Re: Speed gedanken time (repaired) time dilation 099


"Spaceman" <Realspace@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:mMednT3D44WDeXbeRVn-vQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"OG" <owen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4525t5F4irvpU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| What makes you think that observer (B) would measure the same as
observer
| (A). He's not in the same coordinate frame at all is he?

He is passing by the same coordinate frame as the guy that
measured the lines physically and marked them.

| Ah, but your measurement would not be made by observer (B), would it?
After
| all, while you have stopped, gone back and measured the separation
between
| two successive lines, maybe double checked them etc etc, observer (B)
has
| whistled off into the distance at a speed of .5c. Not the same thing at
all
| is it? Again, by stopping to measure the distances, you are removing
(B)'s
| involvement in the measurement.

No,
I am simply making sure I am getting a physical measurement.

But you seem to say that in order that you can measure the distance between
the lines you have to stop moving relative to the lines.

| The reason that (B) does not agree is because when you have one
coordinate
| frame moving relative to another, distance measurements made in one
frame
| are contracted relative to the measurements made in the other.

I do not.
I have an observer (B) moving through a coordinate frame that
observer (A) is in hence it is simply the same frame.
(one is moving through it, the other one stays in it.)
and..
distance does not contract ever.
where are you getting such bull*** from?

I think it's now time that we go back to the question I asked in one of my
original responses:-
How would (B) measure the separation of the lines whilst they are whipping
past at .5c ?



.

Quantcast