|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Einsteinians Trap Unlimitedly Long Objects Inside Unlimitedly Short Containers
Einstein's false constant-speed-of-light postulate entails that unlimitedly long objects can gloriously be trapped, "in a compressed state", inside unlimitedly short containers:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/De9fBJwWkAEMaXZ.jpg "These are the props. You own a barn, 40m long, with automatic doors at either end, that can be opened and closed simultaneously by a switch. You also have a pole, 80m long, which of course won't fit in the barn. [...] So, as the pole passes through the barn, there is an instant when it is completely within the barn. At that instant, you close both doors simultaneously, with your switch. [...] If it does not explode under the strain and it is sufficiently elastic it will come to rest and start to spring back to its natural shape but since it is too big for the barn the other end is now going to crash into the back door and the rod will be trapped in a compressed state inside the barn." http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...barn_pole.html "If it does not explode..." - can it explode? Yes, in Einstein's schizophrenic world: "In a more complicated version of the paradox, we can physically trap the ladder once it is fully inside the garage. This could be done, for instance, by not opening the exit door again after we close it. In the frame of the garage, we assume the exit door is immovable, and so when the ladder hits it, we say that it instantaneously stops. By this time, the entrance door has also closed, and so the ladder is stuck inside the garage. As its relative velocity is now zero, it is not length contracted, and is now longer than the garage; it will have to bend, snap, or explode." https://en.wikipedia..org/wiki/Ladder_paradox https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DafYwspX0AAixYo.jpg Pentcho Valev |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Einsteinians Trap Unlimitedly Long Objects Inside UnlimitedlyShort Containers
All consequences of Einstein's false constant-speed-of-light postulate are idiotic. Some, e.g. the famous travel into the future, are deduced invalidly - they would remain idiotic even if the postulate were true. The length contraction idiocies, however, are valid deductions:
"Einstein's Relativistic Train in a Tunnel Paradox: Special Relativity" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xrqj88zQZJg At 9:01 in the above video Sarah sees the train falling through the hole - an event obviously impossible in Adam's frame. We have reductio ad absurdum and relativity should be abandoned but ... there is always salvation in Einstein's schizophrenic world. In Adam's frame the train undergoes an absurd bending (disintegration), as shown at 9:53 in the video and in this pictu https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped..._variation.PNG We have reductio ad absurdum again: An absurd bending (disintegration) is required - it does occur in Adam's reference frame but doesn't in Sarah's. Conclusion: The underlying premise, Einstein's 1905 constant-speed-of-light postulate, is false. Pentcho Valev |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Trapping Long Objects Inside Short Containers in Einstein'sSchizophrenic World | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 1 | February 16th 17 09:27 AM |
Short versus Long exposures | Stuart M | UK Astronomy | 9 | March 15th 04 01:34 PM |
Long versus short focal length refractors | Jerome Bigge | Amateur Astronomy | 26 | February 3rd 04 04:04 PM |
GTO ZOOM review (short & long :-) | Mark & Roslyn Elkington | Amateur Astronomy | 4 | August 17th 03 12:27 PM |
Short versus Long Stowaway | Rich N. | Amateur Astronomy | 2 | July 13th 03 08:21 PM |