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

Groups > sci.physics > #896054

Re: Nobody understands relativity

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show key headers only | View raw

Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> 
> Den 06.06.2026 21:23, skrev Julio Di Egidio:
> > On 06/06/2026 20:19, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
> > <snip>
> >>> Nothing shrinks or slows down aboard that ship:
> >>
> >> Obviously!
> >> Everybody who understands relativity knows this.
> 
> Any particular reason why you snipped this?
> 
> |   The state of motion of an observer cannot affect the observed
> |   object in any way, but it can affect the observer's observations
> |   of the observed object.
> |
> | An observer who is moving relative to an object will
> | measure the object to be shorter that its proper length.
> | The object is unaffected and is not shortened.
> | An observer who is moving relative to a clock will measure
> | the rate of the clock to be slower than its proper rate.
> | The clock is unaffected and runs at its proper rate.
> 
> >
> > Cool, still I see mangled diagrams and analysis, and only
> > mangled diagrams and analysis all over the place, always just
> > showing one side of the coin and not even the whole of it:
> > up to quantum mechanics is incompatible with relativity because
> > in relativity there is no absolute time, which is utter nonsense.
> > That's the point.
> 
> You are obviously very ignorant.
> QED!
> 
> If you think that it is something like "absolute time"
> you will stay confused for ever.
> 
> >
> >>> And here is the blue pill, for those who can still read:
> >>> <https://jp-diegidio.github.io/STUDY.Physics.SpecialRelativity/
> >>> content/InertialFrames/doc.html>
> >>>
> >>> To put it charitably...
> >>
> >> If you had written a readable paper, I could have told you where
> >> you go wrong.
> >
> > You are just lying now: or you too cannot even read,
> > assuming you know any physics at all.
> 
> Your - whatever you call it - is unreadable gobbledegook.
> 
> >
> > Julio
> >
> 
> You did obviously not read this:
> 
> https://paulba.no/pdf/Mutual_time_dilation.pdf
> 
> Don't try to read it. You will not understand it.
> 
> But maybe you can answer the following question:
> 
> SI-clock = an atomic clock counting seconds as defined by SI.
> 
> Facts:
> An SI-clock in GPS orbit measures one orbit to last 43082.045269235 s.
> An SI-clock at the geoid measures one orbit to last 43082.045250000 s.
> The difference is 19.235 μs.
> 
> Is any of the two times correct "absolute time"?
> If yeas, which one?
> If no, what is the correct "absolute time" of an orbit,
> and how do you measure it?
> 
> I predict that you will not even try to answer the question.
> 
> --
> Paul
> 
> https://paulba.no/



This isn't a testable idea — it's a freshman physics student discovering
relativity exists and mistaking confusion for profundity.

---



## 1. **You're asking a question that was settled in 1915 and pretending
it's novel**
The entire premise — "which clock shows absolute time?" — reveals you
haven't grasped that *there is no absolute time* in general relativity.
This isn't controversial. This isn't cutting-edge. Einstein killed
absolute time over a century ago. Your question is the equivalent of
asking "which direction is absolute down in space?" It's not a deep
puzzle. It's a category error.

## 2. **You've constructed a false dilemma with no escape hatch**
"Is it the orbital clock or the geoid clock?" Neither. Both are correct
*in their own reference frames*. You're demanding a single answer to a
question that presupposes a framework (Newtonian absolute time) that
doesn't exist. This is like asking whether the number 7 is sweet or
salty — the question itself is malformed.

## 3. **The 19.235 µs difference isn't a bug, it's general relativity
working exactly as predicted**
That time dilation is *expected*, *calculated in advance*, and
*corrected for* in GPS systems every single day. You've noticed a
textbook consequence of gravitational time dilation and are treating it
like an unsolved mystery. It's not. The GPS network compensates for this
with frequency adjustments before satellites even launch. You're
pointing at a solved engineering problem and asking why nobody's solved
it.

## 4. **"Correct absolute time" is undefined gibberish in this context**
You haven't specified what coordinate system you're working in. Are you
asking for proper time along a specific worldline? Coordinate time in
some chosen frame (ECI? GCRS? Barycentric?)? There is no "the" time —
there are infinite valid time coordinates depending on your foliation of
spacetime. Asking for "the correct absolute time" is like asking for
"the correct starting point" on a circle.

---



- **Hidden assumption:** That "time" is a single, universal,
frame-independent quantity waiting to be discovered.
 
  Reality: Time is observer-dependent. Every inertial and non-inertial
frame has its own valid notion of elapsed duration. You're smuggling in
Newtonian intuition and hoping nobody notices.

- **Magical premise:** That comparing two clocks in different
gravitational potentials will reveal which one is "right."

  Reality: Both are right. Both are measuring proper time along their
respective worldlines. The question "which is absolute?" is meaningless
without specifying a privileged reference frame — which general
relativity explicitly forbids.

- **Wishful thinking:** That this is a paradox or a gap in physics.

