On Sunday, December 15, 2024 at 11:24:36 AM UTC-7 Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Le dim. 15 déc. 2024, 18:48, Alan Grayson <[email protected]> a écrit : On Sunday, December 15, 2024 at 6:45:57 AM UTC-7 Quentin Anciaux wrote: Le dim. 15 déc. 2024, 14:31, Alan Grayson <[email protected]> a écrit : On Sunday, December 15, 2024 at 6:20:47 AM UTC-7 Alan Grayson wrote: On Sunday, December 15, 2024 at 5:41:54 AM UTC-7 John Clark wrote: On Sat, Dec 14, 2024 at 11:01 PM Alan Grayson <[email protected]> wrote: * > What bothers me is the disagreement between frames about fitness or not, and why the alleged lack of simultaneity resolves the apparent contradiction. AG * *In this thought experiment I think even you would agree that no matter how fast or slow the car is going there will always be times when the front of the car is in the garage, and times when the back of the car is in the garage; so the question of the day is " Is there any frame of reference in which those two events occur SIMULTANEOUSLY?" Einstein's answer is "yes", provided the car is moving fast enough. And as proof that Einstein's answer was correct, in this thought experiment, above a certain speed, there is NO frame of reference in which there is a car shaped hole in the back door of the garage. * *John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>* No. Above a certain speed, since the car is length contracted from the pov of the garage frame, the car will fit in the garage, and waiting some time, then being in a different reference frame, it could hit the back door. AG But the real question is this; if from the pov of the car frame, there is a v such that the car never fits in the garage for this v and greater, why is it claimed that lack of simultaneity between frames solves the problem, since we're only considering simultaneity in garage frame where the car fits? AG eua It's crazy you're still on this... wtf is your definition of fits in which doesn't involve simultaneously having rear and front of the car in the garage? Quentin I never denied that "fitting" requires simultaneity. Then wtf are you trolling about ? *Earlier you asked if I agreed that fitting requires simultaneity, and I affirmed that. My problem all along, which apparently went over your head, is how the two frames can give diametrically opposite results. All you were capable of doing was to repeat some slogan without offering any genuine explanation. BTW, I never troll, as it would be a waste of my time. Finally, French or not, you're a totally worthless a'hole IMO, so please cease responding to anything I might write. AG* Let me suggest that you go F yourself if you know how, which is doubtful. Just STFU. Please do it yoyrself, useless garbage discussion from you, it's the everything list ffs. I was in France a while back, and I nearly exclusively met a'holes rude a'holes like you. AG Great, I'm not french, so STFU -- 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/42f1e94f-6b5c-4eb0-b003-99a435acf76dn%40googlegroups.com.
