Re: "Time" vs "physical time"

Richard Hachel <r.hachel@jesauspu.fr> wrote:

Le 08/08/2024 à 22:36, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) a écrit :

 
So say it again. Does Hachelian physics predict an observed speed of c
for relativistic neutrinos traveling the 732 km from CERN to Gran Sasso?
(with the clocks at CERN and Gran Sasso synchronised by GPS)
 
Yes or no will do,
 
Jan

 
All good relativistic physics must predict an OBSERVABLE speed of the
neutrino perfectly equal to c.
If a physics does not do it, it is not good.
On the other hand, all physicists must experimentally note that the
neutrino has this speed, and that no other particle or law of nature can
exceed it.
The cause is the universal anisochrony against which we cannot, because we
are in a concrete physics where we cannot do everything we want, resist or
contradict.

OK, thats clear.
So Hachelian physics has nothing to add to special relativity,
in the way of observable fact.
All it adds are words,

Jan