Genady

A curious observation about past, present, and future as reflected in a language. English has a simple system that only distinguishes between past, present, and future, just like SR. However, some languages have a system that obligates a speaker to make a finer distinction regarding when an event occurred. For example, whenever a speaker of Yagua (Peru) wants to refer to an event in the past, they must specify one of five different degrees of remoteness from the present: a few hours / couple of days / weeks up to one month / months up to a couple of years / distant or legendary past. Looks like not only the past is subdivided, but also the scale is "logarithmic" rather than linear.

Exactly. This was the reality and people learned from it. My point is that it doesn't matter very much what one is taught, by parents, teachers, leaders, etc.

I think that the notion of time evolved with us as we evolved as species. We needed it to survive, and it had to evolve as our environment changed. It evolved to deal with short intervals, order of .1s, important for fast responses, and with long intervals, of years, important for events on our life scale. Biological evolution didn't need to deal with nanoseconds, billions of years, star masses, or speed of light. But we deal with such environments now and thus the notion of time continues to evolve to include them as well.

C will be already in bits.

I'm talking about the old USSR. We were taught that there the money rules, but not here. However, everyone got the idea that it does anyway.

Or Portuguese, bom ar, bons ares... I think that one of the points in support of the Caquetio origin, Bonay, is the fact that it is name of a place and there are many local places - as well as local plants and fishes - that still retain their Caquetio names in the local language, Papiamentu. In which the island is called, Boneiru.

I agree, but the etymology is not clear: (Bonaire - Wikipedia)

I don't think so. Children are taught many things, but that is what they learn. In non-capitalist countries they are not explicitly taught this - but this is what they learn anyway

How is this information conveyed to human senses? I don't know. Perhaps, various ways can be designed. It seems rather a question of our perception than a question of a nature of time. Some macroscopic instrument "readable" by us is needed. Perhaps, some visual representations on a screen. But might be something ticking... These, 1, 2, 3 above, are examples of changes which are not movements, but which have time duration. Yes, number 3.

I mean that this formula describes velocity of a radially free falling body that starts at rest at infinity, in a Schwarzschild metric with the given rs , at distance r from the center, in the coordinates of the far away observer. I don't know why you say it does not.

Yes, I assume a radial free fall of C from B to A. No, the formula is not specific for black holes. It is general formula for the Schwarzschild's metric.

This is wonderful. But then it's not a puzzle.

I think it might have to do with the island's shape and orientation, so that the sunset time and the sun's angle are not the same in different parts:

I understand and "approve" the first two points. I don't think I understand the third one. "Enough"?

I see.

Why did you pick this particular situation?

Thank you! No complaints

Right. This gives us comparison of "tick rates", i.e., the dτ's, from the B's perspective, i.e., per one "tick" of the clock B. I think, if we write this equation for, say, dτA, solve it fordt , and substitute into the equations for dτB etc., then we can compare "tick rates" of the clocks from the A's perspective. And so on.

Bonaire

Right. Moreover, even when the position is right, the atmospheric conditions don't always cooperate. Then, nobody gets to see it.

This is what I think, too. Here is a little calculation supporting it. The Earth circumference is about 25,000 mi. The Sun makes it in 24 hours. Thus, it moves about 17 miles a minute along the Earth surface in our area, i.e., near the equator. That is, about 40-50 miles in 2-3 minutes. Thus, after our sunset, the Sun is still for 2-3 minutes above the horizon for that neighboring island. What we see then is its long shadow in the sky.

No, I'm not sure in this.

Because of this observation, I thought that the phenomenon is rather optical than atmospheric.

Where do you get this from? From here, among many other similar sources: general relativity - Will an object always fall at an infinite speed in a black hole? - Physics Stack Exchange The link is to the Wikipedia: Schwarzschild geodesics - Wikipedia

Right. And that was the proposal I've disagreed and still disagree with as the substitution shows a significantly different outcome (if my algebra is correct, of course). (Ignoring the angle-dot is fine. I am talking only about the free-falling r-dot.)