Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.1

Liste des GroupesRevenir à p relativity 
Sujet : Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.1
De : ross.a.finlayson (at) *nospam* gmail.com (Ross Finlayson)
Groupes : sci.physics.relativity
Date : 25. May 2025, 15:26:28
Autres entêtes
Message-ID : <vvicnS5yX6AJta71nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@giganews.com>
References : 1 2 3 4 5
User-Agent : Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0
On 05/24/2025 09:31 PM, Thomas Heger wrote:
Am Samstag000024, 24.05.2025 um 19:53 schrieb Ross Finlayson:
On 05/24/2025 08:21 AM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
On 24/05/2025 16:48, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On 05/21/2025 04:47 AM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
>
A clock hypothesis: is a pretty usual idea, that there
are no closed time-like curves and furthermore that whatever
meets has whatever clocks meet. Einstein called it a, "the time",
>
That's false on all accounts, including the time travel
side of things, you still cannot get your head around
which, apparently.  That said, thanks for asking:
>
The "clock hypothesis", in simple terms, is the principle
that all working clocks tick at the same rate (the proper
time rate) in their own frame.  Drop that and you drop
any chance of doing any physics at all: together with
the use of light signals, clocks are fundamental to
contemporary physics and the very measurement process.
>
It is also equivalently the hypothesis that the local
experience of time is universally the same for every
particle and every observer: and I do not actually
mean anything psychological, rather the rate of getting
old, just like the rate of atom decay, is a physics fact.
>
And note that none of that is about inertial frames and
motion only: time proper ticks at the same rate every
time every place.  Indeed, time dilation and length
contraction are only relativistic effects, we know that,
don't we? "Nothing is actually slowing or shortening
aboard that ship", which remains canonical relativity.
>
-Julio
>
>
Ah, no, "clock hypothesis" is usually that there's
a, "universal time", for example an Einstein's "the time".
>
'a universal time' for the entire universe does not make sense!
>
>
We need actually the concept of 'local time' and sets of locations,
which share the same local time and build in sum what I call a 'time
domaine'.
>
On-time-only-universe is plain wrong!
>
The reasons to think so are a little tricky.
>
But there exists a good book about this topic, which I like to recommend:
>
Alexander Franklin Meyer 'Geometry of Time'.
>
>
I can also offer my own 'book' called 'structured spacetime'.
>
(This can be found here and is actually free to read and download - at
least up to now:
>
>
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Ur3_giuk2l439fxUa8QHX4wTDxBEaM6lOlgVUa0cFU4/edit?usp=sharing
)
>
>
TH
...
That's _local_
when _SR is local_
and _Relativity of Simultaneity is non-local_.
The "entelechy" is a complementary concept to energy,
as contents, of a location in space-time,
as with regards to a location in a space, the time.
It's a continuum mechanics.

Date Sujet#  Auteur
21 May 25 * [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.155Julio Di Egidio
24 May 25 +- Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.11Julio Di Egidio
24 May 25 +* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.114Ross Finlayson
24 May 25 i`* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.113Julio Di Egidio
24 May 25 i +- Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.11Otniel Abuhov
24 May 25 i +* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.15Ross Finlayson
25 May 25 i i`* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.14Thomas Heger
25 May 25 i i +* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.12Julio Di Egidio
26 May 25 i i i`- Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.11Thomas Heger
25 May 25 i i `- Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.11Ross Finlayson
25 May 25 i `* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.16Paul.B.Andersen
25 May 25 i  +* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.14Maciej Woźniak
25 May 25 i  i`* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.13Delman Vamvakidis
25 May 25 i  i `* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.12Maciej Woźniak
25 May 25 i  i  `- Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.11Arden Vassilopulos
25 May 25 i  `- Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.11Walton Molnár
25 May 25 `* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.139Julio Di Egidio
25 May 25  +- Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.11Bladimir Rudawski
26 May 25  `* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.137Ross Finlayson
26 May 25   `* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.136Julio Di Egidio
26 May 25    +* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.12Ross Finlayson
26 May 25    i`- Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.11Julio Di Egidio
26 May 25    +* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.115Julio Di Egidio
27 May 25    i+* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.12Ross Finlayson
27 May 25    ii`- Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.11Julio Di Egidio
1 Jun 25    i`* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.112Julio Di Egidio
1 Jun 25    i +* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.12Richard Hachel
1 Jun 25    i i`- Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.11Carlis Bakurov
2 Jun 25    i +* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.17Ross Finlayson
2 Jun 25    i i+* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.15Julio Di Egidio
5 Jun 25    i ii`* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.14Ross Finlayson
5 Jun 25    i ii +- Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.11Maciej Woźniak
5 Jun 25    i ii +- Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.11Julio Di Egidio
5 Jun 25    i ii `- Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.11Julio Di Egidio
3 Jun 25    i i`- Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.11Thomas Heger
11 Jun 25    i `* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.12Julio Di Egidio
11 Jun 25    i  `- Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.11Julio Di Egidio
26 May 25    `* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.118Paul.B.Andersen
26 May 25     +* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.17Python
26 May 25     i`* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.16Maciej Woźniak
26 May 25     i `* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.15Python
26 May 25     i  `* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.14Maciej Woźniak
26 May 25     i   `* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.13Python
27 May 25     i    `* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.12Richard Hachel
27 May 25     i     `- Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.11Ross Finlayson
30 May 25     `* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.110LaurenceClarkCrossen
30 May 25      +* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.18Paul.B.Andersen
30 May 25      i+- Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.11Wilder Molostov
30 May 25      i+* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.13Richard Hachel
30 May 25      ii`* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.12J. J. Lodder
30 May 25      ii `- Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.11Ezekiel Beklemishev
31 May 25      i`* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.13Thomas Heger
1 Jun 25      i `* Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.12Thomas Heger
2 Jun 25      i  `- Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.11Thomas Heger
1 Jun 25      `- Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.11Julio Di Egidio

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal