On 12/22/2018 4:29 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 10:01 PM Brent Meeker <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:On 12/21/2018 5:43 PM, Jason Resch wrote:On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 12:46 PM Brent Meeker <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: On 12/20/2018 9:09 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > I am not advocating any global reference frame, just mentioning that > for a particular observe, they can define a present that works for > them (in their own reference frame). From their point of view they can > consider themselves at rest (whether they are or are not). They can define it in words, but can they define it physically. What is wrong with using the 3-d hyperspace perpendicular to their direction through spacetime?That's words. How shall they determine whether event X in distant galaxy Y is simultaneous with their clock reading Z? Is their "direction through spacetime" constant over billions of years?If the event occurred N-light years away, and light from that event arrives in N-years, then it can be considered simultaneous with the observer.
You mean it could have been considered simultaneous if the observer had known it at the time and the observer had not changed motion in the intervening years.
If their direction through spacetime changes, they must change their interpretation of what constitutes the present.
So as I get up and walk to the garage, whole galaxies of events switch from my past to my future. What is the physical significance of this?
Brent -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
