3 ms·

There were no big words or any form of exotic vocabulary. > No it's not Causality states that the order of effects must match the order of events. The Wikipe

There were no big words or any form of exotic vocabulary. > No it's not Causality states that the order of effects must match the order of events. The Wikipedia articles states that almost verbatim. The mention of a light cone binds the general use of the word to its application of physics without changing the definition. No where does the article extend that definition to anything vaguely measurable. > You can say I attacked a straw man, but the original comment was edited. It was most likely edited hours before your reply. When I completed the edit there were no replies. I am living on the otherside of the world from the US in a far away timezone.

irjustin 6y ago
> No where does the article extend that definition to anything vaguely measurable. Ah, you're right, I didn't realize you dropped the "speed of" in the "speed of causality" (because the "speed of causality" can be measured and expected... what does "expected" even mean in this context?!). So going 2 replies up you linked to Causality and made a statement about causality but ignored the "speed of causality". So nothing was said? So you agree with me! > It was most likely edited hours before your reply. When I completed the edit there were no replies. Ah! Don't worry, thankfully we know that I replied to you 35 minutes later thanks to Hackernew's API[0][1] and that I'm half a world closer in SGT, and that I was originally replying to something that was edited away. [0] https://hacker-news.firebaseio.com/v0/item/24328890.json?print=pretty https://hacker-news.firebaseio.com/v0/item/24328890.json?pri... [1] https://hacker-news.firebaseio.com/v0/item/24329038.json?print=pretty https://hacker-news.firebaseio.com/v0/item/24329038.json?pri...
- austincheney 6y ago
  > Ah! Don't worry, thankfully we know that I replied to you 35 minutes later I don't find that as reassuring. Instead of an editing/time conflict the problem is just poor reading comprehension.

irjustin 6y ago

> No where does the article extend that definition to anything vaguely measurable. Ah, you're right, I didn't realize you dropped the "speed of" in the "speed of causality" (because the "speed of causality" can be measured and expected... what does "expected" even mean in this context?!). So going 2 replies up you linked to Causality and made a statement about causality but ignored the "speed of causality". So nothing was said? So you agree with me! > It was most likely edited hours before your reply. When I completed the edit there were no replies. Ah! Don't worry, thankfully we know that I replied to you 35 minutes later thanks to Hackernew's API[0][1] and that I'm half a world closer in SGT, and that I was originally replying to something that was edited away. [0] https://hacker-news.firebaseio.com/v0/item/24328890.json?print=pretty https://hacker-news.firebaseio.com/v0/item/24328890.json?pri... [1] https://hacker-news.firebaseio.com/v0/item/24329038.json?print=pretty https://hacker-news.firebaseio.com/v0/item/24329038.json?pri...

austincheney 6y ago
> Ah! Don't worry, thankfully we know that I replied to you 35 minutes later I don't find that as reassuring. Instead of an editing/time conflict the problem is just poor reading comprehension.