Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #371607
| From | Plexippus Kritikos <plexik@laertesegidio.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics.relativity |
| Subject | Re: On length contraction |
| Date | 2015-12-08 22:40 +0000 |
| Organization | Offshore Production |
| Message-ID | <n47m8v$uo0$1@speranza.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | <480b34d8-19e3-4189-a293-4cf298956389@googlegroups.com> <e0482912-179c-4c18-ab79-b40faf92372d@googlegroups.com> <3f999d8f-8bf0-44e4-9309-c4c6f21dacdd@googlegroups.com> |
kenseto >> "length contraction" is simply an expression used to describe the the >> "odd result" predicted by SR that if you *measure* the length of [a >> moving object] you will get a "lesser value". SR says nothing about >> "real" or "material". It simply says something about the *value* >> obtained by the measurement procedure. > > Idiot you are clueless in SR....you can't measure the physical length of > a moving meter stick. This is exorbitantly correct. > You can predict its contracted lenngth. The > problem is that all you SRians have no clue what is contracting because > a moving meter stick will return the same length after a journey. The > informed SRians came up with the idea that length contraction is the > geometric projection of a moving meter stick onto the x-axis of the > observer's coordinate system. Well, this gymnastics is again courageously hypothetical. Merely a gedanken. You can't possibly project anything, travelling at that high speed, on a stationary axis. To do that you need some shadows of some art, also considered straight and not curved. (yes, if light can curves, its shadow may curves as well)
Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
On length contraction kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-12-05 07:55 -0800
Re: On length contraction Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-12-05 18:40 +0100
Re: On length contraction kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-12-05 15:49 -0800
Re: On length contraction Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-12-05 22:39 -0600
Re: On length contraction Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-12-06 10:28 +0100
Re: On length contraction alsor@interia.pl - 2015-12-06 05:40 -0800
Re: On length contraction Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-12-06 09:03 -0600
Re: On length contraction alsor@interia.pl - 2015-12-09 02:37 -0800
Re: On length contraction fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-12-06 08:14 -0800
Re: On length contraction fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-12-06 08:27 -0800
Re: On length contraction fuller.david@hotmail.com - 2015-12-06 10:37 -0800
Re: On length contraction kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-12-06 06:21 -0800
Re: On length contraction rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2015-12-06 08:19 -0800
Stephane Baune tries to correct Ken Shito and, in the process, embarrasses himself "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2015-12-07 08:35 -0800
Re: On length contraction Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-12-06 08:24 +0100
Re: On length contraction Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-12-06 08:41 +0100
Re: On length contraction kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-12-06 07:06 -0800
Re: On length contraction Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-12-06 09:20 -0600
Re: On length contraction Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-12-06 21:43 +0100
Re: On length contraction Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-12-07 09:46 -0600
Re: On length contraction Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-06 15:09 -0600
Re: On length contraction Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-12-07 09:49 -0600
Re: On length contraction rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2015-12-06 08:10 -0800
Re: On length contraction Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-12-07 10:01 -0600
Re: On length contraction rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2015-12-07 08:28 -0800
Re: On length contraction Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-07 10:57 -0600
Re: On length contraction mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-12-07 22:58 -0800
Re: On length contraction Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-12-08 08:44 +0100
Re: On length contraction kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-12-08 14:33 -0800
Re: On length contraction Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-08 17:56 -0600
Re: On length contraction moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-12-10 20:07 +0000
Re: On length contraction kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-12-10 13:13 -0800
Re: On length contraction Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-10 17:19 -0600
Re: On length contraction moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-12-11 02:45 +0000
Re: On length contraction kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-12-10 21:11 -0800
Re: On length contraction rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2015-12-11 06:57 -0800
Re: On length contraction kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-12-11 19:20 -0800
Re: On length contraction moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-12-11 19:55 +0000
Re: On length contraction Plexippus Kritikos <plexik@laertesegidio.org> - 2015-12-11 23:25 +0000
Re: On length contraction kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-12-11 19:25 -0800
Re: On length contraction pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-12-11 19:48 -0800
Re: On length contraction pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-12-13 14:33 -0800
Re: On length contraction moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-12-12 17:27 +0000
Re: On length contraction Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-14 10:12 -0600
Re: On length contraction kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-12-10 21:08 -0800
Re: On length contraction Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-11 08:04 -0600
Re: On length contraction kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-12-08 14:26 -0800
Re: On length contraction Plexippus Kritikos <plexik@laertesegidio.org> - 2015-12-08 22:40 +0000
Re: On length contraction kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-12-09 06:50 -0800
Re: On length contraction alsor@interia.pl - 2015-12-09 09:06 -0800
Re: On length contraction rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2015-12-09 09:47 -0800
Re: On length contraction Plexippus Kritikos <plexik@laertesegidio.org> - 2015-12-09 18:11 +0000
Re: On length contraction Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-12-09 12:32 -0600
Re: On length contraction alsor@interia.pl - 2015-12-09 11:18 -0800
Re: On length contraction kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-12-10 06:57 -0800
Re: On length contraction kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-12-10 06:46 -0800
Re: On length contraction wugi <brol@brol.be> - 2015-12-06 18:18 +0100
Re: On length contraction Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-12-06 12:35 -0600
Re: On length contraction wugi <brol@brol.be> - 2015-12-06 21:58 +0100
Re: On length contraction wugi <brol@brol.be> - 2015-12-06 22:31 +0100
Re: On length contraction Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-12-07 10:16 -0600
Re: On length contraction John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-06 13:08 -0800
Re: On length contraction John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-06 14:26 -0800
Re: On length contraction John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-06 14:38 -0800
Re: On length contraction John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-06 15:39 -0800
Re: On length contraction Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-06 15:07 -0600
Re: On length contraction benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-12-14 02:21 -0500
Re: On length contraction Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-14 10:44 -0600
Re: On length contraction alsor@interia.pl - 2015-12-14 08:59 -0800
Re: On length contraction kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-12-14 09:05 -0800
Re: On length contraction alsor@interia.pl - 2015-12-14 09:48 -0800
Re: On length contraction Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-14 12:18 -0600
Re: On length contraction kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-12-15 05:49 -0800
Re: On length contraction Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-15 08:21 -0600
Re: On length contraction mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2015-12-15 23:29 -0800
Re: On length contraction kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-12-16 07:04 -0800
Re: On length contraction Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-16 09:14 -0600
csiph-web