Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #675578
| Message-ID | <2DXAEUWzScGOLfwafrf0eR3U_Oc@jntp> (permalink) |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. |
| References | (5 earlier) <18e487256cf539fd$25456$2380869$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com> <E3BKUZSmg6hb0cIsCCfMmVx568M@jntp> <18e4877b372d015b$26198$2370417$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com> <dPmiCzZ3fMqHRI9QQk7LG8L0fqY@jntp> <18e4889c7bde474e$25457$2380869$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com> |
| Newsgroups | sci.physics.relativity |
| Date | 2026-11-03 12:35 +0000 |
| Organization | Nemoweb |
| From | Python <python@cccp.invalid> |
Maciej,
Oh, for fuck's sake. We're back to the adjective again.
An "ideal clock" in relativity is not defined as:
a clock which agrees with relativity.
It is a MODEL with a specified law:
its reading equals proper time along its worldline.
That law predicts X BEFORE anyone performs the experiment.
Ralph proposes a different law:
the reunited clocks agree.
That predicts 0.
These are not two "opinions about perfection".
They are two incompatible predictions about clock readings.
And then — this is the bit you seem determined never to reach — we use
REAL clocks and compare the result with X and 0.
That's how physical models are tested.
Newton's ideal point masses aren't a religious sect of particularly devout
masses either.
An ideal gas isn't a gas declared "perfect" because it agrees with the
ideal gas law.
An ideal pendulum isn't a pendulum selected after the experiment because
Newton likes its answer.
Idealization -> quantitative prediction -> real experiment -> comparison.
This really isn't complicated.
You keep desperately turning
"Which model predicts the behaviour of real clocks?"
into
"Which clocks do you personally consider perfect?"
because the second question lets you argue about the word "perfect"
forever without ever risking a numerical prediction.
We have noticed, Maciej.
Several hundred repetitions ago.
Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Silly Questions for Silly People. HenryWilson <Hgw@home.com> - 2026-11-01 17:24 +0000
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2026-11-01 11:40 -0800
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. HenryWilson <Hgw@home.com> - 2026-11-03 01:44 +0000
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-01 21:08 +0000
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-11-02 08:03 +0100
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. HenryWilson <Hgw@home.com> - 2026-11-03 04:18 +0000
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-03 10:37 +0000
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-11-03 12:10 +0100
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-03 11:20 +0000
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-11-03 12:37 +0100
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-03 11:41 +0000
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-11-03 12:48 +0100
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-03 11:52 +0000
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-11-03 12:59 +0100
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-03 12:01 +0000
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-11-03 13:05 +0100
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-03 12:15 +0000
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-11-03 13:25 +0100
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-03 12:35 +0000
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-11-03 14:09 +0100
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-03 13:39 +0000
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-11-03 15:57 +0100
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-03 15:28 +0000
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-11-03 16:42 +0100
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-03 15:57 +0000
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-11-03 17:24 +0100
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-03 16:42 +0000
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-11-03 18:05 +0100
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Norbert Kabuzan <zrr@bakkzuob.ru> - 2026-11-03 17:17 +0000
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Kelly Mahlov <kemov@lllall.ru> - 2026-11-03 16:45 +0000
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Jarret Babahanov <bt@nra.ru> - 2026-11-03 17:21 +0000
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. HenryWilson <Hgw@home.com> - 2026-11-05 22:59 +0000
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Python <jpierre.messager@gmail.com> - 2026-11-06 15:05 +0000
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2026-11-06 17:46 +0100
Re: Silly Questions for Silly People. HenryWilson <Hgw@home.com> - 2026-11-06 17:42 +0000
csiph-web