On 28 December 2013 14:44, Edgar L. Owen <edgaro...@att.net> wrote: > Liz, > > Not at all. What SR shows that there are relativistic situations in which > it is impossible to establish simultaneous clock time t values, for > relativistic observers to agree on the clock time t value of some event, > and then ONLY in the case that relativistic frames are different. When the > frames are relativistically mappable (no relative motion or acceleration) > then t value simultaneity can always be established. >
I don't see how. Different observers will observe events taking place in the same inertial frame as happening in a different order. Their measurements are irreconcilable with the existence of a well defined 3-dimensional "plane of simultaneity". (Unless you are dropping the equivalence principle, perhaps? Even then I'm not sure...) I won't insult your intelligence by spelling it out with a train moving at half the speed of light, mirrors, and a flash bulb going off, because you will have come across that sort of thing many times, no doubt. But you have yet to provide a refutation of what is called "the relativity of simultaneity". -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