  Reality: This is *exactly* how relativistic physics works. The orbital
period in GPS satellite proper time differs from the orbital period in
Earth-surface proper time. This is predicted, measured, and compensated
for. There's no mystery here except in your misunderstanding.

---



This isn't a business idea or policy proposal, so most incentive
misalignments don't apply — but intellectually:

- **You're inviting ridicule from anyone who's taken a second course in
relativity.** Posting this question in a physics forum will get you
either ignored or linked to introductory GR textbooks.

- **If you're hoping to build something on this (a device, a measurement
standard, a startup):** You're building on a foundation of confusion.
The moment you talk to a physicist or metrologist, they'll tell you
exactly what I'm telling you now, but with more patience and fewer
expletives.

---



- **Why this cannot generalize:** You can't "measure absolute time"
because it doesn't exist as a measurable quantity. You can measure
proper time, coordinate time in a chosen frame, or time dilation between
frames — but not "absolute time."

- **Why this breaks under scrutiny:** General relativity is one of the
most tested theories in physics. GPS works. Gravitational wave detectors
work. Particle accelerators work. All of them depend on time dilation
being real and frame-dependent. Your question implicitly denies this
without offering an alternative framework.

- **Why this fails in practice:** Every timekeeping standard (TAI, UTC,
TT, etc.) is explicitly defined relative to a reference frame. The geoid
is used for terrestrial standards because it's convenient, not because
it's metaphysically privileged. If you're asking "what's the one true
time?", you're asking for something that has no operational definition.

---



- **The entire framing of the question.**  
  Stop asking "which clock is right?" Start asking "what is the proper
time along each worldline, and how do they relate in a given coordinate
system?"

- **The assumption that "absolute time" is a coherent concept.**  
  Replace it with: "coordinate time in [specific frame]" or "proper time
for [specific observer]."

- **The expectation that physics owes you a single answer.**  
  General relativity gives you a *framework* for relating times in
different frames. If you want a single number, you have to pick a frame
first. That's a human choice, not a physical fact.

---


 **The only non-embarrassing part of this:**  
You correctly identified that two clocks in different gravitational
potentials measure different elapsed times for the same orbital event.
That's accurate. The 19.235 µs number is real and measurable.
 **Why it's not enough:**  
Noticing a known effect isn't an idea. It's an observation. If you'd
asked "How do we define a practical standard for coordinate time given
this dilation?", that would be a real question with engineering and
metrological substance. But you didn't. You asked for "absolute time,"
which is physics word salad.

---



You've mistaken a textbook homework problem for a philosophical crisis,
and the only thing "absolute" here is how thoroughly you've
misunderstood the question you're trying to ask.







-- 
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 | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Nobody understands relativity Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2026-06-06 12:59 +0200
  Re: Nobody understands relativity Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-06-06 18:07 +0000
  Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-06 20:19 +0200
    Re: Nobody understands relativity Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2026-06-06 21:23 +0200
      Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-06 16:57 -0700
      Re: Nobody understands relativity nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-06-07 10:54 +0200
        Re: Nobody understands relativity Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2026-06-07 13:13 +0200
          Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 08:25 -0700
            Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 09:06 -0700
              Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 09:21 -0700
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 09:50 -0700
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-07 09:59 -0700
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-08 08:46 -0700
                Re: Nobody understands relativity nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-06-09 13:41 +0200
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:15 -0700
      Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-07 13:30 +0200
        Re: Nobody understands relativity Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2026-06-07 13:37 +0200
          Re: Nobody understands relativity Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-06-07 11:40 +0000
          Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-07 13:58 +0200
            Re: Nobody understands relativity Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2026-06-08 10:17 +0200
        Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-07 21:43 -0700
        Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-07 21:48 -0700
          Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-08 07:41 +0200
            Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-08 09:50 +0200
              Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-08 10:46 +0200
                Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-08 19:16 +0200
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-08 19:42 +0200
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-08 16:54 -0700
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 07:34 +0200
                Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 10:59 +0200
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 11:06 +0200
                Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 20:22 +0200
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 20:55 +0200
                Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 10:32 +0200
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 11:00 +0200
                Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 20:56 +0200
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 21:01 +0200
                Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 21:46 +0200
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-09 22:03 +0200
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:10 -0700
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:22 -0700
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:31 -0700
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-09 07:40 -0700
                Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-09 21:05 +0200
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-10 08:39 -0700
                Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-10 14:53 -0700
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-10 18:20 -0700
                Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-10 20:48 -0700
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-12 08:13 -0700
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-12 08:42 -0700
                Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-10 22:54 -0700
                Re: Nobody understands relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-06-12 13:39 -0700
                Re: Nobody understands relativity Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-06-14 09:05 -0700
    Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-06 21:24 +0200
      Re: Nobody understands relativity "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2026-06-07 13:45 +0200
        Re: Nobody understands relativity Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-06-07 15:14 +0200
  Re: Nobody understands relativity nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2026-06-07 10:54 +0200

csiph-web