:19 UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> >>>> Reading the display in both frames does not tell you that this is the real >>>> time of those events unless you can demonstrate that the clocks are >>>> synchronized. That's a good point Mr.Bodkin. Fortunately i do know how to synchronize the clocks UNAMBIGUOUSLY. From the midpoint between two clocks we send a signal to both clocks through stationary air, (or any other STATIONARY medium). Clocks synchronized in this way will be synchronized in all frames of reference. >>> It can surely be a problem for an insane >>> guru or his idiot minions. >> You won't make converts by insulting the audience,Mr.Wozniak, > Odd is a fanatic idiot deeply believing that > following this mystical mumble of his moronic > gurus makes him an intellectual elite. He can't > be converted. He can be only kicked into his > puffed ass. I think you are a bit hard on Old Bodkin, Mr.Wozniak. Sure like all the relativists he is a bit arrogant, but i think he does pretty well, for a wood worker eh! keith stein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-05 06:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp70vf$hll$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #474150 |
Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> writes: >>>>> Reading the display in both frames does not tell you that this is the real >>>>> time of those events unless you can demonstrate that the clocks are >>>>> synchronized. >That's a good point Mr.Bodkin. Fortunately i do know how to >synchronize the clocks UNAMBIGUOUSLY. From the midpoint between >two clocks we send a signal to both clocks through stationary air, >(or any other STATIONARY medium). Clocks synchronized in this way >will be synchronized in all frames of reference. You missed the entire point of Einstein's train/platform gedanken. In it the lightning strokes happen at the same time and distance according to the platform observer but the flashes are not simultaneous according to the train observer. (if you want, think of the platform man sending light flashes to trigger two lightning machines, in advance enough so that the flashes reach him at the exact right time)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-05 00:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f27f5b9c-8526-4362-9a7a-2ce79a8a446a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474152 |
On Friday, 5 October 2018 08:39:45 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote: > You missed the entire point of Einstein's train/platform gedanken. > In it the lightning strokes happen at the same time and distance > according to the platform observer but the flashes are not simultaneous > according to the train observer. Sure. Anything can happen in a gedanken of an insane crazie.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-05 06:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pp71oo$fss$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #474150 |
Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: > On 04/10/2018 19:45, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: >> On Thursday, 4 October 2018 19:26:29 UTC+2, Keith Stein wrote: >>> On 04/10/2018 17:41, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: >>>> On Thursday, 4 October 2018 17:25:19 UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> >>>>> Reading the display in both frames does not tell you that this is the real >>>>> time of those events unless you can demonstrate that the clocks are >>>>> synchronized. > > That's a good point Mr.Bodkin. Fortunately i do know how to > synchronize the clocks UNAMBIGUOUSLY. From the midpoint between > two clocks we send a signal to both clocks through stationary air, > (or any other STATIONARY medium). Clocks synchronized in this way > will be synchronized in all frames of reference. Well, then according to you, it is only possible to have synchronized clocks at rest in one single rest frame. This of course would violate the principle of relativity. > > >>>> It can surely be a problem for an insane >>>> guru or his idiot minions. > >>> You won't make converts by insulting the audience,Mr.Wozniak, > >> Odd is a fanatic idiot deeply believing that >> following this mystical mumble of his moronic >> gurus makes him an intellectual elite. He can't >> be converted. He can be only kicked into his >> puffed ass. > > > I think you are a bit hard on Old Bodkin, Mr.Wozniak. > Sure like all the relativists he is a bit arrogant, but > i think he does pretty well, for a wood worker eh! > > keith stein > > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-05 08:51 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <DJEtD.397946$tw.256335@fx11.am4> |
| In reply to | #474156 |
