Re: why was Einstein not nobelized for his relativity?

On Feb 7, 1:34 pm, Tom Roberts <tjroberts...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
kk wrote:
On Feb 6, 4:57 am, Tom Roberts <tjroberts...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
kk wrote:
[...] In even plainer English, it is the problem
of SR's incorrectly-related clocks.
Nonsense.

It was not merely my "nonsense," it was given by a noted physicist,
as my diligently-given quote indicated explicitly.

The nonsense part of it is YOURS. Jammer did not say what you claimed
above. You need to read more accurately -- "the problem of distant
synchronization" does not mean "the problem of SR's incorrectly-related
clocks". Jammer used the word "problem" in the sense of "difficulty",
not in the sense of "error" as you did.

I dare you to write him, and tell him he has written nonsense.

Why should I write him about your confusion?


Difficulty, problem, error, it's all the same in this case
because asynchronicity is asynchronicity any way it's put.

... SR is fully consistent with the way we ACTUALLY synchronize
clocks: take two clocks, place them right next to each other, and adjust
them to both show the same time. Then you can separate them (slowly) and
use them at different places. This is what we do, and in SR this
provides a pair of clocks synchronized in the inertial frame relative to
which they end up at rest, as long as they were separated slowly
relative to that frame.

Tom Roberts

Given your claim that the clocks are "synchronized," you must have
some theoretical picture in mind;

Yes. The two clocks can be used together to measure the one-way speed of
an object traveling between them. We do this all the time in track meets
and auto races. We also do it implicitly (and with much better accuracy)
in extended systems like the GPS.

Tom Roberts

I see no picture. Please provide one showing your
two "synchronized" clocks with readings.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: This is confusing - can someone explain?
    ... and "nonsense" are only value judgements... ... Even if the two clocks were comprised of the same "quarks" making ... historical time on a moving clock and not the current ... However, with relative motion, the ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Why is the speed of light as it is
    ... >>we assume the same rate of acceleration for both clocks, ... > light pulse at the instant A's pulse arrives. ... > Forget SR Ghost, It is nonsense. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Hansen discovers how to reason.
    ... >>his procedure is nonsense. ... > synchronize stationary clock in a stationary frame. ... to be superior and call everyone "idiot", nor am I as smart as Einstein, ... > clocks in a moving frame synchronizes his own clocks, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Hansen discovers how to reason.
    ... >>his procedure is nonsense. ... > synchronize stationary clock in a stationary frame. ... to be superior and call everyone "idiot", nor am I as smart as Einstein, ... > clocks in a moving frame synchronizes his own clocks, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: This is confusing - can someone explain?
    ... intertwinement via a constant speed of propagation of light. ... which would allow an explanation that would not have ... explanation for "nonsense" of observation. ... between clocks do not agree. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)