|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Quantitative Prediction of a Measurable Quantity
On Aug 13, 2:30*pm, PD wrote in
sci.physics.relativity: I think you don't know what a physical theory is. Can you please provide a quantitative prediction of a measurable quantity? That's what a physical theory does. PD Clever Draper, I have aleady asked you and you did reply I must admit but I cannot remember your answer so again: What is the quantitative prediction, Clever Draper, for the length of a 80m long pole safely trapped inside a 40m long barn, provided your brothers have forgotten to reopen the doors of the barn "pretty quickly" and the doors don't break: http://www.math.ucr.edu/home/baez/ph...barn_pole.html "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. Of course, you open them again pretty quickly, but at least momentarily you had the contracted pole shut up in your barn." Pentcho Valev |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Quantitative Prediction of a Measurable Quantity
On Aug 13, 8:25*am, Pentcho Valev wrote:
On Aug 13, 2:30*pm, PD wrote in sci.physics.relativity: I think you don't know what a physical theory is. Can you please provide a quantitative prediction of a measurable quantity? That's what a physical theory does. PD Clever Draper, I have aleady asked you and you did reply I must admit but I cannot remember your answer so again: What is the quantitative prediction, Clever Draper, for the length of a 80m long pole safely trapped inside a 40m long barn, provided your brothers have forgotten to reopen the doors of the barn "pretty quickly" and the doors don't break: Well, of course the quantitative prediction depends on the relative speed between the pole and the barn, but there certainly is a value of the relative speed for which the quantitative prediction for the length of the pole in the barn frame is not 80m but 39m. (The "80m" you referred to in your question above is an adjective that presumably applies in the rest frame of the pole, but does not apply in any other frame.) This yields the qualitative prediction that the doors can be closed briefly without touching either end of the pole. Now, no one has done this exact experiment with a barn and a pole, though there is a clearly a quantitative prediction. Fortunately, the theory makes a number of other quantitative predictions which HAVE been tested -- and confirmed -- in experiment. The role of the barn-and-pole puzzle is then left, not as an experimental prediction, but as a teaching exercise -- which apparently still leaves some Bulgarians addled. http://www.math.ucr.edu/home/baez/ph...barn_pole.html "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. Of course, you open them again pretty quickly, but at least momentarily you had the contracted pole shut up in your barn." Pentcho Valev |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Quantitative Prediction of a Measurable Quantity
On Aug 13, 3:47*pm, PD wrote:
On Aug 13, 8:25*am, Pentcho Valev wrote: On Aug 13, 2:30*pm, PD wrote in sci.physics.relativity: I think you don't know what a physical theory is. Can you please provide a quantitative prediction of a measurable quantity? That's what a physical theory does. PD Clever Draper, I have aleady asked you and you did reply I must admit but I cannot remember your answer so again: What is the quantitative prediction, Clever Draper, for the length of a 80m long pole safely trapped inside a 40m long barn, provided your brothers have forgotten to reopen the doors of the barn "pretty quickly" and the doors don't break: Well, of course the quantitative prediction depends on the relative speed between the pole and the barn, but there certainly is a value of the relative speed for which the quantitative prediction for the length of the pole in the barn frame is not 80m but 39m. (The "80m" you referred to in your question above is an adjective that presumably applies in the rest frame of the pole, but does not apply in any other frame.) This yields the qualitative prediction that the doors can be closed briefly without touching either end of the pole. Now, no one has done this exact experiment with a barn and a pole, though there is a clearly a quantitative prediction. Fortunately, the theory makes a number of other quantitative predictions which HAVE been tested -- and confirmed -- in experiment. The role of the barn-and-pole puzzle is then left, not as an experimental prediction, but as a teaching exercise -- which apparently still leaves some Bulgarians addled. http://www.math.ucr.edu/home/baez/ph...barn_pole.html "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. Of course, you open