On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 14:23:43 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 11:42:54 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >
> >>> The difference is 4.14e-12 or 131 us a year.
> >>> Rather small, but still significant.
> >> Yes. What our resident nutters fail to understand completely
> >> is that those relativistic corrections are not made
> >> just for the sake of pleasing a dead Great Guru.
> >
> > No. What our resident nutters fail to understand completely
> > is that according to their idiot guru there should be no
> > corrections, clocks should desynchronize and indicate
> > his dilation idiocy - because he had imagined and postulated
> > that it would be fine.
> >
> LOL.

LOL, indeed. Expecting clocks to indicate time dilation...
Or maybe saying that your idiot guru was expecting that...
How stupid.

Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 14:23:43 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 11:42:54 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>
>>>>> The difference is 4.14e-12 or 131 us a year.
>>>>> Rather small, but still significant.
>>>> Yes. What our resident nutters fail to understand completely
>>>> is that those relativistic corrections are not made
>>>> just for the sake of pleasing a dead Great Guru.
>>>
>>> No. What our resident nutters fail to understand completely
>>> is that according to their idiot guru there should be no
>>> corrections, clocks should desynchronize and indicate
>>> his dilation idiocy - because he had imagined and postulated
>>> that it would be fine.
>>>
>> LOL.
>
> LOL, indeed. Expecting clocks to indicate time dilation...
> Or maybe saying that your idiot guru was expecting that...
> How stupid.
>

Exhibiting time dilations for uncorrected clocks does not equate to
forbidding clocks from having designed corrections. I’m sure a preeminent
logician could figure that out. Poof.

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On April 21, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>> There is no way to try and compare the tick rate of clocks without some
>> sort of signalling from one to the other, signalling which is subjects
>> to gravitational or velocity-related red or blue shifts.
>
> Of course there is. Just walk down that mountain again.
> You've been misled. All that signalling talk is just a red herring.
> Both the special relativistic twin paradox
> and the general relativistc one
> do not depend on any signalling that may or may not be going on.

You compare apples and oranges.

When one descends the mountain, one compares
the accumulated tick counts, directly. No signaling,
no communications.

When the clocks are far separated, the ticks are
transmitted by radio. Those are signals, the waves fall
through varying G fields. The readings, i.e. the 'tick rates',
are the output of that.

So observers in different frames, each with his own 'now',
will see different realities. No unique correct answers.

--
Rich

On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 23:49:20 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 14:23:43 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 11:42:54 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>> The difference is 4.14e-12 or 131 us a year.
> >>>>> Rather small, but still significant.
> >>>> Yes. What our resident nutters fail to understand completely
> >>>> is that those relativistic corrections are not made
> >>>> just for the sake of pleasing a dead Great Guru.
> >>>
> >>> No. What our resident nutters fail to understand completely
> >>> is that according to their idiot guru there should be no
> >>> corrections, clocks should desynchronize and indicate
> >>> his dilation idiocy - because he had imagined and postulated
> >>> that it would be fine.
> >>>
> >> LOL.
> >
> > LOL, indeed. Expecting clocks to indicate time dilation...
> > Or maybe saying that your idiot guru was expecting that...
> > How stupid.
> >
> Exhibiting time dilations for uncorrected clocks does not equate to
> forbidding clocks from having designed corrections. I’m sure a preeminent
> logician could figure that out. Poof.

Yes, it does. I'm sure such an idiot couldn't figure it
out. Poof. Sorry, when the clocks desynchronize
and are to be corrected, it's just an ordinary clock
error. A very classical phenomenon.

LOL!!! Giant Guru could really expect the clocks to
really indicate what he has written they will indicate!
Buhahahahahahaha. What a nonsense.

RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On April 21, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >> There is no way to try and compare the tick rate of clocks without some
> >> sort of signalling from one to the other, signalling which is subjects
> >> to gravitational or velocity-related red or blue shifts.
> >
> > Of course there is. Just walk down that mountain again.
> > You've been misled. All that signalling talk is just a red herring.
> > Both the special relativistic twin paradox
> > and the general relativistc one
> > do not depend on any signalling that may or may not be going on.
>
> You compare apples and oranges.
>
> When one descends the mountain, one compares
> the accumulated tick counts, directly. No signaling,
> no communications.

