On 12/12/2024 12:57 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:
On Thursday, December 12, 2024 at 1:46:39 PM UTC-7 Brent Meeker wrote:
On 12/11/2024 11:28 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:
> It says "GARAGE" so it must mean garage frame. AG
Perhaps if you looked at the diagrams for a full second you would
notice
that each diagram has a label of "GARAGE" for the worldlines of
the ends
of the garage AND a label of "CAR" for the worldlines of the ends
of the
car.
Brent
I did, but I can't wrap my head around the idea that a car passenger would
experience a crash at the back door, AND a NON crash produced by the
garage's frame (assuming the car stops when fully inside garage). This
seems to be the prediction produced by treating frames as equivalent. AG
Talking about doors and crashing is just making the problem more
unrealistic than it already was. Of course a car going 240,000km/s is
going to crash into the end of the garage. The thought experiment is
about whether there is a moment at which the front of the car has not
exited the end of the garage AND the rear of the car has entered the
garage. In the garage frame there is such a moment, but not in the
car's frame and it is because the constancy of the speed of light in all
frames makes simultaneity frame dependent, so that both the garage frame
conclusion and the car frame conclusion are both true. It has nothing
to do with the car crashing into the end of the garage, which is why I
treated the garage as open ended...which is away the original "tank
trap" version was defined.
Brent
--
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/19e78f45-5197-4169-922d-e88faa5aaa6d%40gmail.com.
