From: relativity@paulba.no   
      
   Den 11.10.2025 09:18, skrev Thomas Heger:   
   > Am Donnerstag000009, 09.10.2025 um 20:46 schrieb The Starmaker:   
   > ...   
   >>   
   >> It is not an assumption. Einstein's time is only based on...'local   
   >> only'...it's caled...Relativity.   
      
   > No, beause Einstein used (secretly) an absolute time and   
   > an absolute space in SRT.   
      
   Consider the following scenario:   
   Given an Euclidean space where the axes are called x, y and z.   
   A is a point at x = 0, y = 0 and z = 0.   
   B is a point at x = L, y = 0 and z = 0.   
   Clock Ca is placed at A and another, equal clock Cb is at B.   
   The two clocks simultaneously show the same; they are synchronous.   
   An object is moving at constant speed from A to B.   
   When the object is at A clock Ca shows t = ta.   
   When the object is at B clock Cb shows t = tb.   
      
   The time the object used to travel from A to B is Δt = tb - ta.   
   The object was moving at the speed v = L/Δt = L/(tb - ta).   
      
   Note that the above is equally true according Newtonian Mechanics   
   and according to The Special Theory of Relativity (SRT).   
      
      
   > The use of Euclidean space in SRT defines also time as absolute measure.   
   >   
   > this is so because Euclidean space is meant as 'timeless'.   
      
   Why does the fact that there is no 'time' in the metric   
   ds² = dx² + dY² + dz² imply that the time Δt is 'absolute'?   
      
   What does it mean that the time Δt is defined "as absolute measure"?   
      
   >   
   > This 'timeless' means, that time and geometry are treated as   
   > fundamentally distict entities.   
      
   Of course time and space are fundamentally distinct entities.   
      
   But what do you mean with the statement:   
   "time and geometry are treated as fundamentally distinct entities"?   
      
   Is this different from:   
   "space and geometry are treated as fundamentally distinct entities"?   
      
   or:   
   "distance and geography are treated as fundamentally distinct entities"?   
      
   Aren't all these statements rather stupid truisms, like   
   "apples and vegetables are treated as fundamentally distinct entities"?   
      
   >   
   > This in turn would make time 'external' to space itself ('the universe').   
      
   Time and space are fundamentally distinct entities.   
      
   Of course 'time' isn't a part of 'space', so the statement:   
   "time is 'internal' to space" is meaningless.   
      
   And so is the statement: "time is 'external' to space".   
      
   >   
   > And as unlikely as you may think:   
   >   
   > Einstein's relativity theory isn't relativistic at all.   
      
   "Not relative" is "absolute".   
      
   In Newtonian Mechanics Galilean relativity applies,   
   but SRT is absolute? :-D   
      
   --   
   Paul   
      
   https://paulba.no/   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)