Yes, that is just what I said.
The twin paradox, both special and general,
is a matter of comparing clocks that stand side by side,
and at rest with respect to each other. (after having traveled)
The fact that they show different elapsed times is a consequence
of the spacetime geometry, and of nothing else.
The amount is a difference of proper times,
so a world scalar that all observers agree on.

BTW, the outcome of the combined special/general twin paradox
is not necessarily that the travelling twin is the younger one.

> When the clocks are far separated, the ticks are
> transmitted by radio. Those are signals, the waves fall
> through varying G fields. The readings, i.e. the 'tick rates',
> are the output of that.

Yes, that is the mistake.
The signalling is not the cause of the twin paradox,
neither special, nor general.
It may be used for illustrative purposes though,
to calculate how old the one thinks that the other is.
The diference in clock rates is an inherent aspect
of the spacetime geometry. (it is in the metric tensor) [1]

> So observers in different frames, each with his own 'now',
> will see different realities. No unique correct answers.

That will depend on what you are asking,

Jan

[1] It really was conceptually difficult.
Einstein struggled with it from 1907 to 1921
before finally getting it both right and unobjectionable.
There is a summary of his struggles with it at
<https://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/circumhc/article/view/36437/27173>

Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> wrote:

> Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 14:23:43 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 11:42:54 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>> The difference is 4.14e-12 or 131 us a year.
> >>>>> Rather small, but still significant.
> >>>> Yes. What our resident nutters fail to understand completely
> >>>> is that those relativistic corrections are not made
> >>>> just for the sake of pleasing a dead Great Guru.
> >>>
> >>> No. What our resident nutters fail to understand completely
> >>> is that according to their idiot guru there should be no
> >>> corrections, clocks should desynchronize and indicate
> >>> his dilation idiocy - because he had imagined and postulated
> >>> that it would be fine.
> >>>
> >> LOL.
> >
> > LOL, indeed. Expecting clocks to indicate time dilation...
> > Or maybe saying that your idiot guru was expecting that...
> > How stupid.
> >
>
> Exhibiting time dilations for uncorrected clocks does not equate to
> forbidding clocks from having designed corrections. I'm sure a preeminent
> logician could figure that out. Poof.

Wikipedia gives a nice example: suppose an ideal clock had been put
on an Everest sized mountain when the Earth had just formed,
and suppose that mountain had remained in place,
how far would that clock be ahead wrt to a clock at sea level?

The answer (unverified jjl) turns out to be thirty-six hours,
so a day and a half. And yes, this does not mean
that the clock up there has seen one more sunrise,
or that he thinks that it is night while the man below sees the sun.
All it means is that they disagree on the length of the day,
as read off in their own proper clock time.

When they want to compare astronomical observations
they will have to agree on some common average time,
like TAI.

What the nutters here fail to understand
is that you can keep perfect time with a clock that runs fast,
provided that you know precisely by how much it runs faster.
Just apply appropriate corrections.

Strange, a nineteenth century sea captain like for example Fitzroy
understood this perfectly.
None of his chronometers kept exact Greenwich time,
yet he always knew where he was,

Jan

On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 11:17:30 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Odd Bodkin <bodk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 14:23:43 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 11:42:54 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>>> The difference is 4.14e-12 or 131 us a year.
> > >>>>> Rather small, but still significant.
> > >>>> Yes. What our resident nutters fail to understand completely
> > >>>> is that those relativistic corrections are not made
> > >>>> just for the sake of pleasing a dead Great Guru.
> > >>>
> > >>> No. What our resident nutters fail to understand completely
> > >>> is that according to their idiot guru there should be no
> > >>> corrections, clocks should desynchronize and indicate
> > >>> his dilation idiocy - because he had imagined and postulated
> > >>> that it would be fine.
> > >>>
> > >> LOL.
> > >
> > > LOL, indeed. Expecting clocks to indicate time dilation...
> > > Or maybe saying that your idiot guru was expecting that...
> > > How stupid.
> > >
> >
> > Exhibiting time dilations for uncorrected clocks does not equate to
> > forbidding clocks from having designed corrections. I'm sure a preeminent
> > logician could figure that out. Poof.
> Wikipedia gives a nice example: suppose an ideal clock had been put
> on an Everest sized mountain when the Earth had just formed,