them again pretty quickly, but at least momentarily you had the contracted pole shut up in your barn." Bravo Clever Draper! Bulgarians are by no means addled - rather, they adore you and your answers. Just a small elaboration: "the quantitative prediction for the length of the pole in the barn frame is not 80m but 39m" but then, when the pole is safely trapped inside the barn, it will try to restore its proper length (which is 80m). But since the doors of the barn don't break, the pole will be able to restore only 1 meter so when Clever Draper goes and measures the length of the trapped pole, Clever Draper clearly sees a 40m long pole, perhaps a few centimetres longer if the doors are slightly deformed. Is this realistic, Clever Draper? A 40m long pole and that's it? Pentcho Valev |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Quantitative Prediction of a Measurable Quantity
On Aug 13, 9:12*am, Pentcho Valev wrote:
On Aug 13, 3:47*pm, PD wrote: On Aug 13, 8:25*am, Pentcho Valev wrote: On Aug 13, 2:30*pm, PD wrote in sci.physics.relativity: I think you don't know what a physical theory is. Can you please provide a quantitative prediction of a measurable quantity? That's what a physical theory does. PD Clever Draper, I have aleady asked you and you did reply I must admit but I cannot remember your answer so again: What is the quantitative prediction, Clever Draper, for the length of a 80m long pole safely trapped inside a 40m long barn, provided your brothers have forgotten to reopen the doors of the barn "pretty quickly" and the doors don't break: Well, of course the quantitative prediction depends on the relative speed between the pole and the barn, but there certainly is a value of the relative speed for which the quantitative prediction for the length of the pole in the barn frame is not 80m but 39m. (The "80m" you referred to in your question above is an adjective that presumably applies in the rest frame of the pole, but does not apply in any other frame.) This yields the qualitative prediction that the doors can be closed briefly without touching either end of the pole. Now, no one has done this exact experiment with a barn and a pole, though there is a clearly a quantitative prediction. Fortunately, the theory makes a number of other quantitative predictions which HAVE been tested -- and confirmed -- in experiment. The role of the barn-and-pole puzzle is then left, not as an experimental prediction, but as a teaching exercise -- which apparently still leaves some Bulgarians addled. http://www.math.ucr.edu/home/baez/ph...barn_pole.html "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. Of course, you open them again pretty quickly, but at least momentarily you had the contracted pole shut up in your barn." Bravo Clever Draper! Bulgarians are by no means addled - rather, they adore you and your answers. Just a small elaboration: "the quantitative prediction for the length of the pole in the barn frame is not 80m but 39m" but then, when the pole is safely trapped inside the barn, it will try to restore its proper length (which is 80m). Why would it do that? The doors NEVER touch the ends of the pole. If you have a fly that flies into a barn and you shut the doors of the barn, the fly continues to fly around inside the barn, and when you open the doors of the barn, the fly flies out. Why are you assuming the pole is brought to rest inside the barn? You perhaps misunderstand the barn and pole puzzle as it is commonly taught. The pole enters the barn. The doors are briefly shut, while the pole is *still* moving at constant velocity. The doors never touch the ends of the pole. Before the pole reaches the far door, the doors are opened back up. The pole continues to fly out, never having changed speed. You mean ALL THIS TIME you've been flummoxed by the barn and pole paradox BECAUSE YOU CAN'T READ??? But since the doors of the barn don't break, the pole will be able to restore only 1 meter so when Clever Draper goes and measures the length of the trapped pole, Clever Draper clearly sees a 40m long pole, perhaps a few centimetres longer if the doors are slightly deformed. Is this realistic, Clever Draper? A 40m long pole and that's it? Pentcho Valev |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Quantitative Prediction of a Measurable Quantity
On Aug 13, 4:17*pm, PD wrote:
