Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #666375
| From | Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics.relativity |
| Subject | Re: Universal anisochronism |
| Date | 2025-09-29 12:43 +0300 |
| Organization | - |
| Message-ID | <10bdkbg$2tmf8$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <b7GfLGeT6J4bGflGjf12RMdqpAQ@jntp> |
On 2025-09-28 11:19:34 +0000, Richard Hachel said: > The problem of synchronization. > Is it possible to synchronize multiple clocks located in different > positions within an inertial frame of reference? Yes, if the clocks are stationary with respect to that frame and there is no significant gravity. > In Newtonian physics, yes, because space and time are considered > independent entities. In a Newtonian world you can synchornize two clocks in the same place, and they stay syncronized when moved to different places. In the real world moving them will desynchronize them. > In relativistic physics, this is no longer possible, since each clock > has its own concept of universal simultaneity, specific to its own > frame of reference. By the usual concept of simultaneity is not clock specific, only frame specific. If you have a coordinate system with a time coordinate then you can define that clocks showing the coordinate time are synchronous. > Let's send a signal from point M, the midpoint of AB, to points A and > B. It is clear that for M, regardless of the time at which it assumes > the signal was received by the two other points, the two events tA and > tB would have been simultaneous. M doesn't know "when" they occurred, > but it knows "that they were, by definition, simultaneous FOR IT, since > the distances MA and MB are equal." That requires that the speed of the signals to A and to B have the same speed. > However, in relativistic physics, for observer A, the two events are > not simultaneous, nor are they for observer B. They are if simultaneity is defined with those signals. -- Mikko
Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Universal anisochronism Richard Hachel <rh@tiscali.fr> - 2025-09-28 11:19 +0000
Re: Universal anisochronism Harold Babosov <sava@ob.ru> - 2025-09-28 12:56 +0000
Re: Universal anisochronism Richard Hachel <rh@tiscali.fr> - 2025-09-28 13:12 +0000
Re: Universal anisochronism The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-09-28 16:36 -0700
Re: Universal anisochronism "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-28 17:14 -0700
Re: Universal anisochronism The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-09-28 10:23 -0700
Re: Universal anisochronism The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-09-28 10:32 -0700
Re: Universal anisochronism The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-09-29 16:11 -0700
Re: Universal anisochronism The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-09-30 00:41 -0700
Re: Universal anisochronism Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-10-15 11:03 +0100
Re: Universal anisochronism Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-09-29 12:43 +0300
Re: Universal anisochronism Richard Hachel <rh@tiscali.fr> - 2025-09-29 14:18 +0000
Re: Universal anisochronism The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-09-29 08:46 -0700
Re: Universal anisochronism Python <jpierre.messager@gmail.com> - 2025-09-29 15:52 +0000
Re: Universal anisochronism Richard Hachel <rh@tiscali.fr> - 2025-09-29 19:19 +0000
Re: Universal anisochronism Python <jpierre.messager@gmail.com> - 2025-09-29 21:35 +0000
Re: Universal anisochronism Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-09-30 16:02 +0300
Re: Universal anisochronism Richard Hachel <rh@tiscali.fr> - 2025-09-30 13:37 +0000
Re: Universal anisochronism Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-01 13:22 +0300
Re: Universal anisochronism Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-09-30 15:47 +0200
Re: Universal anisochronism Python <jpierre.messager@gmail.com> - 2025-09-30 14:00 +0000
Re: Universal anisochronism Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-09-30 16:10 +0200
Re: Universal anisochronism Python <jpierre.messager@gmail.com> - 2025-09-30 14:22 +0000
Re: Universal anisochronism Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-09-30 16:31 +0200
Re: Universal anisochronism Python <jpierre.messager@gmail.com> - 2025-09-30 14:39 +0000
Re: Universal anisochronism Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-09-30 16:50 +0200
Re: Universal anisochronism Python <jpierre.messager@gmail.com> - 2025-09-30 14:52 +0000
Re: Universal anisochronism Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-09-30 17:10 +0200
Re: Universal anisochronism Python <jpierre.messager@gmail.com> - 2025-09-30 15:18 +0000
Re: Universal anisochronism Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-09-30 17:47 +0200
Re: Universal anisochronism Python <jpierre.messager@gmail.com> - 2025-09-30 16:24 +0000
Re: Universal anisochronism Oleander Sadowski <nadre@ilasa.pl> - 2025-09-30 22:02 +0000
Re: Universal anisochronism Python <jpierre.messager@gmail.com> - 2025-09-29 13:29 +0000
Re: Universal anisochronism Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-09-29 15:50 +0200
Re: Universal anisochronism Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-10-02 08:46 +0200
Re: Universal anisochronism Richard Hachel <rh@tiscali.fr> - 2025-10-02 10:31 +0000
csiph-web