If delta t = 0, then t = 0 and there is no universe, no event(s), no motion in the vacuum and nothing at all there to analyze and talk about. Did you say whether you had a problem with Peter Lynds formulation of time?

The light cone at the beginning of this thread is the event / simultaneous event(s) we are talking about?

Well, to start with, only bosons may occupy the same space at the same time ("simultaneously"), so the only event that could be involving matter would be a couple of Higgs bosons interacting for long enough to give each other inertial mass, after which, they promptly decay. Except that under the stated conditions, there isn't even a Higgs field yet, so nowhere for them to originate from.

I suppose I just don't see anywhere constructive this particular treadmill seems to be going. Zero is a constant, not a variable, and evidently does not capture anything remotely physical; even vacuum energy is evidently very far from zero energy, zero mass, or anything **resembling a number in our minds that is little more conceptually than a place holder for manipulations related to simple arithmetic.**

yes this [bolded] is the standard response to the notion that zero is being treated as a variable under SRT.

The important consideration is that the zero involved is the zero point between past and future. It however is still a zero. And it is considered as variable (relative to itself) under SRT

Now keep in mind that all mathematical formulations require an invariant zero, Lorentz transforms are compromised for want of a better word, when we realize that they must be performed with an

**invariant **zero to derive a

**variant** zero.

That there is no invariant zero to begin with (according to SRT) renders the transforms as compromised IMO

What this essentially means is that all values used in SRT are effectively floating in a way that self justifies their float...

The idea of 0 and 0' being relative is part of the problem.

Basically it means that no value can be proved using simple mathematics as you put it.

example:

*10 - 10 = 0* &

*10' - 10' = 0'* are relative values. ( because the zero used to validate their value is relative. )

Therefore equivalence of 10 & 10' can not be proved [10=/=10]

*Question:*
Can one zero to be relative to another zero and still maintain the invariance of zero?

Certainly one nihilo can not be relative to another nihilo in physics.

But perhaps we can allow it in math? (somehow, and still retain the integrity of our formulations, although I fail to see how)

The question put forward again:

*Clarifying question:*
The question to ask is:

Can zero (nihilo) ever be considered to be a variable, regardless of context?

Apply the answer to SRT's "relativity of simultaneity" and explain how the Lorentz Transforms can function if zero is a variable.