On 05/10/2018 07:53, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 04/10/2018 19:45, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: >>> On Thursday, 4 October 2018 19:26:29 UTC+2, Keith Stein wrote: >>>> On 04/10/2018 17:41, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: >>>>> On Thursday, 4 October 2018 17:25:19 UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Reading the display in both frames does not tell you that this is the real >>>>>> time of those events unless you can demonstrate that the clocks are >>>>>> synchronized. >> >> That's a good point Mr.Bodkin. Fortunately i do know how to >> synchronize the clocks UNAMBIGUOUSLY. From the midpoint between >> two clocks we send a signal to both clocks through stationary air, >> (or any other STATIONARY medium). Clocks synchronized in this way >> will be synchronized in all frames of reference. > > Well, then according to you, it is only possible to have synchronized > clocks at rest in one single rest frame. Well of course the clocks can only be "at rest" in the frame of reference in which they are "at rest", but that is surely true of anything. The point is that clocks synchronized in the frame of reference in which the medium is stationary, are synchronized IN ALL FRAMES, irrespective of how fast you walk towards them. > This of course would violate the > principle of relativity. If you mean it is incompatible with Einstein's ridiculous assumption that the speed of light has the same value in all frames of reference, then you are entirely correct Mr.Bodkin. >>>>> It can surely be a problem for an insane >>>>> guru or his idiot minions. >> >>>> You won't make converts by insulting the audience,Mr.Wozniak, >> >>> Odd is a fanatic idiot deeply believing that >>> following this mystical mumble of his moronic >>> gurus makes him an intellectual elite. He can't >>> be converted. He can be only kicked into his >>> puffed ass. >> >> >> I think you are a bit hard on Old Bodkin, Mr.Wozniak. >> Sure like all the relativists he is a bit arrogant, but >> i think he does pretty well, for a wood worker eh! >> >> keith stein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-05 00:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <af011b1f-a48f-4f83-b7a4-88ad4bcd2c54@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474162 |
On Friday, 5 October 2018 09:51:02 UTC+2, Keith Stein wrote: > > This of course would violate the > > principle of relativity. > > If you mean it is incompatible with Einstein's ridiculous > assumption that the speed of light has the same value in all > frames of reference, then you are entirely correct Mr.Bodkin. Keith, even Great Guru was unable to hold this idiocy for long and his GR shit has rejected it. Of course, poor woodworker is much stupider.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-05 12:17 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <BLHtD.373464$8w.290817@fx40.am4> |
| In reply to | #474163 |
On 05/10/2018 08:58, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: > On Friday, 5 October 2018 09:51:02 UTC+2, Keith Stein wrote: > >>> This of course would violate the >>> principle of relativity. >> >> If you mean it is incompatible with Einstein's ridiculous >> assumption that the speed of light has the same value in all >> frames of reference, then you are entirely correct Mr.Bodkin. > > Keith, even Great Guru was unable to hold this idiocy > for long and his GR shit has rejected it. Of course, > poor woodworker is much stupider. > To be honest, Mr.Wpzniak,i'm mostly ignorant about 'GR' myself. However, i know enough about Einstein's 'SR' to know ......... that,,,, the LAST person i would want to teach me about S P A C E and TIME, would be E I N S T E I N eh! keith stein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-06 14:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ppaibi$boj$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #474162 |
Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: > On 05/10/2018 07:53, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 04/10/2018 19:45, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: >>>> On Thursday, 4 October 2018 19:26:29 UTC+2, Keith Stein wrote: >>>>> On 04/10/2018 17:41, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: >>>>>> On Thursday, 4 October 2018 17:25:19 UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Reading the display in both frames does not tell you that this is the real >>>>>>> time of those events unless you can demonstrate that the clocks are >>>>>>> synchronized. >>> >>> That's a good point Mr.Bodkin. Fortunately i do know how to >>> synchronize the clocks UNAMBIGUOUSLY. From the midpoint between >>> two clocks we send a signal to both clocks through stationary air, >>> (or any other STATIONARY medium). Clocks synchronized in this way >>> will be synchronized in all frames of reference. >> >> Well, then according to you, it is only possible to have synchronized >> clocks at rest in one single rest frame. > > Well of course the clocks can only be "at rest" in the frame of > reference in which they are "at rest", but that is surely true > of anything. The point is that clocks synchronized in the frame > of reference in which the medium is stationary, are synchronized > IN ALL FRAMES, irrespective of how fast you walk towards them. That would only be true trivially by your definition of synchronization being keys to performing that only for clocks at rest in the medium’s rest frame. But really, the question is whether there is a synchronized procedure that can be applied INDEPENDENT of the medium’s rest frame. And for this there is a very good prescription described by Einstein. Note that this procedure works for ANY pair of clocks at rest in a common reference frame, regardless whether the medium is at rest in that frame. > >> This of course would violate the >> principle of relativity. > > If you mean it is incompatible with Einstein's ridiculous > assumption that the speed of light has the same value in all > frames of reference, then you are entirely correct Mr.Bodkin. No, that’s not what the principle of relativity