Re: [SR and synchronization] Cognitive Dissonances and Mental Blockage

Le 23/08/2024 à 08:27, Thomas Heger a écrit :

Am Donnerstag000022, 22.08.2024 um 13:06 schrieb Python:

Le 22/08/2024 à 08:51, Thomas Heger a écrit :

Am Mittwoch000021, 21.08.2024 um 09:31 schrieb Python:
>

Addendum : "the distance from A to B is x": this is wrong too.
x is the coordinate of an event in system K, it is not, in
general, the distance between origins of K and k.

>
'x' is a generic coordinate in system K and means a distance from the center of K to a point on the x-axis.
>
Since system k was placed with its center upon the x-axis and B in the center of k, the distance from A to B would actually be x.

>
Systems k and K are not even mentioned in part I.2. So "system k was
placed with its center upon the x-axis and B in the center of k"
is a figment of your imagination in no way related to A.E. article.

>
Wrong, because definitions remain valid throughout the entire paper, unless stated otherwise.

>
Part I.1 is in no way supposed to refer to definitions stated in
part I.3.

 Sure, but fortunately I have not written anything like this.
 I wrote, that defintions for §1.1 remain valind in §1.3, unless the author states otherwise.

But not the other way around. Nothing defined in §1.3 (like k or K)
is involved in §1.2.

If an author defines some variable or other setting and later 'foregets' this definition, all older settings remain valid.

>
And definitely NOT a definition of k/K that is stated LATER, moreover
neither K nor k are mentions in part I.1.

 Sure, but apparently you wanted to discuss a certain equation form part 1.3 on page 3.

Absolutely NOT. I was CLEARLY talking about §1.1. and §1.1 alone.
Are you that stupid, hypocrite or both?

That was LATER than the introduction of K and k.
 

>

What you apparently want is simply inexaptable:
you want the reader to find out, which definition is valid at a certain position of the text and which one already expired.

>
What I want is perfectly acceptable: that the reader has a functional
brain.

  It is a VERY bad idea, to 'fill the blancs' in a scientific text, because it would invite to see, what simply isn't there.

It is a VERY good idea to use its brain, as long as it is functioning
of course. Yours is NOT.

[snip more idiocies]