On Aug 13, 9:12*am, Pentcho Valev wrote: On Aug 13, 3:47*pm, PD wrote: On Aug 13, 8:25*am, Pentcho Valev wrote: On Aug 13, 2:30*pm, PD wrote in sci.physics.relativity: I think you don't know what a physical theory is. Can you please provide a quantitative prediction of a measurable quantity? That's what a physical theory does. PD Clever Draper, I have aleady asked you and you did reply I must admit but I cannot remember your answer so again: What is the quantitative prediction, Clever Draper, for the length of a 80m long pole safely trapped inside a 40m long barn, provided your brothers have forgotten to reopen the doors of the barn "pretty quickly" and the doors don't break: Well, of course the quantitative prediction depends on the relative speed between the pole and the barn, but there certainly is a value of the relative speed for which the quantitative prediction for the length of the pole in the barn frame is not 80m but 39m. (The "80m" you referred to in your question above is an adjective that presumably applies in the rest frame of the pole, but does not apply in any other frame.) This yields the qualitative prediction that the doors can be closed briefly without touching either end of the pole. Now, no one has done this exact experiment with a barn and a pole, though there is a clearly a quantitative prediction. Fortunately, the theory makes a number of other quantitative predictions which HAVE been tested -- and confirmed -- in experiment. The role of the barn-and-pole puzzle is then left, not as an experimental prediction, but as a teaching exercise -- which apparently still leaves some Bulgarians addled. http://www.math.ucr.edu/home/baez/ph...barn_pole.html "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. Of course, you open them again pretty quickly, but at least momentarily you had the contracted pole shut up in your barn." Bravo Clever Draper! Bulgarians are by no means addled - rather, they adore you and your answers. Just a small elaboration: "the quantitative prediction for the length of the pole in the barn frame is not 80m but 39m" but then, when the pole is safely trapped inside the barn, it will try to restore its proper length (which is 80m). Why would it do that? The doors NEVER touch the ends of the pole. If you have a fly that flies into a barn and you shut the doors of the barn, the fly continues to fly around inside the barn, and when you open the doors of the barn, the fly flies out. Why are you assuming the pole is brought to rest inside the barn? You perhaps misunderstand the barn and pole puzzle as it is commonly taught. The pole enters the barn. The doors are briefly shut, while the pole is *still* moving at constant velocity. The doors never touch the ends of the pole. Before the pole reaches the far door, the doors are opened back up. The pole continues to fly out, never having changed speed. You mean ALL THIS TIME you've been flummoxed by the barn and pole paradox BECAUSE YOU CAN'T READ??? But since the doors of the barn don't break, the pole will be able to restore only 1 meter so when Clever Draper goes and measures the length of the trapped pole, Clever Draper clearly sees a 40m long pole, perhaps a few centimetres longer if the doors are slightly deformed. Is this realistic, Clever Draper? A 40m long pole and that's it? Clever Draper, Cleverest Draper, why these zombie tricks again? Look at my initial question and you will see the phrase: "....provided your brothers have forgotten to reopen the doors of the barn "pretty quickly"...." In other words Clever Draper, your brothers always camouflage the idiotic implication of Divine Albert's Divine Theory by reopening the doors of the barn "pretty quickly" but only once they failed to do so and now we are discussing the consequences of their failure. How long is the pole trapped and immobile inside the barn, Clever Draper? Pentcho Valev |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Quantitative Prediction of a Measurable Quantity
Pentcho
Can you please stop for a bit, and write something about my equation. Does it make sense ? On Aug 14, 12:45 am, Pentcho Valev wrote: On Aug 13, 4:17 pm, PD wrote: On Aug 13, 9:12 am, Pentcho Valev wrote: On Aug 13, 3:47 pm, PD wrote: On Aug 13, 8:25 am, Pentcho Valev wrote: On Aug 13, 2:30 pm, PD wrote in sci.physics.relativity: I think you don't know what a physical theory is. Can you please provide a quantitative prediction of a measurable quantity? That's what a physical theory does. PD Clever Draper, I have aleady asked you and you did reply I must admit but I cannot remember your answer so again: What is the quantitative prediction, Clever Draper, for the length of a 80m long pole safely trapped inside a 40m long barn, provided your brothers have forgotten to reopen the doors of the barn "pretty quickly" and the doors don't break: Well, of course the quantitative prediction depends on the relative speed between the pole and the barn, but there certainly is a value of the