Wyz_sub10

Everyone's entitled to their opinion, of course. But I'm pretty sure this contributes nothing to the discussion.

Let's play nice, people.

Wyz_sub10
EoG Mod

Bob K

Sophie:

Simultaneity--Is this it?

The problem of simultaneity requires establishing the same time for all observers of events which are being analyzed.

When the time is the same for all observers, then the reference frame is the same for all observers, and time-dilation doe not occur.

Simultaneity can only mean two or more events happening at the same timepoint.

What is time?

How can we create simultaneous time-measurement so all clocks would measure the same time-intervals and thereby function/operate simultaneously with each other? How can we create clocks which show the same face-reading/measurement of time-intervals anywehere/where and for all observers?

Time is defined as the use of time-intervals, TIs, to measure the occurrences of events, Es, in sequences of events.

Human beings 'do time'/use time to answer questions such as these:

When did Event E1 occur?

When did Event E2 occur?

Did E1 occur at the same timepoint as E2? If so, then they were simultaneous with each other; if not, then they were non-simultaneous to each other.

If E1 and E2 were non-simultaneous to each other, how much time elapsed between the timepoint at which E1 occurred and the timepoint at which E2 occurred? (How many time-intevals elapsed between the occurrence of E1 and the occurrence of E2?)

The key to understanding time measurement is the time-interval, the TI (the time-period) which is the unit of time measurement. Any process involving measurement must have a unit of measurement, and for time the unit of measurement is the time-interval.

For the measurement of time, there are two types of time-intervals: (A) the variable time-interval, the VTI, and (B) the invariable time-interval, the ITI.

VTIs are found and therefore used in clocks, variable time-interval clocks, VTICs, whose rate of functioning/operation is affected by changes of velocity/gravity.

When their velocity/gravity increases, the inertial mass of the VITCs' mechanisms increases and their internal motions slow down and therefore and thereby their rates of functioning/operation slow down and their TIs increase and their face readings/counts/time-measurements change relative to VITCs whose velocity/gravity either do not change or otherwise increase at different rates or decrease.

When variable time-intervals, VTIs, are used in variable time-interval clocks, VTICs, any variation in the velocity/gravity 'experienced' by a VTIC will change its rate of functioning and thus its measurement of the occurrences of events will not be the same as other VTICs which do not 'experience' changes of velocity/gravity and its count/face reading will not be the same as those other similar VTICs.

ITIs are found and therefore used in clocks, invariable time-interval clocks, ITICs, whose rates of functioning/operation are adjusted for changes of velocity/gravity so their face readings are simultaneous with each other regardless of changes of velocity/gravity; such clocks can be (A) motion-sensing and self-adjusting or (B) synchronized by radio signals from a master clock.

When invariable time-intervals, ITIs, are used in invariable time-interval clocks, ITICs, (A) motion-sensing and self-adjusting clocks, or (B) clocks synchronized by radio signals from a master clock, then any variation in velocity/gravity 'experienced' by an ITIC will not change its rate of functioning and thus it will continue to measure the occurrences of events at the same count/face reading as other similar ITICs.

All observers using similar ITICs are thus using the same time references, the same TIs, the same ITIs. When similar ITICs are used, they all show the same count/face readings/measurement of TIs/ITIs/time, and any events observed to occur at the same count/face reading are thus simultaneous with each other--they happen at the same time; any events observed to not occur at the same count/face reading are not simultaneous with each other.

Relative to relativity, if observers were able to determine their distances from specific events and were able to consider the time-differences of the arrival of light-borne information concerning those events then they would be able to eliminate problems of geometry and the use of light for carrying information and thereby they would be able to determine if or not those events are simultaneous/non-simultaneous.

For example, using Einstein's stationary observer A on a railway embankment and moving observer B on a railway carriage, if A were equidistant from Event 1 (E1) and Event 2 (E2) then he would experience the arrival times of light-borne information--the lightning flashes--that would tell him that a lightning strike at E1 was simultaneous with a lightning strike at E2, but B would experience a difference of arrival times of the same light-borne information and conclude that E1 was not simultaneous with E2.

If, however, B were to sense that he is in motion and that there is a possibility of a difference of arrival times of light-borne information from E1 and E2, then it is possible that he could plot his position change to adjust his analysis of the difference of arrival times to determine if or not E1 occurred at the same timepoint as E2. B would have to determine his precise position at the timepoint at which E1 and E2 would have occurred if they had been simultaneous and what would have been the time difference of the travel times and hence the arrivals times of the light-borne information from E1 vs. E2.

