Re: relativity of simultaneity - real or perceived?
- From: jtbell@xxxxxxxxxx (Jon Bell)
- Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 20:10:10 +0000 (UTC)
In article <d659p0$3jc$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Jon Bell <jtbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>No, they would not arrive at the two ends of the box simultaneously in
>frame 2. In frame 2, photon A arrives at the left end of the box at t'_A
>= 0, whereas photon B arrives at the right end of the box at t'_B =
>-0.86603 seconds. That is, photon B arrives at its end of the box first,
>then, 0.86603 seconds later, photon A arrives at *its* end of the box.
For what it's worth, here's a diagram showing what this looks like in
frame 1 at t = 0, and in frame 2 at t' = -0.87 sec and at t' = 0. (I've
rounded off all the numbers to two decimal places on the diagram, so take
that into account if you try to verify my arithmetic.)
<http://web.presby.edu/~jtbell/curious.gif>
I see I left out at least one number: in frame 2, at t' = 0 the right end
of the rod is at x' = 1.3. The rod is length-contracted from 1.5 to
about 1.3 light-seconds.
--
Jon Bell <jtbell@xxxxxxxxxx> Presbyterian College
Dept. of Physics and Computer Science Clinton, South Carolina USA
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: relativity of simultaneity - real or perceived?
- From: Curious
- Re: relativity of simultaneity - real or perceived?
- References:
- relativity of simultaneity - real or perceived?
- From: Curious
- Re: relativity of simultaneity - real or perceived?
- From: Paul Stowe
- Re: relativity of simultaneity - real or perceived?
- From: Curious
- Re: relativity of simultaneity - real or perceived?
- From: Jon Bell
- relativity of simultaneity - real or perceived?
- Prev by Date: Re: Length "contraction" and time "dialation" bad language.
- Next by Date: Re: why is relativity important
- Previous by thread: Re: relativity of simultaneity - real or perceived?
- Next by thread: Re: relativity of simultaneity - real or perceived?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|