AG, your "method" is as hollow as your understanding of relativity. Sure, you might determine in which frame the car fits based on length contraction alone, but that doesn’t address the actual issue—the so-called paradox. The key question isn’t just "does the car fit?" but why the two frames disagree about it. That’s what makes it an apparent paradox, and length contraction alone doesn’t even come close to resolving it.
The disagreement arises because of the relativity of simultaneity, which explains why each frame sees the events differently. In the garage frame, simultaneity aligns the back of the car with the entrance and the front with the exit at the same time, meaning the car fits. In the car frame, simultaneity shifts, and those same events are not simultaneous, meaning the car doesn’t fit. Without simultaneity, you have no way to explain why the frames disagree. Your claim that you "didn’t need any reference to simultaneity" just shows how clueless you are. Length contraction might give you an answer in one frame, but it doesn’t explain the disagreement between frames or why both are internally consistent. Ignoring simultaneity isn’t simplifying the problem—it’s ignoring the core of the issue entirely. Stop acting like your "method" is some genius insight. It’s not. It’s a half-baked shortcut that skips over the actual physics. If you think you’ve solved anything without addressing simultaneity, you’re not just wrong—you’re wasting everyone’s time. Le jeu. 9 janv. 2025, 20:16, Alan Grayson <agrayson2...@gmail.com> a écrit : > > > On Thursday, January 9, 2025 at 12:10:58 PM UTC-7 Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > AG, length contraction is what sets up the apparent paradox, but it > doesn’t resolve it. Length contraction tells us that in the garage frame, > the car is shorter and can fit, while in the car frame, the garage is > shorter and the car cannot fit. This sets the conditions for disagreement > but does nothing to explain why the two frames reach different conclusions. > > The relativity of simultaneity is what resolves the paradox. In the garage > frame, simultaneity ensures that the back of the car passes the entrance > and the front is at or within the exit at the same time, meaning the car > fits. In the car frame, these same events are not simultaneous, and the > back of the car passes the entrance before the front reaches the exit, > meaning the car doesn’t fit. This difference in simultaneity explains why > both frames disagree while remaining consistent with relativity. > > Your claim that you can determine whether the car fits without > simultaneity is nonsense. Length contraction alone doesn’t tell you when > events align—it only gives you the contracted lengths in a given frame. > Without simultaneity, you have no way to compare the positions of the car > and garage endpoints in time, which is essential to define fitting. > > Referencing Einstein and the Lorentz transformations won’t save your > argument. Simultaneity is built into the framework of special relativity. > Ignoring it doesn’t simplify the problem; it leaves it unresolved. You’re > not demonstrating insight, AG. You’re just showing how deeply you > misunderstand relativity. > > > I asked the question to Clark. The fact is, I was able to know in which > frame the car fitted, and didn't need any reference to simultaneity. It was > real easy. Try my method. You might like it. AG > > > > > Le jeu. 9 janv. 2025, 20:05, Alan Grayson <agrays...@gmail.com> a écrit : > > > > On Thursday, January 9, 2025 at 8:58:03 AM UTC-7 Alan Grayson wrote: > > On Thursday, January 9, 2025 at 5:40:16 AM UTC-7 Alan Grayson wrote: > > On Thursday, January 9, 2025 at 5:33:25 AM UTC-7 Alan Grayson wrote: > > On Thursday, January 9, 2025 at 5:13:15 AM UTC-7 John Clark wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 9, 2025 at 1:02 AM Alan Grayson <agrays...@gmail.com> wrote: > > *> I think I've mostly resolved this issue. * > > > *Being confused is bad but there's something worse, convincing yourself > that you're not confused when you're still dead wrong, because then you > believe you no longer need to learn. * > > > * Length contraction is sufficient to define and resolve the problem* > > > *You can't understand length contraction without understanding time > dilation because the speed of light can't be the same for all observers > unless you have BOTH, and if you have both then you must give up > simultaneity. And until you stop thinking about things happening in space > and remember that they happen in SPACETIME you're never going to > understand Special Relativity, and General Relativity would be hopelessly > out of your reach. * > > *> despite the unanimity of our resident experts, the importance of > simultaneity for solving this problem is way overblown.* > > > *As I've said before, nobody on this list has ever been able to convince > you that you're wrong about anything and I don't believe anybody ever will. > And the tragedy of that is if you think you know everything then you will > never learn anything.* > > > Amusing coming from a guy who believes that radioactive decays in the > human body produces many worlds. Carroll never justified his claim, and > sycophants like you presumably go along with this nonsense. AG > > > The LT is derived with the understanding that SR is dealing with > SPACETIME, so I can use it for length contraction as it is stated. AG > > > Apparently you forgot that Einstein assumes x' = f (x, t) and t' = g (x, > t) to derive the LT, where the primed coordinates are the transformed > coordinates. AG > > > Here's a puzzle for one of the resident experts in relativity: how was I > able to determine whether the car fits, or not, in the garage and car > frames respectively, without using the disagreement on simultaneity? 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 everything-li...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/5aeef83c-5dd9-476a-9079-03793a107d03n%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/5aeef83c-5dd9-476a-9079-03793a107d03n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > -- > 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/aa6f76b8-dc57-4930-8743-9bc472084864n%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/aa6f76b8-dc57-4930-8743-9bc472084864n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAMW2kAr0ffACYuq0p8h43%3DPu1cF4d6Ez3wtXOQVF2wJ-btGBug%40mail.gmail.com.
