Sujet : Re: A definition of "when"
De : mlwozniak (at) *nospam* wp.pl (Maciej Wozniak)
Groupes : sci.physics.relativityDate : 19. Sep 2024, 20:22:02
Autres entêtes
Organisation : NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com
Message-ID : <17f6bb8d5631b7c5$1247051$546728$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com>
References : 1 2
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
W dniu 19.09.2024 o 20:48, Python pisze:
Le 19/09/2024 à 07:12, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
W dniu 10.09.2024 o 23:25, Python pisze:
>
>
> Define "when" please. We can. You haven't.
>
You say you can. I say you're lying, as
expected from a poor relativistic stinker.
>
Let's check. Will we?
Let S - a satalite of GPS. One, chosen.
B - a GPS ground base.
All your bases are belong to us :-)
You mean ground facilities ?
I mean your alleged definition of "when", poor
stinker, and stop playing even a bigger idiot
than you are.
https://www.gps.gov/systems/gps/control/
One, chosen.
ES, EB - sets of events in S,B
e1 - an event from ES, e2 - an event from EB.
It makes no sense to write that an event, or a set or events,
are "in" something, or are "from" something.
An event such as "Wozniak posted a given post about 'when'" is happening "in" everything
No, it's happening in my home.
Propose a method of determining whether
e1 and e2 are simultaneous - according to
an observer from B. A method, of course,
fitting The Shit you worship.
>
Will I have to apologize for "you're lying",
You should
No, you proposed nothing (of course) and
were definitely lying.