relative speed for which the quantitative prediction for the length of the pole in the barn frame is not 80m but 39m. (The "80m" you referred to in your question above is an adjective that presumably applies in the rest frame of the pole, but does not apply in any other frame.) This yields the qualitative prediction that the doors can be closed briefly without touching either end of the pole. Now, no one has done this exact experiment with a barn and a pole, though there is a clearly a quantitative prediction. Fortunately, the theory makes a number of other quantitative predictions which HAVE been tested -- and confirmed -- in experiment. The role of the barn-and-pole puzzle is then left, not as an experimental prediction, but as a teaching exercise -- which apparently still leaves some Bulgarians addled. http://www.math.ucr.edu/home/baez/ph...barn_pole.html "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. Of course, you open them again pretty quickly, but at least momentarily you had the contracted pole shut up in your barn." Bravo Clever Draper! Bulgarians are by no means addled - rather, they adore you and your answers. Just a small elaboration: "the quantitative prediction for the length of the pole in the barn frame is not 80m but 39m" but then, when the pole is safely trapped inside the barn, it will try to restore its proper length (which is 80m). Why would it do that? The doors NEVER touch the ends of the pole. If you have a fly that flies into a barn and you shut the doors of the barn, the fly continues to fly around inside the barn, and when you open the doors of the barn, the fly flies out. Why are you assuming the pole is brought to rest inside the barn? You perhaps misunderstand the barn and pole puzzle as it is commonly taught. The pole enters the barn. The doors are briefly shut, while the pole is *still* moving at constant velocity. The doors never touch the ends of the pole. Before the pole reaches the far door, the doors are opened back up. The pole continues to fly out, never having changed speed. You mean ALL THIS TIME you've been flummoxed by the barn and pole paradox BECAUSE YOU CAN'T READ??? But since the doors of the barn don't break, the pole will be able to restore only 1 meter so when Clever Draper goes and measures the length of the trapped pole, Clever Draper clearly sees a 40m long pole, perhaps a few centimetres longer if the doors are slightly deformed. Is this realistic, Clever Draper? A 40m long pole and that's it? Clever Draper, Cleverest Draper, why these zombie tricks again? Look at my initial question and you will see the phrase: "....provided your brothers have forgotten to reopen the doors of the barn "pretty quickly"...." In other words Clever Draper, your brothers always camouflage the idiotic implication of Divine Albert's Divine Theory by reopening the doors of the barn "pretty quickly" but only once they failed to do so and now we are discussing the consequences of their failure. How long is the pole trapped and immobile inside the barn, Clever Draper? Pentcho Valev |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Quantitative Prediction of a Measurable Quantity
I'm awaiting confirmation of others. . .
Very interesting developments. Using something spatial (the SI unit), and with mass. . .to predict the end of time. On Aug 14, 12:50 am, Y wrote: Pentcho Can you please stop for a bit, and write something about my equation. Does it make sense ? On Aug 14, 12:45 am, Pentcho Valev wrote: On Aug 13, 4:17 pm, PD wrote: On Aug 13, 9:12 am, Pentcho Valev wrote: On Aug 13, 3:47 pm, PD wrote: On Aug 13, 8:25 am, Pentcho Valev wrote: On Aug 13, 2:30 pm, PD wrote in sci.physics.relativity: I think you don't know what a physical theory is. Can you please provide a quantitative prediction of a measurable quantity? That's what a physical theory does. PD Clever Draper, I have aleady asked you and you did reply I must admit but I cannot remember your answer so again: What is the quantitative prediction, Clever Draper, for the length of a 80m long pole safely trapped inside a 40m long barn, provided your brothers have forgotten to reopen the doors of the barn "pretty quickly" and the doors don't break: Well, of course the quantitative prediction depends on the relative speed between the pole and the barn, but there certainly is a value of the relative speed for which the quantitative prediction for the length of the pole in the barn frame is not 80m but 39m. (The "80m" you referred to in your question above is an adjective that presumably applies in the rest frame of the pole, but does not apply in any other frame.) This yields the qualitative prediction that