- Forum
- Lounge
- Fascinating Stuff
- Page 2
Fascinating Stuff
Pages: 12
PS: Regarding Schrödinger's Cat - wasn't it proposed in the first place to say that a cat in a box would NOT be half dead, as a matter to point out flaws in the theory?
Yes, I believe so hanst. I think Schrödinger disagreed with this interpretation of quantum theory, thus his reducto ad absurdum argument against it.
closed account (D80DSL3A)
Re: The relativity example
If I recall correctly from the 2 courses I took in relativity in college (way many years ago) this is key to the situation. Events observed to occur simultaneously in one frame won't be observed as simultaneous in another frame that is in motion relative to the first frame.
Another point:
It is a mistake to think of one observer seeing the whole rod. Observations are made "locally". Each observer can see only what is right in front of him.
Consider 2 observers who are at rest relative to the garage (the garage based observers).
One observer notes the passage of the front end of the rod at his position and a 2nd observer notes the passage of the rear end at his (different) position. These two observers carry clocks which they have synchronized. If they find that they observed the rod ends at the same instant (simultaneously) then they may conclude that the length of the rod equals the distance between them (the 2 observers).
A pair of rod based observers (one traveling with each end) would see the garage based observers making their observations at different times, so of course they got the length of the rod wrong.
Herein lies the basis for the effect of length contraction.
I hope that explanation helps a bit. It's a tricky subject and it has been a long time for me.
| Xander314 wrote: |
|---|
| But, simultaneous events in one frame need not be simultaneous in another. |
If I recall correctly from the 2 courses I took in relativity in college (way many years ago) this is key to the situation. Events observed to occur simultaneously in one frame won't be observed as simultaneous in another frame that is in motion relative to the first frame.
Another point:
It is a mistake to think of one observer seeing the whole rod. Observations are made "locally". Each observer can see only what is right in front of him.
Consider 2 observers who are at rest relative to the garage (the garage based observers).
One observer notes the passage of the front end of the rod at his position and a 2nd observer notes the passage of the rear end at his (different) position. These two observers carry clocks which they have synchronized. If they find that they observed the rod ends at the same instant (simultaneously) then they may conclude that the length of the rod equals the distance between them (the 2 observers).
A pair of rod based observers (one traveling with each end) would see the garage based observers making their observations at different times, so of course they got the length of the rod wrong.
Herein lies the basis for the effect of length contraction.
I hope that explanation helps a bit. It's a tricky subject and it has been a long time for me.
Yes it does help somewhat - thanks.
I believe that it is however permissible to think of the "world map" of some observer, that is a complete map of the whole of space at a particular instant of time in the frame of some observer (despite the fact that the observer can't see this him/herself).
| It is a mistake to think of one observer seeing the whole rod. |
I believe that it is however permissible to think of the "world map" of some observer, that is a complete map of the whole of space at a particular instant of time in the frame of some observer (despite the fact that the observer can't see this him/herself).
Topic archived. No new replies allowed.
Pages: 12