Re: k-calculus
From: Dirk Van de moortel (dirkvandemoortel_at_ThankS-NO-SperM.hotmail.com)
Date: 01/13/05
- Next message: ah: "Re: Planet Beyond Solar System Has Been Photographed"
- Previous message: jimp_at_specsol-spam-sux.com: "Re: Have a permanent colony on the moon now"
- In reply to: KaliKinkar: "Re: k-calculus"
- Next in thread: KaliKinkar: "Re: k-calculus"
- Reply: KaliKinkar: "Re: k-calculus"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 16:20:53 GMT
"KaliKinkar" <kalikinkar@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1105626161.363878.97260@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Dirk,
>
> Thank you very much, once again.
> I have got a small query regarding the previous discussion you had
> regarding this. There we found written as
>
> > Clearly therefore, since the speed of the signal is constant,
> > the time for each pulse to get from A to B will be less than
> > the time it will take to get back from B to A.
>
> I am not able to understand this.
This was written by John Marsden and it was wrong.
He should have written:.
Clearly therefore, since the speed of the signal is constant,
the time for each pulse to get from A to B, as measured
on A's clock, will be less than the time it will take to get
back from B to A as measured on B's clock.
> As it seems that when at the point the pulse hits B it returns from
> that point instantaneously; in that case the time for each pulse to get
> from A to B should be the same as the time it will take to get back
> from B to A, so long we are measuring it with the same clock. Am I
> right or wrong? Could you please comment.
> Thank you once again for your help.
Yes, you are right.
Dirk Vdm
- Next message: ah: "Re: Planet Beyond Solar System Has Been Photographed"
- Previous message: jimp_at_specsol-spam-sux.com: "Re: Have a permanent colony on the moon now"
- In reply to: KaliKinkar: "Re: k-calculus"
- Next in thread: KaliKinkar: "Re: k-calculus"
- Reply: KaliKinkar: "Re: k-calculus"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|