B would need the precise timekeeping/time-measuring services of three ITICs: ITIC 1 at E1, ITIC 2 at E2 and ITIC 3 with him on the railway carriage.

Because ITICs are motion-sensing and self-adjusting for changes of velocity, or otherwise are synchronized by radio signals from a master clock, they all show the same time-measurement/face-readings/time-count and thus eliminate reference frame time differences and thereby eliminate time-dilation possibilities.

B could then ask for evidence such as photographs that would show the coincidence of E1 with the timepoint/face reading/time count of ITIC 1 that would provide information describing at what timepoint E1 occurred, the face reading/timepoint of ITIC 2 when E2 occurred, and his position relative to E1 at the ITIC 1 face reading and E2 at at the ITIC 2 face reading. If the photographs show that the timepoint for the occurrence of E1 is the same timepoint as the occurrence of E2, i.e., the timepoint of ITIC 1 for E1 = the timepoint of ITIC 2 for E2, then he can conclude that E1 and E2 occurred simultaneously.

Because his ITIC 3 is operating/functioning/counting time simultaneously with ITIC 1 and ITIC 2, he can compare his position at the timepoint at which E1 and E2 occurred and learn how the differences of the distances over which light-borne information from the the E1 and E2 lightning strikes traveled seemed to produce nonsimultaneity.

Thus, by ITIs in ITICs time differences due to variations of travel distances and arrival times of light-borne information from events can be determined to have occurred and the simultaneity/nonsimultaneity of the occurrences of events can be determined.

If humans all were using ITICs, then since ITICs are counting the identical TIs and are therefore producing the same face readings/counts the ITICs are all simultaneous with each other and time dilation disappears, and for simultaneity/nonsimultaneity humans would only need to ask at what timepoints specific events occurred, and those occurring at the identical timepoints would therefore be simultaneous while those occurring at different timepoints would therefore be nonsimultaneous.

If we were able to construct a 3D model-maker that would create models of all things/events comprised of matter/energy in the universe at precise ITI-based timepoints, then, each 3D Now model would present a frozen 'picture' of the positions in space of each thing/event at a specific timepoint. Thus, a 3D model would be similar to a 2D photograph in freezing the people/things/events in their respective positions at a specific timepoint.

By comparing the presence and position of each thing/event in the Now at each timepoint, we could observe simultaneity as the presence/position of the Things of Event E1 with the presence/position of the Things of Event E2.

A thing is an object which retains its identity for a longer time-period/duration in time than relevant events.

Examples: A woman named Jane, a ball, and a man named Dick (from the Dick and Jane primer books many schools systems used to teach students to read).

An event is a relationship between/among relevant things.

Example: Jane throws the ball to Dick.

In an event, people/things who/which are causes cause people/things who/which are effects. Therefore, in an event, there is a causality in which people/things cause forces which change and thereby affect the inertial states of people/things and cause as a result effects which are the changes of the inertial states of those people/things.

When we compare the Now models at different timepoints, we can observe if or not in each Now there are people/things who/which cause events which result in people/things who/which are effects in subsequent Nows at later timepoints.

If we find, for example, E1 = Jane throwing a ball to Dick in the Now of Timepoint 1, T1, and also in the Now of T1 we find E2 = Joan throwing a different ball to Don, and then in the Now of Timepoint T2, a later timepoint, we find Dick has the ball Jane threw to him and Don has the ball Joan threw to him, then we can conclude that because they occurred in the same Now at T1 then E1 and E2 were simultaneous, or, more precisely, between T1 and T2, E1 and E2 occurred simultaneously.

If we find, instead, that at T2 Dick has the ball Jane threw to him but Don does not have the ball Joan threw to him, then we could conclude that E1 and E2 did not occur simultaneously.

Upon analysis, we may find that Don caught the Joan-ball at T3 and conclude that Joan (A) threw the Joan-ball over a longer distance at the same velocity that Jane threw the Jane-ball or (B) that Joan threw the Joan-ball at a lower velocity than Jane threw the Jane-ball over the same distance, and that, therefore, either A or B was the reason for the nonsimultaneity of E1 and E2.

Thus, because of the causality in events in which people/things/forces as causes cause changes of inertial states of other people/things as effects (because people/things in events have relationships between/among each other), we could relate people/things/events to each other in Nows at precise ITI-based timepoints and determine their simultaneity/nonsimultaneity.

Thus, because of the use of ITs for ITICs for the precise measurement of the occurrences of events in sequences of events, time dilation does not occur, simultaneity and nonsimultaneity of events can be determined, time is independent of space, and the SR/GR spacetime is destroyed.