Could the moving observer be at some distance instead of moving and still give Albert the same conclusion? In IX. The Relativity of Simultaneity, Albert describes two simultaneous lightning strikes and two observers. One of the observers is stationary at a mid point between the simultaneous lightning strikes. The other observer is on a moving train. Albert says both observers are at the same mid point between the simultaneous lightning strikes. He also says the moving observer then moves towards the right in the diagram with the velocity v of the train. Now in reality (considered with reference to the railway embankment) he is hastening towards the beam of light coming from B, whilst he is riding on ahead of the beam of light coming from A. Hence the observer will see the beam of light emitted from B earlier than he will see that emitted from A. Since the moving observer was at some point other than the mid point when they observed the lightning strikes, could that observer have just gone to that same point and been standing there when the lightning strikes occurred. Would the same following conclusion apply? Events which are simultaneous with reference to the embankment are not simultaneous with respect to the train, and vice versa (relativity of simultaneity). Every reference-body (co-ordinate system) has its own particular time; unless we are told the reference-body to which the statement of time refers, there is no meaning in a statement of the time of an event.