How many times must I say it: Simultaneity is NOT relative

When an observer in a rocket, or even in a stationary room, sees light hitting a rear wall and a forward wall at the same time, he is not actually seeing the light hit the walls at the same time; he is actually seeing the reflected light from each wall arriving at his position at the same time. There are two events: the light hitting the walls (event A), and the reflected light arriving at his eyes (event B). If the observer claims that he sees the light hit the walls, then he’s claiming that event B is event A, and he is thus an idiot.

According to Einstein, and common sense as well, if lightning strikes either end of a moving train simultaneously, then the light from each strike will converge on an observer at the center of the train at two different times, i.e. non-simultaneously. Logically, the converse must also be true: if a bolt struck the center of the moving train, light from the bolt would strike the ends of the train non-simultaneously. From this we can conclude the following: if our observer at the center of the moving train shines a light toward the front and rear of the cabin at the same time, then each light beam will strike its respective wall at a different time, i.e. non-simultaneously…which would be in agreement with an outside observer who is stationary with respect to the train. The light will reflect from each wall and converge on the observer at the center of the cabin at the same time, and he will erroneously conclude that the light hit both walls simultaneously. The observer on the rocket and the outside observer disagree on the timing of the light hitting the walls. The observer on the rocket says it hit simultaneously, the outside observer says non-simultaneously. But the outside observer is correct, since the rocket’s observer is basing his conclusion on an erroneous perception. As I have shown, there is in fact no actual, physical difference as to when the light hit each wall; the thought experiment put forth by Einstein himself shows this, but he and his followers have failed to realize it. The relativist is not justified in concluding that simultaneity is relative, since it is only relative in the mistaken perception of the moving observer. 

Motion in space is impossible

One thing it is of vital importance to understand is that when one moves from “here” to “there” in space, one is not actually moving in space; rather, one is moving in time. When I arrive “there,” “there” is not the same “there” to which I determined to move when I was “here.”

Let me explain in detail. Let’s say I am standing at a position X at 7:01 PM. We’ll combine this to read X7:01, a timespace position. I determine that I wish to move to position Y (perhaps Y is a spot across the room, over by the sofa). I do so, arriving at Y at 7:02 PM. Y7:02. When I look back to X from Y7:02, I am looking back at X7:02, not X7:01. X7:01 is now in a part of a space which I can no longer see. It is part of the past. Likewise, when I was standing at X7:01, looking across the room and deciding to move to position Y, I was actually deciding to move to Y7:01. But instead, I moved to Y7:02. I did not move across the intervening space from X7:01 to Y7:01. I moved across the intervening time from X7:01 to Y7:02. One can never be in two spatially contiguous places at the same time. I can never move from X7:01 to Y7:01. Nothing can ever move from X7:01 to Y7:01. Motion through space is impossible, without also moving through time.

Indeed, the part of me that determined to leave position X7:01 never actually left it. Even as I arrive at Y7:02, that other part of me is still there at X7:01. When I stand at Y7:02 and look back at X, I do not see that part, because I am looking at X7:02, not X7:01.

How are spaces connected in time? What velocity is necessary to move me from one moment to the next, from one position in time to another? I don’t mean spatial velocity, the force I need to achieve to propel myself from X to Y. I mean, what force, what velocity through time, is necessary to move me from X7:01 to X7:02? Because a force, a velocity, must be required, whether I am moving or stationary in the spatial part of timespace. We are all of us being propelled through timespace whether we wish it or not. Some velocity, some force, must therefore be exerted upon us to propel us from X7:01 to X7:02, in addition to the force I must exert to move from X7:01 to Y7:02.