Re: Sync two clocks

W dniu 23.08.2024 o 13:23, Paul.B.Andersen pisze:

Den 22.08.2024 21:12, skrev Richard Hachel:

Le 22/08/2024 à 20:19, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit :

>
It is no absolute and universal simultaneity.
>
Since you still seem to think that it was Richard Hachel
who  discovered this, it is obvious that you do not read
what I and others write to you.
>
Den 22.08.2024 Paul B. Andersen wrote:
|
| And you believe it is YOU that have discovered that? 😂
|
| Before 1905 everybody believed it was a "universal, present now",
| that simultaneity was absolute, and that clocks could be
| absolutely synchronised. Newton took it for granted!
|
| But Einstein showed that there is no absolute simultaneity,
| and clocks can't be absolutely synchronised.
|
| https://paulba.no/paper/Electrodynamics.pdf
| See: § 1. Definition of Simultaneity
|
| Did you really not know that it was Einstein who discovered this? 😂
>

 

>
Let's admit it, Paul.
You're wrong, Einstein didn't say anything at all, and always just repeated what Poincaré said, but hey, it doesn't matter, we'll admit that you're right.

 https://paulba.no/paper/Electrodynamics.pdf
Quote from § 1. Definition of Simultaneity:
-------------------------------------------
"If at the point A of space there is a clock, an observer at
  A can determine the time values of events in the immediate
  proximity of A by finding the positions of the hands which
  are simultaneous with these events.
  If there is at the point B of space another clock in all
  respects resembling the one at A, it is possible for an observer
  at B to determine the time values of events in the immediate
  neighbourhood of B.
  But it is not possible without further assumption to compare,
  in respect of time, an event at A with an event at B.
  We have so far defined only an “A time” and a “B time.”
  We have not defined a common “time” for A and B, for
  the latter cannot be defined at all unless we establish
  by definition that the “time” required by light to travel
  from A to B equals the “time” it requires to travel from B to A.
"

As you said not so long:
 > Of course "simultaneity" and "synchronism" are man made,
 > theoretical notions, but they are very practical, and
 > the world would be even more chaotic than it is without it.
Well, the gedankenwelt of your idiot guru,
thanks to his incredible stupidity,
is even more chaotic than the reality.