Top Document: Einstein (1905) Absurdities Previous Document: 15. The "brag about your absurdities" absurdity. Next Document: 16. Einstein's anti-simultaneity argument. See reader questions & answers on this topic! - Help others by sharing your knowledge Just what is it that contracts? There are three basic possibilities: (I) The whole universe contracts, parallel to the line of the moving object's direction. (II) The whole universe contained in a cylinder centered on the moving object and extending forwards and rearwards contracts. (III) The moving object only contracts. The really 'cute' one is (II). ============================================================ (III) The moving object only. Let there be two markers in space at a constant distance of 10^10 kilometers from each other, as measured by an observer at rest wrt the markers. Let a spaceship exist that is measured by the observer as one kilometer long while it is a rest wrt the observer. The distance between the markers is thus 10^10 spaceship lengths. Let the spaceship depart the observer and eventually pass one marker at .7071c. The observer sees the spaceship now as being .5 kilometers in length at t=0, and the moving clock to be ticking only half as fast as his own. The spaceship does not see his length as having changed, and if the distance between the objects didn't also change, then its perceived distance to the second marker is now 2*10^10 kilometers, so it takes twice the time to get to the second marker as one might have supposed, so according to both the stationary and moving clocks, the transit time from one marker to the other will be the same. QED: if only the object contracts, there is no transit time difference between the two systems at a given velocity. ======================================================== (I) The whole universe contracts. (a) Is the contraction instantaneous throughout the universe? How could you tell? And what possible difference could it make? Those are not rhtorical questions. There would be no way SR could have a meaningful application, right? If you suggest that time would not similarly be dilated throughout the universe, you are suggesting an apparent change in v, for v is constant in SR only because d/t=d'/t', and in this case we have no possible d'<>d because all the universe's measuring sticks contract sim- ilarly. Similarly? Identically! (b) Does the contraction propagate through the universe at the speed of light from the location of the moving object? Except for questions like "speed of light from any viewpoint?" this might not be different that the instantaneous model. Hmm. Or maybe a number of widely distributed observers in one frame could tell that something had happened? Again, none of these are rhetorical questions. (c) Does the contraction propagate through the universe at less than the speed of light from the location of the moving object? One could see that parts of the universe had contracted. Your own measuring stick wouldn't contract until after it had measured the distant contraction. Whole Universe Summary: who knows what effect could be eventually discovered; what is knowable is that there would be no simple(ton) visible contraction. =========================================================== (II) The whole universe contained in a cylinder centered on the moving object, and extending forwards and rearward, contracts. This is compatible with standard SR; elsewise a transit time between two markers would show the same elapsed time as for an observer at rest wrt the markers, as we saw in the dis- cussion of the 'object only' case. Let there be a spaceship be at rest between two stars, and with its axis of incipient motion passing through both stars. When it accelerates to any appreciable velocity, is it the center cylinder of the forward star that is snatched from its guts and hurtles toward the spaceship, or the rearward star's guts? Or both? That assumes the center of contraction is at least somewhere from the rearward star almost to the forward star. If the center of contraction were somewhere very distant from the ship, it could be that both star centers and the spaceship would all be yanked instaneously through the center of one start to a point that could be light years distant. Unless the contraction wasn't instantaneous, and then we'd have some mess indeed, figuring out how much and how far the contraction had taken effect before the ship once again changed velocity. At a simpler level, of course, contraction along the line of movement implies faster than light transit of information if the contraction is instantaneous, or at least faster than light. In any case, we'd certainly see some calamitous effects were objects other than light moving at high v anywhere in the near universe, wouldn't we? If SR were correct. ============================================================ Summary. ============================================================ For our three possibilities in the contraction circus, (I) The whole universe, parallel to the line of a moving object's direction contracts, and why wouldn't time also dilate universally? (II) The whole universe contained in a cylinder centered on the moving object and extending forewards and rearwards contracts, and would yield stellar catastrophes we'd almost surely have seen by now. (III) The moving object only contracts, and SR's claim about transit time differences would be invalid. The less unlikely possibility seems to be the one where you not only couldn't tell there had been contraction, but you'd be darn silly saying there had been. Then again, that last is the standard SR position, isn't it? The contractions don't really occur, they're just observational differences (which you couln't see in the whole universe case). That's what SRians on these newsgroups say; and they also say the time differences are real and lasting, except when they aren't. <g> User Contributions:Top Document: Einstein (1905) Absurdities Previous Document: 15. The "brag about your absurdities" absurdity. Next Document: 16. Einstein's anti-simultaneity argument. Single Page [ Usenet FAQs | Web FAQs | Documents | RFC Index ] Send corrections/additions to the FAQ Maintainer: Thnktank@concentric.net (Eleaticus)
Last Update March 27 2014 @ 02:12 PM
|
Comment about this article, ask questions, or add new information about this topic: