Re: Relativistic synchronisation method

Le 22/12/2024 à 14:00, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit :

Den 21.12.2024 18:26, skrev Richard Hachel:

Le 21/12/2024 à 15:21, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit :

>
Richard, I an not criticising you or your theory.
I am only asking simple questions I would like you to answer,
So please do.
>
Richard, you have a watch of some kind, haven't you?
>
How did you set your clock to show what it shows, so
that you can reach your bus or train at the right time?
>
Do you expect your watch to show the same as the clock
on the wall of the railway station (within a minute or so)?
>
>
If you ignore them yet again, I will ask you  again.

 You have still not answered my questions, so I will ask again.
 

 I have already answered all these questions, except that you do not read my answers.

 The answers you repeat below?
 

So we are in an insurmountable problem.
Especially since my posts are in French, and my pdfs in French.
There are of course French people, who should love Henri Poincaré and Richard Hachel.
No! They love Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking. Why? Because they are not French.
Those are the race below the race of toads. They hate their own culture out of a desire to hate their own culture.
We have a good example here with the idiot "Python".
Who hates France and would love a cession of France into various entities, must have a Breton entity.
So as soon as the scent of France is felt a little, he goes crazy.
I have already answered your questions many times. When you post pdfs, I ask readers to read them carefully.
When I think I see inaccuracies, I explain them, and I try to correct it (even the notion of integration which is incorrect in one of your pdf).

 I don't understand your answers to my questions.
 

What more do you want to ask me?

 I want you to answer my simple questions in a way I can understand.
 I will reformulate my question so you will only have to
answer "YES" or "NO".
 Here we go:
 Richard, do you own a watch of some kind?
  'yes' or 'no', please!
 Do you use the internet to set your watch?
(or is your watch a computer on the net?)
  'yes' or 'no', please!
 Do you use a mobile network to set your watch?
(or is your watch a mobile phone?)
  'yes' or 'no', please!
 Do you use GPS to set your watch?
(or is your watch a GPS-receiver?)
  'yes' or 'no', please!
 Do you use public radio or TV to set your  watch?
(or is your watch on a radio receiver or a TV?)
 Do you expect your watch to show the same as the clock on
the wall of a railway station or an airport (within a minute or so)?
  'yes' or 'no', please

Everything you say is true.
So I can answer "yes, absolutely" to all your questions.
The problem is that you do not understand what you are doing, and what a synchronization process consists of in our universe.
When you synchronize all the users' watches, you synchronize them on a single watch, which is the system watch and which is located in a given place (the position of the watch is as crucial as its relative speed in the cosmos).
This watch is an "abstract", virtual watch, which synchronizes all the watches on it, and on IT ALONE, to give coherence to the whole.
Breathe, blow.
This means that in fact, all the watches remain out of tune by nature, and will always remain so, but that the basic watch serves to give the whole a false, but COHERENT system.
That is to say that we are dealing with a type M synchronization if you follow what I wrote in French in my pdf.
In Einstein, the explanations do not exceed three lines, and in Poincaré one line. This is not enough to understand, teach and explain what is happening.
To understand, you have to reread what I wrote, calmly, neither too slowly nor too quickly.
It is absolutely abnormal that I am told that we do not understand what is said, when everything is clearly defined, even defined several times with the most precise words possible.
pdf here ---> <http://nemoweb.net/jntp?HQFxpJvcwIpLhNIeMKqLNQ292YE@jntp/Data.Media:1>
R.H.