the doors can be closed briefly without touching either end of the pole. Now, no one has done this exact experiment with a barn and a pole, though there is a clearly a quantitative prediction. Fortunately, the theory makes a number of other quantitative predictions which HAVE been tested -- and confirmed -- in experiment. The role of the barn-and-pole puzzle is then left, not as an experimental prediction, but as a teaching exercise -- which apparently still leaves some Bulgarians addled. http://www.math.ucr.edu/home/baez/ph...barn_pole.html "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. Of course, you open them again pretty quickly, but at least momentarily you had the contracted pole shut up in your barn." Bravo Clever Draper! Bulgarians are by no means addled - rather, they adore you and your answers. Just a small elaboration: "the quantitative prediction for the length of the pole in the barn frame is not 80m but 39m" but then, when the pole is safely trapped inside the barn, it will try to restore its proper length (which is 80m). Why would it do that? The doors NEVER touch the ends of the pole. If you have a fly that flies into a barn and you shut the doors of the barn, the fly continues to fly around inside the barn, and when you open the doors of the barn, the fly flies out. Why are you assuming the pole is brought to rest inside the barn? You perhaps misunderstand the barn and pole puzzle as it is commonly taught. The pole enters the barn. The doors are briefly shut, while the pole is *still* moving at constant velocity. The doors never touch the ends of the pole. Before the pole reaches the far door, the doors are opened back up. The pole continues to fly out, never having changed speed. You mean ALL THIS TIME you've been flummoxed by the barn and pole paradox BECAUSE YOU CAN'T READ??? But since the doors of the barn don't break, the pole will be able to restore only 1 meter so when Clever Draper goes and measures the length of the trapped pole, Clever Draper clearly sees a 40m long pole, perhaps a few centimetres longer if the doors are slightly deformed. Is this realistic, Clever Draper? A 40m long pole and that's it? Clever Draper, Cleverest Draper, why these zombie tricks again? Look at my initial question and you will see the phrase: "....provided your brothers have forgotten to reopen the doors of the barn "pretty quickly"...." In other words Clever Draper, your brothers always camouflage the idiotic implication of Divine Albert's Divine Theory by reopening the doors of the barn "pretty quickly" but only once they failed to do so and now we are discussing the consequences of their failure. How long is the pole trapped and immobile inside the barn, Clever Draper? Pentcho Valev |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Quantitative Prediction of a Measurable Quantity
On Aug 13, 9:45*am, Pentcho Valev wrote:
On Aug 13, 4:17*pm, PD wrote: On Aug 13, 9:12*am, Pentcho Valev wrote: On Aug 13, 3:47*pm, PD wrote: On Aug 13, 8:25*am, Pentcho Valev wrote: On Aug 13, 2:30*pm, PD wrote in sci.physics.relativity: I think you don't know what a physical theory is. Can you please provide a quantitative prediction of a measurable quantity? That's what a physical theory does. PD Clever Draper, I have aleady asked you and you did reply I must admit but I cannot remember your answer so again: What is the quantitative prediction, Clever Draper, for the length of a 80m long pole safely trapped inside a 40m long barn, provided your brothers have forgotten to reopen the doors of the barn "pretty quickly" and the doors don't break: Well, of course the quantitative prediction depends on the relative speed between the pole and the barn, but there certainly is a value of the relative speed for which the quantitative prediction for the length of the pole in the barn frame is not 80m but 39m. (The "80m" you referred to in your question above is an adjective that presumably applies in the rest frame of the pole, but does not apply in any other frame.) This yields the qualitative prediction that the doors can be closed briefly without touching either end of the pole. Now, no one has done this exact experiment with a barn and a pole, though there is a clearly a quantitative prediction. Fortunately, the theory makes a number of other quantitative predictions which HAVE been tested -- and confirmed -- in experiment. The role of the barn-and-pole puzzle is then left, not as an experimental prediction, but as a teaching exercise -- which apparently still leaves some Bulgarians addled. http://www.math.ucr.edu/home/baez/ph...barn_pole.html "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. Of