An "ideal" for a brainwashed worshipper or an "ideal"
for a sane person?
That's what your Shit is really about: desynchronizing
junk is "ideal" and synchronization is "improper", because
an insane guru has announced so.

On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 11:17:30 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:

> The twin paradox, both special and general,
> is a matter of comparing clocks that stand side by side,
> and at rest with respect to each other. (after having traveled)
> The fact that they show different elapsed times is a consequence

of a simple unability of their gedanking creators
to understand what a clock is in the real world
and what it is for.

A clock isn't any fucken avatar of any fucking
Great Mystical Essence. It's a tool designed
and crafted BY US for helping US to stay in sync.

It has to indicate t'=t, otherwise it is as useless
as your "perfect differently" clocks are in GPS.

Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 11:17:30 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>
> > The twin paradox, both special and general,
> > is a matter of comparing clocks that stand side by side,
> > and at rest with respect to each other. (after having traveled)
> > The fact that they show different elapsed times is a consequence
>
> of a simple unability of their gedanking creators
> to understand what a clock is in the real world
> and what it is for.
>
> A clock isn't any fucken avatar of any fucking
> Great Mystical Essence. It's a tool designed
> and crafted BY US for helping US to stay in sync.
>
> It has to indicate t'=t, otherwise it is as useless
> as your "perfect differently" clocks are in GPS.

You are way behind the times.
(ever since Hafele and Keating)
With today's accuracies you can demonstrate the twin paradox
with a clock that is built into a van,
while driving through the mountains.
(they actually did it near Chamonix)

Saying that t' must equal t is of no help
when real clocks refuse to comply with your dictates,

Jan

On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 13:35:05 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 11:17:30 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >
> > > The twin paradox, both special and general,
> > > is a matter of comparing clocks that stand side by side,
> > > and at rest with respect to each other. (after having traveled)
> > > The fact that they show different elapsed times is a consequence
> >
> > of a simple unability of their gedanking creators
> > to understand what a clock is in the real world
> > and what it is for.
> >
> > A clock isn't any fucken avatar of any fucking
> > Great Mystical Essence. It's a tool designed
> > and crafted BY US for helping US to stay in sync.
> >
> > It has to indicate t'=t, otherwise it is as useless
> > as your "perfect differently" clocks are in GPS.
> You are way behind the times.
> (ever since Hafele and Keating)
> With today's accuracies

GPS clocks keep measuring t'=t, just like all serious clocks
always did.
But, of course, some useless junk insisted (for religious
reasons) to be "perfect" by a bunch of brainwashed fanatics
may still demonstrate their insane paradoxes.

Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 11:17:30 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>
>> The twin paradox, both special and general,
>> is a matter of comparing clocks that stand side by side,
>> and at rest with respect to each other. (after having traveled)
>> The fact that they show different elapsed times is a consequence
>
> of a simple unability of their gedanking creators
> to understand what a clock is in the real world
> and what it is for.
>
> A clock isn't any fucken avatar of any fucking
> Great Mystical Essence. It's a tool designed
> and crafted BY US for helping US to stay in sync.

Well, that might be what YOU personally think clocks are for, and YOU
personally might discount other applications or intents for clocks, but
that doesn’t extend beyond you, does it?

>
> It has to indicate t'=t, otherwise it is as useless
> as your "perfect differently" clocks are in GPS.
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 14:40:31 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 11:17:30 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >
> >> The twin paradox, both special and general,
> >> is a matter of comparing clocks that stand side by side,
> >> and at rest with respect to each other. (after having traveled)
> >> The fact that they show different elapsed times is a consequence
> >
> > of a simple unability of their gedanking creators
> > to understand what a clock is in the real world
> > and what it is for.
> >
> > A clock isn't any fucken avatar of any fucking
> > Great Mystical Essence. It's a tool designed
> > and crafted BY US for helping US to stay in sync.
> Well, that might be what YOU personally think clocks are for, and YOU
> personally might discount other applications or intents for clocks, but
> that doesn’t extend beyond you, does it?

No, it doesn't. It just happens that I'm a professional information
engineer and you're not-even-a-layman idiot woodworker. Your opinion
doesn't count, and so does the opinion of your idiot gurus.

Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 23:49:20 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 14:23:43 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 11:42:54 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> The difference is 4.14e-12 or 131 us a year.
>>>>>>> Rather small, but still significant.
>>>>>> Yes. What our resident nutters fail to understand completely
>>>>>> is that those relativistic corrections are not made
>>>>>> just for the sake of pleasing a dead Great Guru.
>>>>>
>>>>> No. What our resident nutters fail to understand completely
>>>>> is that according to their idiot guru there should be no
>>>>> corrections, clocks should desynchronize and indicate
>>>>> his dilation idiocy - because he had imagined and postulated
>>>>> that it would be fine.
>>>>>
>>>> LOL.
>>>
>>> LOL, indeed. Expecting clocks to indicate time dilation...
>>> Or maybe saying that your idiot guru was expecting that...
>>> How stupid.
>>>
>> Exhibiting time dilations for uncorrected clocks does not equate to
>> forbidding clocks from having designed corrections. I’m sure a preeminent
>> logician could figure that out. Poof.
>
> Yes, it does.

No it does not mean that to normal people.

Now, to Woz, who is obsessed with sensations of restriction and bucking
against imagined forbiddings, it might mean that.

> I'm sure such an idiot couldn't figure it
> out. Poof. Sorry, when the clocks desynchronize
> and are to be corrected, it's just an ordinary clock
> error. A very classical phenomenon.
>
> LOL!!! Giant Guru could really expect the clocks to
> really indicate what he has written they will indicate!
> Buhahahahahahaha. What a nonsense.
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 14:40:31 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 11:17:30 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>
>>>> The twin paradox, both special and general,
>>>> is a matter of comparing clocks that stand side by side,
>>>> and at rest with respect to each other. (after having traveled)
>>>> The fact that they show different elapsed times is a consequence
>>>
>>> of a simple unability of their gedanking creators
>>> to understand what a clock is in the real world
>>> and what it is for.
>>>
>>> A clock isn't any fucken avatar of any fucking
>>> Great Mystical Essence. It's a tool designed
>>> and crafted BY US for helping US to stay in sync.
>> Well, that might be what YOU personally think clocks are for, and YOU
>> personally might discount other applications or intents for clocks, but
>> that doesn’t extend beyond you, does it?
>
> No, it doesn't. It just happens that I'm a professional information
> engineer and you're not-even-a-layman idiot woodworker.

My, my, my. Such bigotry over professions.

The ONLY people who have a right to claim better informed opinions about
physics here are PHYSICISTS. Which *neither* of us are.

You, meanwhile, try to position yourself with a vague title that implies
that your opinion is more worthwhile than anyone else’s. Even over that of
physicists, on the subject of physics.

This is of course infantile and not a little insane.

> Your opinion
> doesn't count, and so does the opinion of your idiot gurus.
>
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 15:12:34 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 23:49:20 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 14:23:43 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 11:42:54 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> The difference is 4.14e-12 or 131 us a year.
> >>>>>>> Rather small, but still significant.
> >>>>>> Yes. What our resident nutters fail to understand completely
> >>>>>> is that those relativistic corrections are not made
> >>>>>> just for the sake of pleasing a dead Great Guru.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> No. What our resident nutters fail to understand completely
> >>>>> is that according to their idiot guru there should be no
> >>>>> corrections, clocks should desynchronize and indicate
> >>>>> his dilation idiocy - because he had imagined and postulated
> >>>>> that it would be fine.
> >>>>>
> >>>> LOL.
> >>>
> >>> LOL, indeed. Expecting clocks to indicate time dilation...
> >>> Or maybe saying that your idiot guru was expecting that...
> >>> How stupid.
> >>>
> >> Exhibiting time dilations for uncorrected clocks does not equate to
> >> forbidding clocks from having designed corrections. I’m sure a preeminent
> >> logician could figure that out. Poof.
> >
> > Yes, it does.
> No it does not mean that to normal people.

