Re: Spaceship Question
- From: "kenseto" <kenseto@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 16:10:49 GMT
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1138895273.976996.218280@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
contraction.
kenseto wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1138817866.743854.117450@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I said no such thing. I said that measuring the length is certainly
possible while it's moving.
Sure it's possible....but the result does not support length
have
In the case of radars and planes, that's exactly what I said in the
part you snipped. In the other experiments I referred you to, however,
length contraction is apparent.
In
every text book I ever read you need to mark both ends of a moving rod
simultaneously in your frame to measure the length of a moving rod. You
not provide any experiment that does this.
On the contrary, I referred you to rapidity distributions in fixed
target and collider experiments that do require simultaneity in the
measurement of lengths, and where Lorentz contraction is apparent.
Unfortunately, you do not choose to look them up and read them.
Your problem is: that you don't understand that length contraction (in SR)
is an apparent effect.
Ken Seto
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Spaceship Question
- From: PD
- Re: Spaceship Question
- References:
- Re: Spaceship Question
- From: PD
- Re: Spaceship Question
- From: kenseto
- Re: Spaceship Question
- From: PD
- Re: Spaceship Question
- Prev by Date: Re: A small conservation of energy puzzle
- Next by Date: Re: Spaceship Question
- Previous by thread: Re: Spaceship Question
- Next by thread: Re: Spaceship Question
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|