Re: A twin contraction paradox
- From: "tomtom" <Carmam1534@xxxxxxx>
- Date: 5 Jan 2007 12:09:47 -0800
Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
i.o.w. THE FACT THAT THEY STRIKE SIMULTANEOUSLY
= g L/(2c) (with your v = c/2)
That is the time the aft prong strikes before the front prong.
If you stay in one IFR, the two statements above are contradictory. If
they strike simultaneously, how can the rear prong strike before the
front prong? You are jumping IFRs again. Sure, they strike
simultaneously according to B, but not according to A, and it is the
view according to A that we are interested in, not the view from B. As
measured in IFR A, the prongs on B are 0.866m apart, and do not strike
simultaneously.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: A twin contraction paradox
- From: Sorcerer
- Re: A twin contraction paradox
- From: Dirk Van de moortel
- Re: A twin contraction paradox
- From: Dirk Van de moortel
- Re: A twin contraction paradox
- References:
- Re: A twin contraction paradox
- From: tomtom
- Re: A twin contraction paradox
- From: Dirk Van de moortel
- Re: A twin contraction paradox
- From: tomtom
- Re: A twin contraction paradox
- From: Dirk Van de moortel
- Re: A twin contraction paradox
- From: tomtom
- Re: A twin contraction paradox
- From: Dirk Van de moortel
- Re: A twin contraction paradox
- Prev by Date: Re: A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to a Light Source
- Next by Date: Re: A twin contraction paradox
- Previous by thread: Re: A twin contraction paradox
- Next by thread: Re: A twin contraction paradox
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|