Re: [ANN] SR/InertialFrames v2.2.1

On 05/25/2025 08:47 PM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:

On 26/05/2025 02:41, Ross Finlayson wrote:
>

Hmm..., "retro-causation", ..., not causation?

>
Causation, too: but nobody seems bothered by that. :)
>
No, seriously, the fact with the Twins is (and this can
be shown with diagrams!) that, assuming you are the one
who travels of us two: you (the individual I am talking
to here and now) will meet an older "me" when you get
back (not the me you are talking to here and now); while
I will meet a younger "you" when, at a later (proper)
time than that, "you" get back to me!
>
Namely, there are *two* (in proper time!) separate
rendezvous "events" (the standard terminology is rather
a hindrance), and here is the Twin Paradox: what if I
decide to kill myself in between the (proper) time you
get back (the first rendezvous), where you get to see
"me", and the (later, proper) time when I am supposed
to get to my rendezvous with "you"?
>
Coherence conditions is my best bet, as opposed to
everything goes, as that immediately makes no sense:
ultimately in a quantum mechanical form (information),
but already geometrically because *zero* (proper)
distance along a light-like path I take for serious:
zero distance is direct contact, and even sameness...
>
-Julio
>

For two twins to part and meet, imagine they both leave
at the same time and travel the same distance away, and
then both return and arrive to meet again, symmetrically.
The idea that one leaves and departs and at some point
turns around and returns and arrives and comes to a stop
has that it's the same as if they had made the symmetrical trip.
Now, that's linear, then rotational is a bit different,
_because linear and rotational are different_ with regards
to not only relativistic dynamics, yet even classical mechanics.
Yet, the space-contraction has space-contraction-linear
(the object moving through space brings its space with it,
objects are mostly space) and space-contraction-rotational
(the objects form or un-form a free rotating frame).
Then, time or the clocks involved can only slow or meet,
about the space they're in a governed by GR, while,
light's interpretation of the arrivel of light pulses
is exactly defined by Doppler, about the _observer_
of things like boost addition, when the theory doesn't
have anything going faster than light-speed at all,
not even the geodesy's constant updating that has
that the geodesy is always instantaneously evaluated
everywhere with respect to all the other contents of
Space-Time, for example free rotating frames that
look like spheres as much as moving linear frames
look like smears.
Then that it results that they get back together in
the proper time with their entire surrounds, or back
to the garden as it were, is about their being a
continuous manifold, then as with regards to, "Poincare
completion", for the ideas of Poincare in the time of
Hilbert and Minkowski, that for the zollfrei and the
idea of free rotating frames, is for the difference
between the linear and the rotational, the un-linear,
and about orbits instead of a field of force,
_in mechanics itself_.
Yeah I know about Hafaele-Keating and these kinds things,
also about frame-dragging and these kinds things.
Warm regards I'd wish you luck in your theoretical developments.