EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY : THE BUG-RIVET ABSURDITY

The bug-rivet paradox:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu.../bugrivet.html
"In an attempt to squash a bug in a 1 cm deep hole, a rivet is used. But the rivet is only 0.8 cm long so it cannot reach the bug. The rivet is accelerated to 0.9c. (...) The paradox is not resolved."

In the rivet's frame, "the end of the rivet hits the bottom of the hole before the head of the rivet hits the wall" - the bug is squashed. In the bug's frame, "the rivet head hits the wall when the rivet end is just 0.35 cm down in the hole" - the bug remains alive.

Needless to say, the bug being squashed in the rivet's frame and alive in the bug's frame is fatal for special relativity. Accordingly, Einsteinians resort to an idiotic ad hoc "requirement" - the rivet shank length miraculously increases beyond its at-rest length and poor bug gets squashed in both frames:

http://math.ucr.edu/~jdp/Relativity/Bug_Rivet.html
John de Pillis Professor of Mathematics: "In fact, special relativity requires that after collision, the rivet shank length increases beyond its at-rest length d."

The "requirement" does not save special relativity. Let us assume the idiotic length elongation (beyond the at-rest length) does occur and the bug gets squashed in both frames. No contradiction now in terms of bug's life and death but an absurdity remains:

(1) In the rivet's frame, "the end of the rivet hits the bottom of the hole before the head of the rivet hits the wall".

(2) In the bug's frame, "the rivet head hits the wall when the rivet end is just 0.35 cm down in the hole". That is, the rivet head hits the orifice of the hole before the end of the rivet hits the bottom.

It is easy to imagine an event that occurs if the orifice is hit before the bottom of the hole, and does not if the bottom is hit before the orifice. In accordance with (1) and (2), this event will take place in the bug's frame but will be absent in the rivet's frame. Some changes in the scenario are relevant:

- The hole is now 0.8 cm deep, the rivet is 1 cm long

- The connection head-shank in the rivet is loose

In this scenario, as judged from the bug's frame, the head-shank separation will be the first result of the collision. Einsteinians are invited to describe the variations in the length of the rivet that precede the selfsame head-shank separation, AS SEEN FROM THE RIVET'S FRAME. Then one could check if their description is absurd.

Pentcho Valev