says. > >>>>>> It can surely be a problem for an insane >>>>>> guru or his idiot minions. >>> >>>>> You won't make converts by insulting the audience,Mr.Wozniak, >>> >>>> Odd is a fanatic idiot deeply believing that >>>> following this mystical mumble of his moronic >>>> gurus makes him an intellectual elite. He can't >>>> be converted. He can be only kicked into his >>>> puffed ass. >>> >>> >>> I think you are a bit hard on Old Bodkin, Mr.Wozniak. >>> Sure like all the relativists he is a bit arrogant, but >>> i think he does pretty well, for a wood worker eh! >>> >>> keith stein > > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mlwozniak@wp.pl |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-06 08:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <25e92c7a-8a7f-408f-bf86-53ac23fbc801@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474258 |
On Saturday, 6 October 2018 16:54:46 UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 05/10/2018 07:53, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On 04/10/2018 19:45, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: > >>>> On Thursday, 4 October 2018 19:26:29 UTC+2, Keith Stein wrote: > >>>>> On 04/10/2018 17:41, mlwozniak@wp.pl wrote: > >>>>>> On Thursday, 4 October 2018 17:25:19 UTC+2, Odd Bodkin wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Reading the display in both frames does not tell you that this is the real > >>>>>>> time of those events unless you can demonstrate that the clocks are > >>>>>>> synchronized. > >>> > >>> That's a good point Mr.Bodkin. Fortunately i do know how to > >>> synchronize the clocks UNAMBIGUOUSLY. From the midpoint between > >>> two clocks we send a signal to both clocks through stationary air, > >>> (or any other STATIONARY medium). Clocks synchronized in this way > >>> will be synchronized in all frames of reference. > >> > >> Well, then according to you, it is only possible to have synchronized > >> clocks at rest in one single rest frame. > > > > Well of course the clocks can only be "at rest" in the frame of > > reference in which they are "at rest", but that is surely true > > of anything. The point is that clocks synchronized in the frame > > of reference in which the medium is stationary, are synchronized > > IN ALL FRAMES, irrespective of how fast you walk towards them. > > That would only be true trivially by your definition of synchronization > being keys to performing that only for clocks at rest in the medium’s rest > frame. And GPS engineers made GPS broken!! Idiot woodworker KNOWS!!!!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-06 19:17 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <L_6uD.3358$aX1.1942@fx21.am4> |
| In reply to | #474258 |
On 06/10/2018 15:54, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 05/10/2018 07:53, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> That's a good point Mr.Bodkin. Fortunately i do know how to >>>> synchronize the clocks UNAMBIGUOUSLY. From the midpoint between >>>> two clocks we send a signal to both clocks through stationary air, >>>> (or any other STATIONARY medium). Clocks synchronized in this way >>>> will be synchronized in all frames of reference. >>> This of course would violate the >>> principle of relativity. >> If you mean it is incompatible with Einstein's ridiculous >> assumption that the speed of light has the same value in all >> frames of reference, then you are entirely correct Mr.Bodkin. > No, that’s not what the principle of relativity says. Well if you mean that synchronizing clocks in the frame of reference in which the medium is stationary would violate the principle that the laws of physics are the same in all inertial frames of reference, then NO it would certainly NOT violate the principle of relativity Mr.Bodkin. What on Earth makes you think that it would ? keith stein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-06 20:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ppb5e0$1cdc$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #474285 |
Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: > On 06/10/2018 15:54, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 05/10/2018 07:53, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> That's a good point Mr.Bodkin. Fortunately i do know how to >>>>> synchronize the clocks UNAMBIGUOUSLY. From the midpoint between >>>>> two clocks we send a signal to both clocks through stationary air, >>>>> (or any other STATIONARY medium). Clocks synchronized in this way >>>>> will be synchronized in all frames of reference. > >>>> This of course would violate the >>>> principle of relativity. > >>> If you mean it is incompatible with Einstein's ridiculous >>> assumption that the speed of light has the same value in all >>> frames of reference, then you are entirely correct Mr.Bodkin. > >> No, that’s not what the principle of relativity says. > > Well if you mean that synchronizing clocks in the frame of > reference in which the medium is stationary would violate > the principle that the laws of physics are the same in all > inertial frames of reference, then NO it would certainly > NOT violate the principle of relativity Mr.Bodkin. What on > Earth makes you think that it would ? Well, because the synchronization procedure will have to work for pairs of clocks at rest in ANY inertial reference frame, or the laws of physics will not be the same in different reference frames. It’s pretty straightforward. > > keith stein > -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-07 05:37 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <y4guD.5135$_E4.853@fx10.am4> |