course, you open them again pretty quickly, but at least momentarily you had the contracted pole shut up in your barn." Bravo Clever Draper! Bulgarians are by no means addled - rather, they adore you and your answers. Just a small elaboration: "the quantitative prediction for the length of the pole in the barn frame is not 80m but 39m" but then, when the pole is safely trapped inside the barn, it will try to restore its proper length (which is 80m). Why would it do that? The doors NEVER touch the ends of the pole. If you have a fly that flies into a barn and you shut the doors of the barn, the fly continues to fly around inside the barn, and when you open the doors of the barn, the fly flies out. Why are you assuming the pole is brought to rest inside the barn? You perhaps misunderstand the barn and pole puzzle as it is commonly taught. The pole enters the barn. The doors are briefly shut, while the pole is *still* moving at constant velocity. The doors never touch the ends of the pole. Before the pole reaches the far door, the doors are opened back up. The pole continues to fly out, never having changed speed. You mean ALL THIS TIME you've been flummoxed by the barn and pole paradox BECAUSE YOU CAN'T READ??? But since the doors of the barn don't break, the pole will be able to restore only 1 meter so when Clever Draper goes and measures the length of the trapped pole, Clever Draper clearly sees a 40m long pole, perhaps a few centimetres longer if the doors are slightly deformed. Is this realistic, Clever Draper? A 40m long pole and that's it? Clever Draper, Cleverest Draper, why these zombie tricks again? Look at my initial question and you will see the phrase: "....provided your brothers have forgotten to reopen the doors of the barn "pretty quickly"...." Then your question is, is it a quantitative prediction that an 80m pole will be trapped *intact* in a 40m barn if you decide to keep the barn doors closed? The answer to that is: no, relativity makes no such prediction. If you close the doors and strike one end of a very rapidly moving pole with the barn door, then all sorts of other physics gets involved. In other words Clever Draper, your brothers always camouflage the idiotic implication of Divine Albert's Divine Theory by reopening the doors of the barn "pretty quickly" but only once they failed to do so and now we are discussing the consequences of their failure. How long is the pole trapped and immobile inside the barn, Clever Draper? Pentcho Valev |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Quantitative Prediction of a Measurable Quantity
On Aug 13, 6:42*pm, PD wrote:
http://www.math.ucr.edu/home/baez/ph...barn_pole.html "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. Of course, you open them again pretty quickly, but at least momentarily you had the contracted pole shut up in your barn." Bravo Clever Draper! Bulgarians are by no means addled - rather, they adore you and your answers. Just a small elaboration: "the quantitative prediction for the length of the pole in the barn frame is not 80m but 39m" but then, when the pole is safely trapped inside the barn, it will try to restore its proper length (which is 80m). Why would it do that? The doors NEVER touch the ends of the pole. If you have a fly that flies into a barn and you shut the doors of the barn, the fly continues to fly around inside the barn, and when you open the doors of the barn, the fly flies out. Why are you assuming the pole is brought to rest inside the barn? You perhaps misunderstand the barn and pole puzzle as it is commonly taught. The pole enters the barn. The doors are briefly shut, while the pole is *still* moving at constant velocity. The doors never touch the ends of the pole. Before the pole reaches the far door, the doors are opened back up. The pole continues to fly out, never having changed speed. You mean ALL THIS TIME you've been flummoxed by the barn and pole paradox BECAUSE YOU CAN'T READ??? But since the doors of the barn don't break, the pole will be able to restore only 1 meter so when Clever Draper goes and measures the length of the trapped pole, Clever Draper clearly sees a 40m long pole, perhaps a few centimetres longer if the doors are slightly deformed. Is this realistic, Clever Draper? A 40m long pole and that's it? Clever Draper, Cleverest Draper, why these zombie tricks again? Look at my initial question and you will see the phrase: "....provided your brothers have forgotten to reopen the doors of the barn "pretty quickly"...." Then your question is, is it a quantitative prediction that an 80m pole will be trapped *intact* in a 40m barn if you decide to keep the barn doors closed? The answer to that is: no, relativity makes no such prediction. If you close the doors and strike one end of a very rapidly moving pole with the barn door, then all sorts of other physics gets involved. But then Clever Draper goes to the place (he is curious this Clever Draper) and measures the length of what was once a 80m long pole but is now something trapped inside the 40m long barn. What is the maximal length of this something trapped inside the 40m long barn? 40m perhaps? Special relativity does not predict even this? Pentcho Valev |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Quantitative Prediction of a Measurable Quantity
