Quentin, Yes, I understand this. But they are clearly not at the same clock time coordinates. So called 'coordinate time' is basically an accounting trick that relativity uses to d make sense of the problems I point out without realizing the real implications of those problems, namely that there is an entirely different P-time.
Coordinate time says, if there was an absolute p-time it would work something like this but then claims there is no such absolute p-time which is contradictory. Well it doesn't work quite like that but that's what it tries to do, account for the problem of different clock times being in the same present moment. But the only way to really account for that is to accept the fact that there is a present moment which is not the same as clock time. Coordinate time is not understood to be a separate physical time than clock time. It's just a different way of calculating clock times. Edgar On Friday, January 17, 2014 11:36:49 AM UTC-5, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > > > 2014/1/17 Edgar L. Owen <[email protected] <javascript:>> > > Quentin, > > No, not at all. They are NOT at the same spacetime coordinates > > > Yes they are... > > > because their clock time t values are different. > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coordinate_time > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_time > > Quentin > > > Only if their clocktime t values as well as their x,y,z values were the > same would they be at the same spacetime coordinates. I hate to say it but > that is quite obvious.... > > But they are in the exact same p-time present moment because they can > shake hands and compare clocks.... > > Edgar > > > > On Friday, January 17, 2014 11:24:33 AM UTC-5, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > > > > 2014/1/17 Edgar L. Owen <[email protected]> > > Stephen, > > Your argument is fine. It's standard GR. BUT for the nth time it's talking > about CLOCK TIME simultaneity, rather than the present moment of p-time. It > still doesn't seem to register that there is a difference even though the > fact of the twins meeting with different clock times in the SAME present > > > They are at the same present moment *because* they are at the same > spacetime coordinates, that's the only and unique reason as to why they can > meet at that moment, there is absolutely no need of an unexistant p-time. > > Quentin > > > moment clearly demonstrates they are different. > > You can argue no inherent absolute clock time simultaneities till the cows > come home and I will agree EVERY TIME. > > But that just ain't the p-time present moment as the twins prove over and > over .... > > Edgar > > > > On Thursday, January 16, 2014 11:13:14 AM UTC-5, Stephen Paul King wrote: > > Dear Edgar, > > I already wrote up one argument against the concept of a universal > present moment using the general covariance requirement of GR. Did you read > it? It is impossible to define a clock on an infinitesimal region of > space-time thus it is impossible to define a "present moment" in a way that > could be "universal" for observers that exist in a space-time. There are > alternatives that I have mentioned. > The non-communicability of first person informa > > ... -- 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.
