"Bruce Pew" wrote in message
om...
"kenseto" wrote in message
...
"Bruce Pew" wrote in message
om...
"kenseto" wrote in message
...
"Rudolf Drabek" wrote in message
...

"Brian Kennelly" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
kenseto wrote:
.....
3) The laws of physics based on a defined absolute second
is different in different frames of reference.

Acc. to the Twin Paradox the seconds differ. Also acc. to M&M and
therefore
SR.
So what frame shows the correct "abs. second" ?

We don't have a universal clock that measures absolute time in all
frames.
An observer can declare his clock second is also representing a
defined
absolute second then he use SR/Gr to determine the clcok time value
for
a defined absolute second in the observed frame.

So we have the possibility of 'absolute tick intervals' with differing
'tick intervals'?

Yes this is true also in SR. A clcok second here does not correspond to
a clock second there. What this mean is that a clcok second will contain
a different amount of universal time (absolute time) in different state
of absolute motion.

Ken Seto

So you are saying the value of 'absolute time intervals' is relative
[frame dependent]? Can't be absolute and relative at the same time
[pun intended].

Hey stupid....clock time is relative and the rate of passage of absolute
time is the same in all frames.

I guess it can if you are a clueless nitwit hopefully
[hopelessly] contriving some reason for a useful theory, such as
relativity, to be replaced by the contrivance of a clueless nitwit.
eh!

ROTFLOL.....I seems that you are the one who has a zero IQ.

Ken Seto