|
|
|
|
|
|
by pdonis
953 days ago
|
|
|
> If you didn't know special relativity, you would never get this idea. You're looking at it backwards. The paper is not assuming anything here; in fact it is explicitly refusing to assume that we know the correct transformation law between frames. That means we have to leave open the possibility of the time difference changing, not because we know SR, but because we are being logically rigorous. |
|
|