On Wednesday, October 23, 2024 at 7:18:34 PM UTC-6 ilsa wrote:
Wasn't there a time art project It was just for a weekend or something and it had the the clocks and they were always changing and they were always different You could probably look up a look it up and see if it's an artistic description of what you're talking about It was at the San Francisco Museum of modern art you know 15 years ago or something I don't recall that event. I probably wasn't there. The LHS in the address is anonymous67. AG On Wed, Oct 23, 2024, 6:10 PM Brent Meeker <[email protected]> wrote: I think it's confusing to introduce "frames" that are spacially extended (although Einstein did). Better to recognize that all physical times are proper times of some clock and they can be set to the same time when they are at the same place and as ideal clock's they are assumed to keep perfect time along their world lines. Brent On 10/23/2024 3:46 PM, Jesse Mazer wrote: On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 6:31 PM Alan Grayson <[email protected]> wrote: On Wednesday, October 23, 2024 at 1:55:13 PM UTC-6 Brent Meeker wrote: The fact that you never specify whether "synchronized" means "set to the same time" or "caused to run at the same rate" or both, makes me think you don't understand your own question. Brent I meant when juxtaposted, to set at the two clocks at the same time, and then synchronized throughout each frame. Then I expect, but am not certain, that the rates in the two frames will be the same. AG "Synchronized" only has meaning relative to a particular frame's definition of simultaneity--since the frames disagree on simulataneity, you can momentarily set all clocks so that they read the same time at the same moment relative to one frame, but you can't do this in both frames. And whichever frame you pick, unless you artificially adjust the ticking rate of the clocks moving relative to that frame to "correct" for time dilation, the moving clocks won't stay synchronized with the clocks at rest in that frame. Jesse On 10/23/2024 6:00 AM, Alan Grayson wrote: In this scenario, is there any contradition with the principles of SR? Suppose there exist two inertial frames, moving in opposite directions with velocity v < c along the x-axis, where one clock of each frame is initially located one unit, positively and negatively respectively from the origin, and when these clocks are juxtaposed at the origin, the multiple set of clocks in both frames can be synchronized? Does this scenario imply an unwarranted affirmation of simultaneity? TY, AG -- 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 view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/01c8eb1c-624b-4dc7-b585-cb0f0a1c38e9n%40googlegroups.com.
