Talk:Simultaneity

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Time Mid‑importance

	This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Time, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Time on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TimeWikipedia:WikiProject TimeTemplate:WikiProject TimeTime articles
Mid	This disambiguation page has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

WikiProject Time assessment rating comment[edit]

Want to help write or improve articles about Time? Join WikiProject Time or visit the Time Portal for a list of articles that need improving.
—Yamara ✉ 17:58, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spacetime meaning[edit]

User Pieter Kuiper substituted the paragraph using the tool of hyperbolic-orthogonality in spacetime theory with a link to another that is not technically useful. I have restored the original physical statement.Rgdboer (talk) 02:18, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Simultaneity in special relativity theory is treated in Relativity of simultaneity, where also a link to Hyperbolic-orthogonal is given. This is a disambiguation page, not the proper place for explaining physics. I will revert. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 07:38, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The alternative link posted today is more positive and technically informative than the other link. Most readers interested in simultaneity have a technical reason; to properly represent relativity as a quantitative science the new link is necessary.Rgdboer (talk) 23:26, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you're using a single dimensioned spacetime graph (an S T coordinate graph) to depict the relative location and time of occurrence of one or more events, you can then separately measure the time and/or distance interval between the events. And if you do that about events involving light rays, you can also infer information about the light rays that are not apparent within the chart. For example, if the paths of two light rays are depicted to cross on the chart that originated at different locations, you can say categorically that not only do they occur at the same time at that location but also that they originated at the same time if they originated on the baseline time. And this would be true regardless of the velocity rate of motion of any observer who was positioned at the point of simultaneous crossing of the light rays.WFPM (talk) 16:52, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

However, if the rays don't originate at the same time on a same time baseline, then we have the usual problem of finding and defining a baseline time where their simultaneous time of occurrence can first be established.WFPM (talk) 17:59, 9 April 2010 (UTC). This will get us back to the time of occurrence of the latest event. But if the observer is moving, he will not agree with a stationary observer as to the time and/or location of the first event due to the problems with relative spacetime measurement considerations.WFPM (talk) 22:56, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Simult?[edit]

"The noun simult means a supernatural coincidence, two or more divinely inspired events that occur at or near the same period of time that are related to each other in both noticeable and unnoticeable characteristics."

What is the source for this claimed etymology? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Konetidy (talk • contribs) 09:47, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know but I added a "citation needed" tag. Jason Quinn (talk) 02:43, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Simult" barely provides any useful search results, and isn't a word in any repudable dictionary (even that poor excuse for a dictionary by Oxford). However, at http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Simult there are two definitions, yet the one shown on the search engine "Thin cast foams typically use a separate machine direction orienter (MDO), while blown film gains inherent simult eous biaxial orientation from the expa ding bubble," (which sounds like gibberish to me) was not on there. Since I could find no reliable source for this word, and because there has been no acceptable reference for the statement in over two years, I propose we should remove the sentence in question.Mousenight (talk) 21:57, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]