On Monday, January 6, 2025 at 10:30:58 PM UTC-7 Brent Meeker wrote:

On 1/6/2025 3:03 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:

      On Monday, January 6, 2025 at 3:31:12 PM UTC-7 Brent Meeker wrote:

On 1/5/2025 9:02 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:

      On Sunday, January 5, 2025 at 9:43:47 PM UTC-7 Brent Meeker wrote:

             On 1/5/2025 7:44 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:

> You claim there is no objective fact. The car fitted in the garage. 
> But that's only from the garage frame. 
If it's from only one frame and not another, that's the definition of 
"not objective".  It's not fact.  It's subjective perception. 

Brent


You truncated my statement. You showed the car fits in one frame
and not the other (the car frame). The paradox is based on the belief
that this is impossible. Disproving this belief is required to resolve
the paradox. AG

I've shown that it fits in one frame and not the other. 


*We're in agreement! AG *
       

If your belief is irrational, that's not a paradox, it's just a false 
belief.


*It might be a false belief. I'll grant you that. But can you prove it 
false? *

I can't if you won't say what you belief is.  If your belief is that it 
cannot be the case that the car fits in the garage frame and not in the car 
frame, then I have proven it false.  You have not pointed out a flaw in my 
proof.  You just make vague assertions of you opinion  like " I don't think 
this issue has been adequately resolved".

Brent


*I am not sure what I believe. I am open to alternatives. But I don't see 
that you proved anything. The apparent paradox arose because the results of 
SR seemed untenable, that is, false. Then you used SR to affirm something 
in doubt. So your logic is circular. AG *


*That's the issue which must be addressed, rather than assuming it false 
and using SR to get the result already known by a thought experiment just 
assuming length contraction. You could be on a slippery slope, being so 
sure SR is correct that you use it assuming its predictions must be true. 
Personally, I think SR is OK and want it to be OK, but I don't think this 
issue has been adequately resolved. AG*

*Quentin; thanks for your thoughtful reply. I'll reply to it later. AG*

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/cc47acc2-cf0e-477c-96ab-3f0cdd6fe932n%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to