Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:a length contraction paradox

2014-03-07 Thread H Veeder
ng into the > stationary frame ... theres gonna be sparks :_) > > > > *From:* H Veeder [mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 05, 2014 2:54 PM > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Subject:* Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:a length contraction paradox > > > >

RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:a length contraction paradox

2014-03-06 Thread Roarty, Francis X
ile growing into the stationary frame ... theres gonna be sparks :_) From: H Veeder [mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 2:54 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:a length contraction paradox Both frames are in sliding contact so it takes no time for

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:a length contraction paradox

2014-03-05 Thread John Berry
ween time and the >> spatial vector. Never able to reach C from our perspective just get smaller >> and "slower" once past 45 degrees. >> >> Fran >> >> >> >> *From:* Eric Walker [mailto:eric.wal...@gmail.com] >> *Sent:* Wednesday, March

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:a length contraction paradox

2014-03-05 Thread H Veeder
m] > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 05, 2014 3:04 AM > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:a length contraction paradox > > > > On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 11:54 PM, H Veeder wrote: > > > > Only by changing the thought experiment and incorporating that signal

RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:a length contraction paradox

2014-03-05 Thread Roarty, Francis X
spatial vector. Never able to reach C from our perspective just get smaller and “slower” once past 45 degrees. Fran From: Eric Walker [mailto:eric.wal...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 3:04 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:a length contraction paradox On Tue, Mar 4