OK then, this is for me the last time that I reply to this in this MMX thread.Dalespam, harrylin, ghwellsjr, anyone else:
Can you please take one last look at this attached diagram, and rephrased description, and tell me if you agree: (please note that synchronization is always done when the clocks are not apart, and that, in the diagram example, the clocks [A,B] are synchronized and moved apart, only when they are in the stationary frame).
Your clocks A and B are synchronized and moved apart when the system is in rest, and next the whole system with clocks is brought to a certain speed - I will assume a speed parallel to the drawing.
Then the one-way speed of light will not appear isotropic in that moving system because the clocks are not synchronized according to the standard SR convention.
[edit:] If you mean, if they are moved apart, they will remain in sync according to the frame in which they are in rest? Yes. That is however relative, not absolute.What you are saying is, it is absolutely possible to keep them synchronize (A,B) in relation to one another, after they are moved apart, within the stationary frame.
Huh?! No, the main point of relativity is that you can choose which frame you call "moving" or "stationary"! Correcting your errors, we get:What it is, that makes the device, with the exact same configuration, work the same, in both a moving and stationary frame (in contrast to the diagram) - has to do with what happens in the moving frame, which is: Time dilation of the time delay of the middle clock (C), within the moving frame, coupled with the fact, that both clocks (A,B) are measuring time, at different positions, within the moving frame. The same different positions (A,B) as in the stationary frame, now in the moving frame, makes the difference.
So the difference that compensates for C clock time dilation and makes the device work always the same in both frames, can occur in two ways: 1. When acceleration occurs - if the clocks are synchronized, and moved apart, in the stationary frame (as in the above example and diagram), Or: 2. While the action of moving the clocks apart occurs (in relation to the stationary frame), if synchronization is done in the moving frame.
The difference that compensates for C clock time dilation and makes the device work always the same in both states of motion, can occur in several ways, for example:
1. If the clocks A and B were synchronized, and moved apart before acceleration (as in the above example and diagram), and then re-synchronized by means of light signals.
2. If those clocks are synchronized and equally moved apart relative tot the system after the acceleration, they will remain synchronized according to the synchronization convention.
No, of course not- just read what we wrote, none of us were saying that!And also, you are saying that there is no 'more mechanical' or 'only one ideal spoken words' explanation, from this point on, but at that phase of understanding further, only is a mathematical description available.
Is that correct?