Re: SR cannot determine Contraction

"Dono" <sa_ge@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1a9d4300-fd43-45a6-b051-31d97de34a52@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I know the paradox, this simple exercise doesn't support your view.

Yes .. it does. If the pole was not taking up less space in the barn's
frame of reference, it would not fit inside the barn.

BTW: there is no such thing as a 'stationary' frame in SR.

Yes .. hence the '' around 'stationary' and 'moving' .. did you not see
that?

Your attempt at trying to score pedantic point is just an attempty to divert
from your fundamental error here.

Please try reading the recommended reference.

I have .. have you? It appears not. if you had, you would not be arguing
with me.

The above should not be misconstrued in any form or fashion as my
agreeing with the Ken Shito crackpot.

Indeed. But you are wrong here. It happen as much as you hate to admit it

A 'moving' object DOES take up less 'space' in a 'stationary' frame of
reference at a given time in that frame (and, as you seem to have problems
with understanding what is meant by that .. the 'moving' and 'stationary'
are wrt the observer).


.

Loading