Dramatic! As alternate way of revealing the paradox, I imagined the two charged balls connected by a spring which counter balances the force of repulsion. In the reference frame where the balls are moving, a magnetic force would cause the spring to become shorter. Paradoxically, in the frame of reference of the balls the length of the spring would remain unchanged.
harry On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 1:21 AM, John Berry <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 6:51 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]>wrote: > >> I figured that you were attempting to set some sort of trap. :-) Take the >> time to figure out what I have described and you will understand that every >> observer has a valid viewpoint that depends upon his relative motion. > > > At one point you said you agreed with me that another observer's reference > frame would not lead to a force appearing, but it seems that you again take > that view again. > > So let me ask you the following, in the example with the compasses and the > charged car's, or the same experiment with charged tennis balls already > described, what if the negatively car's compass has a bomb hooked up to it, > so that if it points up the car will explode. > > From the cars reference frame no magnetic field in expected and they do > not experience an explosion. > From the stationary observers frame let's say the compass points down, no > explosion. > > But from an overtaking cars POV the magnetic field of the car should make > the compass point up and explode. > > Now we have one reality that expects there to be an explosion and no more > car, and 2 other reference frames where the cars should still exist. > > It seems that you would think that this is what should occur? Different > permanent fates for each reference frame. > > That is what would happen if everything happened according to each > observers view and expected consequences of their reality being right. > > Maybe I can see why you are fearful of traps, traps are only in issue if > your concept is flawed. > > John > >
