On Monday, December 30, 2024 at 2:14:48 AM UTC-7 Quentin Anciaux wrote:
Le lun. 30 déc. 2024, 07:41, Alan Grayson <[email protected]> a écrit : 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* *The only asymmetry in this case involves the velocity of the car. Here, it's not an ideal case of two entities moving with respect to each other, and being the only entities in the universe, that allows us to conclude their motion is simply relative. AG * *What you demonstrate is a person of ordinary intelligence. A symptom of your condiiton is that you fail to ask a fairly deep question inherent in this issue; specifically, why is it considered a paradox when the frames reach opposite conclusions? I don't see this question asked on the Internet, even though the disagreement is alleged to be an apparent paradox. The videos I posted try to show the frames reach the same conclusion. Some fail, others I am not sure about. In Brent's case, IIUC, he's not bothered that the frames disagree. So it surely seems there's an unanswered question here. Finally, when I asked you about your position, you refuse to answer. So, either you're a coward, or aren't clear what your actual position is. 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/5412987d-509a-4e06-882b-66316d5ba9d3n%40googlegroups.com.
