On 31 December 2013 00:00, Pierz <[email protected]> wrote: > I have to admit I'm starting to derive a weird kind of enjoyment from this > debate. Liz and frequentflyer: you guys are my heroes. Though "anodyne" > means "pain-relieving", which is not how I would describe Roger's theories. > I would choose the word "jejune" instead. >
Thank you :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) (Although like any good writer, I only come here to avoid having to work on my novel... :-( > > Edgar, ole buddy ole pal. You're wrong mate. Has some tiny skerrick of the > possibility of this osmosed through the blood-brain barrier yet? Take your > long "proof" of the common present moment. Once again the flaw is clear to > everyone but you. You describe a graph with lines describing the two > separated travellers. Now you draw a vertical line from one to the other > and thus "prove" they share the same moment at all times. The problem is > your privileging of the vertical line - ie the one orthogonal to traveller > 'a'. There are many lines that could be used to connect the two travellers' > moments from other frames of reference. There is no single "vertical" line > that can be privileged above others. > > Sure, when two people shake hands they share a common moment so to speak, > because the event is a single point in space time. The problem is proving > simultaneity while the observers are apart. > > I'm going to give you a challenge here. Take two spatially separated > events. How do you know if these two events occur at the same time (ie, in > the same common present moment)? I presume you think they either shared a > CPM or didn't, that the universal line of time either passed through the > two events together or in sequence. Please show how you will prove one or > the other. If you can suggest an experiment to prove this, I'll give you > $100. If your experiment involves clocks, however, well we know that > simultaneity will be relative to inertial frame of reference, so that won't > do. > > Brent, you seem to be both highly knowledgeable on physics and relativity > and impartial on the subject of Edgar, so you can decide if he has met the > challenge. i.e., if you say cough up, I cough up. Hope you don't mind the > burden of responsibility! > > BUT, if I don't have to cough up, then I submit that it is established > that we only share a unique common present moment at exact points of > coincidence in space-time, e.g., the handshake, and that your theory is > worthless for all practical purposes (and therefore wrong). > I will throw in a bottle of wine if my other half hasn't polished off the 16 I got him for Xmas before then (OK, technically it was a present from work, but he's the main wine drinker, so.... it saved a lot of thought about socks....!) > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
