From: richalivingston@gmail.com   
      
   On Wednesday, March 16, 2022 at 12:47:08 PM UTC-5, Mike Fontenot wrote:   
   > >   
   ...   
   > That's all true. But I am not interested in what TV images he receives   
   > from her ... those just tell him what she looked like in the past, and   
   > how old she was in the past. Instead, I am interested in what he   
   > DEDUCES about her CURRENT age at any given instant in his life, using   
   > the laws of special relativity. I.e., I'm interested in his "NOW"   
   > instant ... what does he say her age is "RIGHT NOW", at some instant in   
   > his life. I'm purely interested in what he says about "simultaneity at   
   > a distance".   
      
   Simultaneity at a distance is not observable.  In our everyday experience   
   we actually experience the world on our past light cone and think of that   
   as "now".  This  a misconception.  The "now" that Einstein defines with   
   his clock synchronization procedure is a useful concept for coordinates,   
   but as you are realizing, at any given event in space-time there is no   
   unique "now", it is highly observer dependent (i.e. depends on the   
   observers state of motion).  I suggest that the only reality is on the   
   past light cone.  That is something that all observers can agree on.   
   All observers will agree on WHAT is on the light cone and on the sequence   
   of events on the light cone (at least in a given direction), but may disagree   
   on when any event is on the light cone.   
      
   In particular, no matter what you do with direct observation, you will never   
   observe a clock going backwards or a person aging backwards.  At most   
   you may CALCULATE that a clock on your "now" axis has gone backwards   
   due to your acceleration, but you will never be able to directly observe such   
   a thing.  And I would argue that such a calculation is meaningless.   
      
   Proof of this is two events separated in space and occurring "simultaneously"   
   in some reference frame.  The observer in that frame directly observing these   
   events from some time in the future says they occurred simultaneously at   
   {some time in the past}.  A moving observer at that same place and time as   
   the first observer, will also see the two events occurring at the same time,   
   no matter how fast they are traveling.  It is only when they calculate their   
   "now" times that the paradox of time appears.   
      
   This is why I think it is a mistake in quantum mechanics to talk about the   
   instantaneous collapse of the wave function CAUSED BY a measurement   
   event.  There cannot be a consistent causal explanation directly linking   
   two events that are outside the light cone.   
      
   Rich L.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)