I will give an exemple

[Richard Hachel]

I will give an example, although I wonder if it is useful to teach donkeys
that do not want to drink water.

Let us take a watch set in such a way by a watchmaker.

I call the way in which it is set by the watchmaker: the chronotropy of
the watch, or the internal mechanism of the watch.

Now, with this watch, I will go for a walk for a distance d, and I will
come back. I note 20".

The next day, I go for a walk of =2d, and, on the way back, I note 40'.

I then look at my watch with immense astonishment.

And I do like Paul, I confuse chronotropy and time marked on the watch.
And I say: "Hey, that's strange, why did my watch beat twice as fast?"

But no! Simply having covered a greater distance, I also covered more
time, while my watch had the same chronotropy as the day before.

This is the case in relativity, it is not enough to adjust the
chronotropy, it is also necessary to adjust the times considered. It is
NOT the same thing.

Thus the OBSERVER's proper time will depend on his chronotropy (that's
obvious) but, in relativity, also on his position, and the relative path
traveled.

Say To=Tr/sqrt(1-v²/c²) that is not enough.

And that is NOT what we read on the watch.

On the watch we read:
Tapp (the observer's tau)=Tr.(1+cosµ.v/c)/sqrt(1-v²/c²)

Do you understand the difference, and why Paul, as for this story of
accelerated reference frame does not understand anything anymore, and,
instead of thinking, starts to mock what he does not understand.

R.H.

[J. J. Lodder]

Post by Richard Hachel
I will give an example, although I wonder if it is useful to teach donkeys
that do not want to drink water.

Now that we are teaching idiomatically correct English here:
(out of necessity)
The idiomatically correct expression is:
'You can lead a horse to the water, but you cannot make it drink.'

Jan