It does. And also for many of your fellow idiots.

On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 15:12:35 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 14:40:31 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 11:17:30 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> The twin paradox, both special and general,
> >>>> is a matter of comparing clocks that stand side by side,
> >>>> and at rest with respect to each other. (after having traveled)
> >>>> The fact that they show different elapsed times is a consequence
> >>>
> >>> of a simple unability of their gedanking creators
> >>> to understand what a clock is in the real world
> >>> and what it is for.
> >>>
> >>> A clock isn't any fucken avatar of any fucking
> >>> Great Mystical Essence. It's a tool designed
> >>> and crafted BY US for helping US to stay in sync.
> >> Well, that might be what YOU personally think clocks are for, and YOU
> >> personally might discount other applications or intents for clocks, but
> >> that doesn’t extend beyond you, does it?
> >
> > No, it doesn't. It just happens that I'm a professional information
> > engineer and you're not-even-a-layman idiot woodworker.
> My, my, my. Such bigotry over professions.
>
> The ONLY people who have a right to claim better informed opinions about
> physics

I'm not talking about physics, i"m not especially interested
in your gedanken delusions (though I know them much better
than you do). I'm talking about the real world and the real clocks.

El lunes, 25 de abril de 2022 a las 9:29:57 UTC-4, maluw...@gmail.com escribió:
> On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 15:12:35 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:

> > The ONLY people who have a right to claim better informed opinions about
> > physics
> I'm not talking about physics, i"m not especially interested
> in your gedanken delusions (though I know them much better
> than you do). I'm talking about the real world and the real clocks.

And in the real world and with the real clocks of the GPS satellites, they are corrected for relativistic effects, which amount to a clock elapsed time difference of 38.5 microseconds per day.

On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 15:50:22 UTC+2, Paparios wrote:
> El lunes, 25 de abril de 2022 a las 9:29:57 UTC-4, maluw...@gmail.com escribió:
> > On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 15:12:35 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > The ONLY people who have a right to claim better informed opinions about
> > > physics
> > I'm not talking about physics, i"m not especially interested
> > in your gedanken delusions (though I know them much better
> > than you do). I'm talking about the real world and the real clocks.
> And in the real world and with the real clocks of the GPS satellites, they are corrected

against you Holiest Postulate (demanding all clocks to
be identical) and your ISO idiocy.(demanding Cs
clocks to be set to 9 192 631 770).

Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 15:12:35 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 14:40:31 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 11:17:30 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> The twin paradox, both special and general,
> > >>>> is a matter of comparing clocks that stand side by side,
> > >>>> and at rest with respect to each other. (after having traveled)
> > >>>> The fact that they show different elapsed times is a consequence
> > >>>
> > >>> of a simple unability of their gedanking creators
> > >>> to understand what a clock is in the real world
> > >>> and what it is for.
> > >>>
> > >>> A clock isn't any fucken avatar of any fucking
> > >>> Great Mystical Essence. It's a tool designed
> > >>> and crafted BY US for helping US to stay in sync.
> > >> Well, that might be what YOU personally think clocks are for, and YOU
> > >> personally might discount other applications or intents for clocks, but
> > >> that doesn't extend beyond you, does it?
> > >
> > > No, it doesn't. It just happens that I'm a professional information
> > > engineer and you're not-even-a-layman idiot woodworker.
> > My, my, my. Such bigotry over professions.
> >
> > The ONLY people who have a right to claim better informed opinions about
> > physics
>
> I'm not talking about physics, i"m not especially interested
> in your gedanken delusions (though I know them much better
> than you do). I'm talking about the real world and the real clocks.

