- #71
mysearch
Gold Member
- 526
- 0
Quick Response to #70
Guess the purpose of #68/#69 was to see if we could converge to some physical interpretation of the implication of relativity. Wasn’t sure whether you would agree with the ABA = BAB conclusion and that ABA > BAB was really an `apple and oranges` comparison.
Yes I had seen the Bell Paradox thread and was glad that you had raised it as a separate issue, because previously it seemed to be buried in other non-obvious threads. Unfortunately, I haven’t had too much time over the weekend to get into the details, but will add to the thread as soon as possible.
However, I did post a question in your Impure Twin Paradox thread. Hopefully, while you take a look at this, it will give me some time to get my ‘event horizon-hiking boots` on. Although I am not sure, as yet, whether I have yet got all the right equipment.
Guess the purpose of #68/#69 was to see if we could converge to some physical interpretation of the implication of relativity. Wasn’t sure whether you would agree with the ABA = BAB conclusion and that ABA > BAB was really an `apple and oranges` comparison.
Yes I had seen the Bell Paradox thread and was glad that you had raised it as a separate issue, because previously it seemed to be buried in other non-obvious threads. Unfortunately, I haven’t had too much time over the weekend to get into the details, but will add to the thread as soon as possible.
However, I did post a question in your Impure Twin Paradox thread. Hopefully, while you take a look at this, it will give me some time to get my ‘event horizon-hiking boots` on. Although I am not sure, as yet, whether I have yet got all the right equipment.