... 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 the sprayer to
leave
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 the sprayer to leave
behind
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 11:54 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
Only by changing the thought experiment and incorporating that signal can
an observer in the rest frame declare the events to be non-synchronous in
his frame.
This is an interesting thought experiment. I'm curious how the
Don't blame me Charlie... I can't see!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Itr0jcR0S4s
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 12:30 AM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
What you see in this video is how SR effects light rays coming into a
camera
or an eye.
SR says length contraction is literally length
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 05, 2014 3:04 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:a length contraction paradox
On Tue, Mar 4
*Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:a length contraction paradox
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 11:54 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
Only by changing the thought experiment and incorporating that signal can
an observer in the rest frame declare the events to be non-synchronous in
his frame
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, 2014 at 11:54 PM, H
Terry,
Is there something in particular about this video that I should apply to my
example?
harry
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
This video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQnHTKZBTI4
provides observed effects of travel at light speed. It does so
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 8:03 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
Terry,
Is there something in particular about this video that I should apply to my
example?
I think it shows that length contraction is really rotation, not a
physical change in the dimension traveled.
John,
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 3:51 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:
From a discussion in another group, I can say that the view of SR would be
that what is simultaneous in the train frame would not be viewed as
simultaneous in the track frame.
This would only be true if the
rotation of what?
harry
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 8:56 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 8:03 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
Terry,
Is there something in particular about this video that I should apply to
my
example?
I think it shows that
What the observer sees as contraction is actually a rotation of the
observed object due to the optical wavefront compression. Watch the
sign in the second part of the video.
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 9:33 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
rotation of what?
harry
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at
What you see in this video is how SR effects light rays coming into a camera
or an eye.
SR says length contraction is literally length contraction. It does not say
it is illusion of rotation.
Length contraction can happen with or without illumination so it should be
apprehended with your sense of
. Why would you expect them to make two separate
observations? There is only one train moving past.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Mar 2, 2014 3:23 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:a length contraction paradox
A length contraction paradox which doesn't vanish with further analysis.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxxczzEYA5C5cXNmZU1aUXNTRFE/edit?usp=sharing
harry
@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Mar 2, 2014 1:10 pm
Subject: [Vo]:a length contraction paradox
A length contraction paradox which doesn't vanish with further analysis.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxxczzEYA5C5cXNmZU1aUXNTRFE/edit?usp=sharing
harry
...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Mar 2, 2014 1:10 pm
Subject: [Vo]:a length contraction paradox
A length contraction paradox which doesn't vanish with further analysis.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxxczzEYA5C5cXNmZU1aUXNTRFE/edit?usp=sharing
harry
that is at rest relative to the tracks.
He would not see two separate spray events so I would suspect that he would
find the short version only.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Mar 2, 2014 1:10 pm
Subject: [Vo]:a length
This video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQnHTKZBTI4
provides observed effects of travel at light speed. It does so by
having a constant velocity and changes the speed of light instead of
the speed of the observer.
? There is only one
train moving past.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Mar 2, 2014 3:23 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:a length contraction paradox
That would be true if the problem of simultaneity across frames
hveeder...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Mar 2, 2014 1:10 pm
Subject: [Vo]:a length contraction paradox
A length contraction paradox which doesn't vanish with further analysis.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxxczzEYA5C5cXNmZU1aUXNTRFE/edit?usp=sharing
harry
-
From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Mar 2, 2014 1:10 pm
Subject: [Vo]:a length contraction paradox
A length contraction paradox which doesn't vanish with further analysis.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxxczzEYA5C5cXNmZU1aUXNTRFE/edit?usp
22 matches
Mail list logo
