Sujet : Re: Sync two clocks
De : r.hachel (at) *nospam* tiscali.fr (Richard Hachel)
Groupes : sci.physics.relativityDate : 23. Aug 2024, 12:30:06
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Nemoweb
Message-ID : <mi8jivrFcigra2axpPaQXJiogwg@jntp>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
User-Agent : Nemo/0.999a
Le 23/08/2024 à 10:55, Mikko a écrit :
This is not, what 'invariant' means in the context of relativity.
Yes, it is.
Meant is, that time would not change, if you switch from one frame of reference to another.
No, it means that whatever is called "invariant" is the same for all
frames. In the current case, the number wirtten on the paper is invariant.
Mikko
Here is yet another proof of what I am saying, and of the need to re-explain things correctly.
When I say "I bought a white horse, and I gave it to Father François; he will take care of it because he is retired, and he owns a field", everyone understands what I am saying.
But if I say: "All the watches will be desynchronized", it is clear that no one will clearly understand what that means, and so on for a great many terms used.
For a while, we will be able to bluff, and say: "I understand the first sentence as clearly as the second".
But if we scratch a little, we see that it is pure bluff.
What do you understand clearly in "the round squares if they are scarlet white in color remain more voluntary than watches synchronized on a vast Friday"?
Nothing.
A pure nothingness.
"I synchronize A and B": when, how, with what, seen from where?
All this must be defined, and if possible with a prose as obvious as:
"I bought a white horse, and I gave it to Father François; he will take care of it because he is retired, and he owns a field".
R.H.