Russell, Sorry, but you miss my argument. The 1:1 correspondence is between actual or present moment time, not clock time. Please refer to my proximate responses to Jesse for the details of the argument.
Edgar On Saturday, February 1, 2014 8:21:48 PM UTC-5, Russell Standish wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 01, 2014 at 03:46:37PM -0800, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > > c. Therefore during the trip there must always be a one to one > > correspondence between those actual present moments even though the > clock > > times are not in synch. Because they both begin and end in that present > > moment and never leave it during the trip. > > It is here that your argument breaks down. Yes, there is a 1:1 > correspondence (a bijection in fact) between the two clock times. But > there are many possible such bijections, where you (implicitly) assume > only a single one (perhaps the linear one). In SR there is a differnt > bijection for each different inertial reference frame. > > > -- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) > Principal, High Performance Coders > Visiting Professor of Mathematics [email protected]<javascript:> > University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- 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.