| In reply to | #474307 |
On 06/10/2018 21:20, Odd Bodkin wrote: > Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 06/10/2018 15:54, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On 05/10/2018 07:53, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>>>> That's a good point Mr.Bodkin. Fortunately i do know how to >>>>>> synchronize the clocks UNAMBIGUOUSLY. From the midpoint between >>>>>> two clocks we send a signal to both clocks through stationary air, >>>>>> (or any other STATIONARY medium). Clocks synchronized in this way >>>>>> will be synchronized in all frames of reference. >> >>>>> This of course would violate the >>>>> principle of relativity. >> >>>> If you mean it is incompatible with Einstein's ridiculous >>>> assumption that the speed of light has the same value in all >>>> frames of reference, then you are entirely correct Mr.Bodkin. >> >>> No, that’s not what the principle of relativity says. >> >> Well if you mean that synchronizing clocks in the frame of >> reference in which the medium is stationary would violate >> the principle that the laws of physics are the same in all >> inertial frames of reference, then NO it would certainly >> NOT violate the principle of relativity Mr.Bodkin. What on >> Earth makes you think that it would ? > > Well, because the synchronization procedure will have to work for pairs of > clocks at rest in ANY inertial reference frame, or the laws of physics will > not be the same in different reference frames. It’s pretty straightforward. > First let me say that the laws of physics ARE the same in ANY inertial frame, and the fact that my synchronization procedure must be done in the frame of reference in which the medium is stationary is certainly not a violation of that principle. Maybe the best way for you to understand this, Mr.Bodkin, is to use a sound signal, rather than a light signal, to synchronize the clocks. This could be done, and (as with light) the clocks synchronized in this way will be synchronized in all frames of reference. However it is clearly essential that the procedure is carried out in the frame of reference in which the medium is stationary. This certainly does not mean the laws of physics are frame dependent. It just means things can behave differently on a windy day eh! keith stein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-07 09:17 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <9ijuD.17738$F96.12657@fx40.am4> |
| In reply to | #474334 |
On 07/10/2018 05:37, Keith Stein wrote: > On 06/10/2018 21:20, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 06/10/2018 15:54, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On 05/10/2018 07:53, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>>>>> That's a good point Mr.Bodkin. Fortunately i do know how to >>>>>>> synchronize the clocks UNAMBIGUOUSLY. From the midpoint between >>>>>>> two clocks we send a signal to both clocks through stationary air, >>>>>>> (or any other STATIONARY medium). Clocks synchronized in this way >>>>>>> will be synchronized in all frames of reference. >>> >>>>>> This of course would violate the >>>>>> principle of relativity. >>> >>>>> If you mean it is incompatible with Einstein's ridiculous >>>>> assumption that the speed of light has the same value in all >>>>> frames of reference, then you are entirely correct Mr.Bodkin. >>> >>>> No, that’s not what the principle of relativity says. >>> >>> Well if you mean that synchronizing clocks in the frame of >>> reference in which the medium is stationary would violate >>> the principle that the laws of physics are the same in all >>> inertial frames of reference, then NO it would certainly >>> NOT violate the principle of relativity Mr.Bodkin. What on >>> Earth makes you think that it would ? >> >> Well, because the synchronization procedure will have to work for >> pairs of >> clocks at rest in ANY inertial reference frame, or the laws of physics >> will >> not be the same in different reference frames. It’s pretty >> straightforward. >> > > First let me say that the laws of physics ARE the same in ANY inertial > frame, and the fact that my synchronization procedure must be done in > the frame of reference in which the medium is stationary is certainly > not a violation of that principle. > > Maybe the best way for you to understand this, Mr.Bodkin, is to use a > sound signal, rather than a light signal, to synchronize the clocks. > This could be done, and (as with light) the clocks synchronized in this > way will be synchronized in all frames of reference. However it is > clearly essential that the procedure is carried out in the frame of > reference in which the medium is stationary. This certainly does not > mean the laws of physics are frame dependent. It just means things > can behave differently on a windy day eh! > > keith stein > P.S. When i say "the medium is stationary" i only mean that it is stationary RELATIVE TO the clocks eh! For sure the synchronization procedure i describe can be carried out on a plane if you like.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-07 04:57 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <582fede7-964c-43a7-8f0b-c381cb2ee19a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474347 |
