Timeline for Is there a rigorous, explicitly geometric, general characterization for whether a given clock had been "good", or not?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 20, 2014 at 20:42 | answer | added | user12262 | timeline score: 0 | |
| Nov 4, 2014 at 21:17 | comment | added | user12262 | @Ben Crowell: "[...] in the quote from MTW, they discuss inertial motion" -- The quote mentions "time coordinate of a local inertial frame", thus apparently dealing with, and being restricted to, clocks "in inertial motion". My question aims at a generalization to clocks "in any (time-like) motion". "the notation given is clearly inadequate to talk about this." -- Hmm ... At least, the suggested notation allows to express interval ratios as real numbers, such as $$\frac{s^2[~\varepsilon_{C K}, \varepsilon_{C P}~]}{s^2[~\varepsilon_{C J}, \varepsilon_{C Q}~]}$$, etc. | |
| Nov 4, 2014 at 21:02 | comment | added | user12262 | @Ben Crowell: "The question asks for answers in a specific notation, [...]" -- If answers have been prepared using a different notation (or terminology), a map should be included (or may be added as comment), mapping any applicable symbol (or notion) used in the answer to precisely one symbol (or notion) I suggested. | |
| Nov 4, 2014 at 20:50 | comment | added | user12262 | @Ben Crowell: "[...] the point of listing indices like J, K, P, and Q" -- These examplify how to denote distinct events in which $C$ took part. Since, according to Einstein: "All our well-substantiated space-time propositions amount to the determination of space-time coincidences {such as} encounters between two or more recognizable material points", $\varepsilon_{C J}$ is for instance meant to denote the coincidence event in which $C$ and $J$ took part, but neither $K$, nor $P$, nor $Q$. | |
| Nov 4, 2014 at 20:35 | comment | added | user4552 | The question asks for answers in a specific notation, but to me the notation seems both cumbersome and inadequate to discuss what is going on. Note that in the quote from MTW, they discuss inertial motion, and the notation given is clearly inadequate to talk about this. I also don't understand the point of listing indices like J, K, P, and Q. Why four such letters? Why not three, or five? | |
| Nov 4, 2014 at 19:32 | history | asked | user12262 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |