On Monday, December 30, 2024 at 12:23:08 AM UTC-7 Alan Grayson wrote:
On Sunday, December 29, 2024 at 11:06:06 PM UTC-7 Brent Meeker wrote:
On 12/29/2024 7:02 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:
On Sunday, December 29, 2024 at 4:38:06 PM UTC-7 Brent Meeker wrote:
On 12/29/2024 4:08 AM, Alan Grayson wrote:
*Here's another video which shows the paradox is resolved by demonstrating
that the car fits in both frames, again affirming my intuition that 1), the
paradox is caused by the apparent disagreement between the frames that the
car fits in garage; and 2), the fact that using the LT properly, by
including time dilation, there does exist an objective reality wherein the
car fits in garage in both frames. Why then, when I asked you to affirm the
existence of this objective reality, you denied it? AG*
*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HtKe9POc_Q
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HtKe9POc_Q>*
You don't even understand the things you post...or you're just trolling.
Here's a still from that video.
Look at the numbers in the box, the entrance and exit numbers from the
garage point of view. Back enters at 1.6e-8 and Front exits at 1.8e-8,
AFTER the back had entered. So the pole was entirely within the garage,
from the garage pov. Now look at the numbers calculated on the upper
right. These are the numbers from the cars point of view. Back enters at
3.70e-8 sec and Front exits 8.07e-9 sec. The Front exits BEFORE the back
enters. The pole is not entirely within the garage! And then the
discrepancy is illustrated by an animation, clearly showing the pole
(ladder) doesn't fit in the garage in the frame in which the garage is
moving.
Yet you write, "
*Here's another video which shows the paradox is resolved by demonstrating
that the car fits in both frames,". *
*I should have wriiten " ... allegedly resolved ... ". In your opinion,
can it be shown the car fits in garage from the car's frame? If not, the
paradox is alive and well, and SR is in trouble. AG*
??? You should have written the video shows that the pole fits in one
reference frame (the garage's) and not in the other (the pole's). I don't
know whether that "allegedly resolves" the paradox for you or not.
Brent
*In other alleged SR paradoxes, where observers are juxtaposed like the TP,
the resolution involves some asymmetry, but not in this case. My question
was, really, as far as you know, is there any way for the car to fit in the
garage from the car's frame? For you, I suppose that the observers
differing in their conclusion about fitting is not a problem. If so, my use
of length contraction should have been sufficient for you, since the
conclusion is the same as your plots. For me the disagreement is a problem,
but it's hard to come up with a convincing argument why that's the case. On
the Internet, it seems to be assumed that such disagreement produces what
appears to be a paradox, but it's not argued why this is so. In my
discussions with Jesse I tried to imagine a Bird's Eye Observer for an
observer, say, from a satellite with the garage being open on the top, to
determine what would be observed, by an alleged objective observer, but I'm
not sure this is helpful in this case. AG*
*Here's another video, which I have NOT watched, which claims to resolve
the "paradox" of disagreement about fitting between the two frames. You
might want to view it and give me your opinion. Does it do what it claims?
AG *
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TU1tKTOIj4
--
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/3b62fb12-2558-40df-ba2a-d4f5b519c182n%40googlegroups.com.