Keith Stein escrito P.S. When i say "the medium is stationary" i only mean that it is stationary RELATIVE TO the clocks eh! For sure the synchronization procedure i describe can be carried out on a plane if you like. The Medium has the characteristics of being Stationary because it is (Pressure) The Pressure “Permeates” (((c^7) / (hbar * (G^2))) * (planck length^3)) / c = 6.5248935 m kg / s ((c^7) / (hbar * (G^2))) * (planck length^3) = 1.95611386e+9 joules (((c^7) / (hbar * (G^2))) * (planck length^3)) / (c^2) = 2.1764702e-8
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-07 04:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7a27c73a-1299-434a-a647-3542be8c7172@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474349 |
Keith Stein escrito P.S. When i say "the medium is stationary" i only mean that it is stationary RELATIVE TO the clocks eh! For sure the synchronization procedure i describe can be carried out on a plane if you like. The Medium has the characteristics of being Stationary because it is (Pressure) The Pressure “Permeates” (((c^7) / (hbar * (G^2))) * (planck length^3)) / c = 6.5248935 m kg / s ((c^7) / (hbar * (G^2))) * (planck length^3) = 1.95611386e+9 joules (((c^7) / (hbar * (G^2))) * (planck length^3)) / (c^2) = 2.1764702e-8 (((6.67408e-11 / 2) * pascals) * ((1 m)^3)) / (c^2) = 3.71295774e-28 kilograms/m^3
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-07 05:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d25c2621-0ba0-4136-84ec-7efdcf0f25fb@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474350 |
Keith Stein escrito P.S. When i say "the medium is stationary" i only mean that it is stationary RELATIVE TO the clocks eh! For sure the synchronization procedure i describe can be carried out on a plane if you like. The Medium has the characteristics of being Stationary because it is (Pressure) The Pressure “Permeates” (((c^7) / (hbar * (G^2))) * (planck length^3)) / c = 6.5248935 m kg / s ((c^7) / (hbar * (G^2))) * (planck length^3) = 1.95611386e+9 joules (((c^7) / (hbar * (G^2))) * (planck length^3)) / (c^2) = 2.1764702e-8 (((6.67408e-11 / 2) * pascals) * ((1 m)^3)) / (c^2) = 3.71295774e-28 kilograms/m^3 ((2.1764702e-8 / 3.71295774e-28) / (c^2)) * ((G * c) / 2) = 6.52489352 m^2 kg^-1 s^-1
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-07 20:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ppdqp3$1r7s$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #474334 |
Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: > On 06/10/2018 21:20, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 06/10/2018 15:54, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On 05/10/2018 07:53, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>>>> Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>>>>> That's a good point Mr.Bodkin. Fortunately i do know how to >>>>>>> synchronize the clocks UNAMBIGUOUSLY. From the midpoint between >>>>>>> two clocks we send a signal to both clocks through stationary air, >>>>>>> (or any other STATIONARY medium). Clocks synchronized in this way >>>>>>> will be synchronized in all frames of reference. >>> >>>>>> This of course would violate the >>>>>> principle of relativity. >>> >>>>> If you mean it is incompatible with Einstein's ridiculous >>>>> assumption that the speed of light has the same value in all >>>>> frames of reference, then you are entirely correct Mr.Bodkin. >>> >>>> No, that’s not what the principle of relativity says. >>> >>> Well if you mean that synchronizing clocks in the frame of >>> reference in which the medium is stationary would violate >>> the principle that the laws of physics are the same in all >>> inertial frames of reference, then NO it would certainly >>> NOT violate the principle of relativity Mr.Bodkin. What on >>> Earth makes you think that it would ? >> >> Well, because the synchronization procedure will have to work for pairs of >> clocks at rest in ANY inertial reference frame, or the laws of physics will >> not be the same in different reference frames. It’s pretty straightforward. >> > > First let me say that the laws of physics ARE the same in ANY inertial > frame, and the fact that my synchronization procedure must be done in > the frame of reference in which the medium is stationary is certainly > not a violation of that principle. > > Maybe the best way for you to understand this, Mr.Bodkin, is to use a > sound signal, rather than a light signal, to synchronize the clocks. > This could be done, and (as with light) the clocks synchronized in this > way will be synchronized in all frames of reference. However it is > clearly essential that the procedure is carried out in the frame of > reference in which the medium is stationary. This certainly does not > mean the laws of physics are frame dependent. It just means things > can behave differently on a windy day eh! > > keith stein > > Alright, so until there is a way to find the rest frame of the medium, you claim it is impossible to establish synchronized and separated clocks. So we will have to work with experiments that do not rely on separated clocks because they would require synchronization. So now the question is, is there a method to determine the rest frame of the medium without them? And in looking at your example of sound, can you think of an experiment that would unambiguously determine the rest frame of the medium, using only the sound signal as a reference? -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web