Galilean transformation of time

[Maciej Wozniak]

What does it say?
It says that good/correct/proper/well tuned clocks should
indicate t'=t.

Now, let's take another rule. We need clocks to be synchronized.
What does it mean?
It means that that good/correct/proper/well tuned clocks should
indicate t'=t.

It is not another rule, it is the same rule.

And yes, you're idiots. All of you.

[Richard Hachel]

Post by Maciej Wozniak
What does it say?
It says that good/correct/proper/well tuned clocks should
indicate t'=t.
Now, let's take another rule. We need clocks to be synchronized.
What does it mean?
It means that that good/correct/proper/well tuned clocks should
indicate t'=t.
It is not another rule, it is the same rule.
And yes, you're idiots. All of you.

We cannot "absolutely" synchronize two watches placed in different places,
and even less two watches evolving in different stationary systems.

To synchronize them with each other, it would be necessary not only to
synchronize them in the same place, but that once this is done, they not
only remain in the same place, but that in addition they have no relative
speed (for example one rotating around the other).

If we move them apart, we change their hyperplane of simultaneity; and if
we place them in relativistic frames of reference with high speed in them,
we change, moreover, their chronotropy (the internal mechanisms of the
watches no longer beat at the same speed).

The only way to tune two watches with each other is not to make them move
and to leave them in the same place.

This means that we remain on the same watch and that the two form only
one.

I refer you to what I wrote in pdf on the nature of simultaneity (I don't
know of any article in the world that is truer and more precise than mine
on this).

I also refer you to the study of what I said about the Langevin traveler,
and how, in this example, Terrence is 30 years old, and that when Stella
returns, she is only 18.

I described this with prodigious precision and great mathematical beauty
(unheard of because physicists have never resolved the paradox that
imposes the use of the relativistic spatial zoom effect that they do not
understand, and in the way in which space is a Hachel-type reference
mollusk (and not Lorentz-type).

The Lorentz contraction imposes a global and fixed contraction of
D'=D.sqrt(1-Vo²/c²) which makes the apparent speeds absurd.

The Hachel elasticity (I prefer this term because here the distances to be
covered expand) is much more logical and truer, and it goes through
D'=D.sqrt(1-Vo²/c²)/(1+cosµ.Vo/c).

It is this forgetting of equation directly deduced from Poincaré
transformations that has made that for 120 years, physicists have been in
perfect blindness and have stuffed the RR with paradoxes and falsehoods
that should not be there.

R.H.

[Maciej Wozniak]

Post by Richard Hachel

Post by Maciej Wozniak
What does it say?
It says that good/correct/proper/well tuned clocks should
indicate t'=t.
Now, let's take another rule. We need clocks to be synchronized.
What does it mean?
It means that  that good/correct/proper/well tuned clocks should
indicate t'=t.
It is not another rule, it is the same rule.
And yes, you're idiots. All of you.

We cannot "absolutely" synchronize two watches placed in different places,

Maybe you can't but professionals can and do.

[Richard Hachel]

Post by Maciej Wozniak

Post by Richard Hachel

Post by Maciej Wozniak
What does it say?
It says that good/correct/proper/well tuned clocks should
indicate t'=t.
Now, let's take another rule. We need clocks to be synchronized.
What does it mean?
It means that  that good/correct/proper/well tuned clocks should
indicate t'=t.
It is not another rule, it is the same rule.
And yes, you're idiots. All of you.

We cannot "absolutely" synchronize two watches placed in different places,

Maybe you can't but professionals can and do.

No, they can't.

They think they can, but that's not what they do.

To say that it is completely idiotic to think that if you cut off a dog's
four legs, it becomes deaf, because it no longer comes when you call it
for its food.

I have never stopped repeating it, when you synchronize a thousand clocks
placed in different places, you do not synchronize them with each other,
because it is IMPOSSIBLE, just as it is physically impossible for a square
to be round.

You must then synchronize a virtual watch, ideally placed in a fourth
dimension, and at an equal distance from the thousand others, which will
all end up in its virtual hyperplane of simultaneity.

All the watches in the system will then be synchronized with it.

But between them, they will never be synchronized, because it is
PHYSICALLY absurd in an anisochronous environment.

Your behavior is stupid as hell, not only do you not understand anything
(a little effort would be welcome), but you exhaust your opponents by
repeating simple things that you deliberately spit on.

The notion of anisochrony is not an innate science in human beings, like
the notion of a round earth.

A sixty-year-old man locked in a room, with a view of the garden, to whom
we would have all the languages, all the history of the world, all the
botany, electricity, etc... but NOT that the earth is round, would not
know that the earth is round.

But once explained, anisochrony, then relative chronoitropy like the
notion of a round earth, you see nothing else.

Still, you have to think about it, and you don't.

Your behavior is ridiculous and exhausting.

You will end up looking like Python.

R.H.

[Maciej Wozniak]

Post by Richard Hachel

Post by Maciej Wozniak

Post by Richard Hachel

Post by Maciej Wozniak
What does it say?
It says that good/correct/proper/well tuned clocks should
indicate t'=t.
Now, let's take another rule. We need clocks to be synchronized.
What does it mean?
It means that  that good/correct/proper/well tuned clocks should
indicate t'=t.
It is not another rule, it is the same rule.
And yes, you're idiots. All of you.

We cannot "absolutely" synchronize two watches placed in different places,

Maybe you can't but professionals can and do.

No, they can't.
They think they can, but that's not what they do.

Yes, they can.
You think they can't, nobody cares.