Yes, that is precisely your problem,

Jan

Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 15:12:34 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 23:49:20 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 14:23:43 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 11:42:54 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The difference is 4.14e-12 or 131 us a year.
>>>>>>>>> Rather small, but still significant.
>>>>>>>> Yes. What our resident nutters fail to understand completely
>>>>>>>> is that those relativistic corrections are not made
>>>>>>>> just for the sake of pleasing a dead Great Guru.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No. What our resident nutters fail to understand completely
>>>>>>> is that according to their idiot guru there should be no
>>>>>>> corrections, clocks should desynchronize and indicate
>>>>>>> his dilation idiocy - because he had imagined and postulated
>>>>>>> that it would be fine.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> LOL.
>>>>>
>>>>> LOL, indeed. Expecting clocks to indicate time dilation...
>>>>> Or maybe saying that your idiot guru was expecting that...
>>>>> How stupid.
>>>>>
>>>> Exhibiting time dilations for uncorrected clocks does not equate to
>>>> forbidding clocks from having designed corrections. I’m sure a preeminent
>>>> logician could figure that out. Poof.
>>>
>>> Yes, it does.
>> No it does not mean that to normal people.
>
> It does.

No, sorry it does not. You do not represent normal people. You are
decidedly abnormal.

> And also for many of your fellow idiots.
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 15:12:35 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 14:40:31 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 11:17:30 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The twin paradox, both special and general,
>>>>>> is a matter of comparing clocks that stand side by side,
>>>>>> and at rest with respect to each other. (after having traveled)
>>>>>> The fact that they show different elapsed times is a consequence
>>>>>
>>>>> of a simple unability of their gedanking creators
>>>>> to understand what a clock is in the real world
>>>>> and what it is for.
>>>>>
>>>>> A clock isn't any fucken avatar of any fucking
>>>>> Great Mystical Essence. It's a tool designed
>>>>> and crafted BY US for helping US to stay in sync.
>>>> Well, that might be what YOU personally think clocks are for, and YOU
>>>> personally might discount other applications or intents for clocks, but
>>>> that doesn’t extend beyond you, does it?
>>>
>>> No, it doesn't. It just happens that I'm a professional information
>>> engineer and you're not-even-a-layman idiot woodworker.
>> My, my, my. Such bigotry over professions.
>>
>> The ONLY people who have a right to claim better informed opinions about
>> physics
>
> I'm not talking about physics,
> i"m not especially interested
> in your gedanken delusions (though I know them much better
> than you do). I'm talking about the real world and the real clocks.
>

Even then, clocks have broader uses than just for keeping humans in synch.
It’s a pity you’re unaware of so many of those.

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 16:36:24 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 15:12:35 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 14:40:31 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > >> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>> On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 11:17:30 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> The twin paradox, both special and general,
> > > >>>> is a matter of comparing clocks that stand side by side,
> > > >>>> and at rest with respect to each other. (after having traveled)
> > > >>>> The fact that they show different elapsed times is a consequence
> > > >>>
> > > >>> of a simple unability of their gedanking creators
> > > >>> to understand what a clock is in the real world
> > > >>> and what it is for.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> A clock isn't any fucken avatar of any fucking
> > > >>> Great Mystical Essence. It's a tool designed
> > > >>> and crafted BY US for helping US to stay in sync.
> > > >> Well, that might be what YOU personally think clocks are for, and YOU
> > > >> personally might discount other applications or intents for clocks, but
> > > >> that doesn't extend beyond you, does it?
> > > >
> > > > No, it doesn't. It just happens that I'm a professional information
> > > > engineer and you're not-even-a-layman idiot woodworker.
> > > My, my, my. Such bigotry over professions.
> > >
> > > The ONLY people who have a right to claim better informed opinions about
> > > physics
> >
> > I'm not talking about physics, i"m not especially interested
> > in your gedanken delusions (though I know them much better
> > than you do). I'm talking about the real world and the real clocks.
> Yes, that is precisely your problem,

That's not any problem. Of course, you don't know
abouit problems, just like you don't know about
almost anything else.

