On Friday, December 6, 2024 at 9:32:53 PM UTC-7 Alan Grayson wrote:
On Friday, December 6, 2024 at 9:24:06 PM UTC-7 Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/6/2024 7:57 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: On Friday, December 6, 2024 at 8:47:24 PM UTC-7 Alan Grayson wrote: On Friday, December 6, 2024 at 8:00:56 PM UTC-7 Brent Meeker wrote: On 12/6/2024 6:09 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: On Friday, December 6, 2024 at 5:30:59 PM UTC-7 Brent Meeker wrote: I thought I had put this to bed long ago. Here's how is looks in the cars reference frame. The garage ,which is 10' long, is moving fast toward the car. It's length is Lorentz contracted to only 6', so the car doesn't fit. No surprise since the car is 12' long. But now from the garage's reference frame. The car is contracted to only 8' and so fits nicely, both ends of the car are inside the garage at the same time (where simultaneity is defined in the garage reference frame). But doesn't this contradict the car's observation that the garage was way to short? No, because what the car measure to be simultaneous is shown as the slanted car. His front bumper was well beyond the end of the garage when his rear bumper had just entered. These two diagrams are just the Lorentz transform of one another. *Please elaborate on this point. TY, AG* Brent *So, from the car's frame, the car won't fit in garage due to contraction of garage's length, but from garage frame the car fits perfectly due to contraction of car's length, and then it doesn't? * How did you get "and then it doesn't out of what I wrote." Study the diagram. Brent *First the car doesn't fit from car's frame, then it does fit from garage frame, then the elogated car doesn't fit from garage frame. AG* *Maybe you meant the elogated car doesn't fit in car frame, but we already knew this. AG* *In the words of Oliver Heaviside, "I've given you an argument. I'm not obliged to give you an understanding." Brent* *Heavyside isn't well known and now we know why. You can do better, much better, but don't want to. And that's where this story presumably ends. AG* *Ultimately, what you've presented relies on handwaving since your argument is incomplete. Maybe someone else here can complete it. AG* *So, apparently, there's no objective answer to the question of whether car fits in garage, or not. Doesn't there have to be agreement betweem the frames to claim the apparent paradox is resolved? BTW, what velcoity did you use to get the numerical contraction values? AG* -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/be9c7a1d-ea90-4ba2-af9e-5ef9b34304e7n%40googlegroups.com.