Pentcho Valev wrote:
On Aug 13, 6:42 pm, PD wrote: http://www.math.ucr.edu/home/baez/ph...barn_pole.html "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. Of course, you open them again pretty quickly, but at least momentarily you had the contracted pole shut up in your barn." Bravo Clever Draper! Bulgarians are by no means addled - rather, they adore you and your answers. Just a small elaboration: "the quantitative prediction for the length of the pole in the barn frame is not 80m but 39m" but then, when the pole is safely trapped inside the barn, it will try to restore its proper length (which is 80m). Why would it do that? The doors NEVER touch the ends of the pole. If you have a fly that flies into a barn and you shut the doors of the barn, the fly continues to fly around inside the barn, and when you open the doors of the barn, the fly flies out. Why are you assuming the pole is brought to rest inside the barn? You perhaps misunderstand the barn and pole puzzle as it is commonly taught. The pole enters the barn. The doors are briefly shut, while the pole is *still* moving at constant velocity. The doors never touch the ends of the pole. Before the pole reaches the far door, the doors are opened back up. The pole continues to fly out, never having changed speed. You mean ALL THIS TIME you've been flummoxed by the barn and pole paradox BECAUSE YOU CAN'T READ??? But since the doors of the barn don't break, the pole will be able to restore only 1 meter so when Clever Draper goes and measures the length of the trapped pole, Clever Draper clearly sees a 40m long pole, perhaps a few centimetres longer if the doors are slightly deformed. Is this realistic, Clever Draper? A 40m long pole and that's it? Clever Draper, Cleverest Draper, why these zombie tricks again? Look at my initial question and you will see the phrase: "....provided your brothers have forgotten to reopen the doors of the barn "pretty quickly"...." Then your question is, is it a quantitative prediction that an 80m pole will be trapped *intact* in a 40m barn if you decide to keep the barn doors closed? The answer to that is: no, relativity makes no such prediction. If you close the doors and strike one end of a very rapidly moving pole with the barn door, then all sorts of other physics gets involved. But then Clever Draper goes to the place (he is curious this Clever Draper) and measures the length of what was once a 80m long pole but is now something trapped inside the 40m long barn. What is the maximal length of this something trapped inside the 40m long barn? 40m perhaps? Special relativity does not predict even this? According to the bull**** of SR, It will depend on if the barn is moving or not and who is observing the measurement. If it is moving fast enough according to a certian observer, it will be shorter so then the maximum will decrease even more. It is so full of contracted bull****, who would ever want to open the doors. -- James M Driscoll Jr Creator of the Clock Malfunction Theory Spaceman |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Quantitative Drift Alignment | Rob Johnson | Amateur Astronomy | 4 | July 13th 08 09:46 PM |
quantity totally calculates Alexandra's agent | Ayman Alhadin Al Nami | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | August 15th 07 05:57 AM |
NASA has recently answered with a world press release to the prediction of a mega tsunami, created by a possible impact of a fragment of the comet SW-3 on MAY 25, 2006 in the Atlantic Ocean. This prediction, based on a clear and precise psychic commu | [email protected] | Amateur Astronomy | 12 | May 26th 06 06:50 PM |
NASA has recently answered with a world press release to the prediction of a mega tsunami, created by a possible impact of a fragment of the comet SW-3 on MAY 25, 2006 in the Atlantic Ocean. This prediction, based on a clear and precise psychic commu | [email protected] | Amateur Astronomy | 2 | May 4th 06 08:56 PM |
New prediction! | Santana | Misc | 5 | September 27th 05 08:57 PM |