On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 16:36:35 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 15:12:34 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 23:49:20 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 14:23:43 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Sunday, 24 April 2022 at 11:42:54 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The difference is 4.14e-12 or 131 us a year.
> >>>>>>>>> Rather small, but still significant.
> >>>>>>>> Yes. What our resident nutters fail to understand completely
> >>>>>>>> is that those relativistic corrections are not made
> >>>>>>>> just for the sake of pleasing a dead Great Guru.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> No. What our resident nutters fail to understand completely
> >>>>>>> is that according to their idiot guru there should be no
> >>>>>>> corrections, clocks should desynchronize and indicate
> >>>>>>> his dilation idiocy - because he had imagined and postulated
> >>>>>>> that it would be fine.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> LOL.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> LOL, indeed. Expecting clocks to indicate time dilation...
> >>>>> Or maybe saying that your idiot guru was expecting that...
> >>>>> How stupid.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Exhibiting time dilations for uncorrected clocks does not equate to
> >>>> forbidding clocks from having designed corrections. I’m sure a preeminent
> >>>> logician could figure that out. Poof.
> >>>
> >>> Yes, it does.
> >> No it does not mean that to normal people.
> >
> > It does.
> No, sorry it does not. You do not represent normal people.

I don't; but still - you were admitting so many times with such
a proud that what words mean for you and your fellow idiots
is not what they mean forr normal people. weren't you?

Well, it's true. For normal people "proper" means proper,
and not-proper, i.e. improper means forbidden.

On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 16:36:36 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 15:12:35 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 14:40:31 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> Maciej Wozniak <maluw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 11:17:30 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> The twin paradox, both special and general,
> >>>>>> is a matter of comparing clocks that stand side by side,
> >>>>>> and at rest with respect to each other. (after having traveled)
> >>>>>> The fact that they show different elapsed times is a consequence
> >>>>>
> >>>>> of a simple unability of their gedanking creators
> >>>>> to understand what a clock is in the real world
> >>>>> and what it is for.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> A clock isn't any fucken avatar of any fucking
> >>>>> Great Mystical Essence. It's a tool designed
> >>>>> and crafted BY US for helping US to stay in sync.
> >>>> Well, that might be what YOU personally think clocks are for, and YOU
> >>>> personally might discount other applications or intents for clocks, but
> >>>> that doesn’t extend beyond you, does it?
> >>>
> >>> No, it doesn't. It just happens that I'm a professional information
> >>> engineer and you're not-even-a-layman idiot woodworker.
> >> My, my, my. Such bigotry over professions.
> >>
> >> The ONLY people who have a right to claim better informed opinions about
> >> physics
> >
> > I'm not talking about physics,
> > i"m not especially interested
> > in your gedanken delusions (though I know them much better
> > than you do). I'm talking about the real world and the real clocks.
> >
> Even then, clocks have broader uses than just for keeping humans in synch..

Representative, for instance... and your bunch of idiots
has made them one of minor subjects in your moronic
cult... nothing really important, sorry.

El lunes, 25 de abril de 2022 a las 10:29:22 UTC-4, maluw...@gmail.com escribió:
> On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 15:50:22 UTC+2, Paparios wrote:
> > El lunes, 25 de abril de 2022 a las 9:29:57 UTC-4, maluw...@gmail.com escribió:
> > > On Monday, 25 April 2022 at 15:12:35 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > > The ONLY people who have a right to claim better informed opinions about
> > > > physics
> > > I'm not talking about physics, i"m not especially interested
> > > in your gedanken delusions (though I know them much better
> > > than you do). I'm talking about the real world and the real clocks.
> > And in the real world and with the real clocks of the GPS satellites, they are corrected
> against you Holiest Postulate (demanding all clocks to
> be identical) and your ISO idiocy.(demanding Cs
> clocks to be set to 9 192 631 770).