On 8 February 2014 01:57, Edgar L. Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > Jesse, > > OK, here's the detailed analysis of how I see the current state of this > issue that I promised: > > > A few points: > > 1. Since you asked let me repeat my 'operational definition' of the > present moment that I used before. The twins meet, shake hands and compare > watches. That is the operation definition. > > That is essentially the same as your reflected light operational > definition with which I have no problem. > > 2. However it is important to note that that works not just for the twins > together, but for every single twin by himself. Because any twin or > observer can shake his own hand, look at his own watch, or note that the > light reflected from a mirror in his hand takes minimal time to return. > > Therefore what is true for the twins together is also true for each twin > separately, and is true for every observer in the universe as well. > > 3. So what is it that is true? You say it is "being at the same point in > spacetime". Call that relationship R1. I use the term that everyone else > does and has throughout history, namely "being in the (same) present > moment". Call that relationship R2. >
That was what people thought before relativity, but now know to be wrong. Nothing to see here, move along... -- 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.
