Is a length contraction just a visual thing?

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by absolute-space, Feb 22, 2016.

Page 29 of 29
  1. river

    river

    Messages:
    17,307
    My point in my post # 342 and #559 is true .
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2017
    river, Apr 8, 2017
    #561

  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Dywyddyr

    Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,252
    Nope: it depends on where you're taking the measurements from.
     
    Dywyddyr, Apr 8, 2017
    #562

  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. DaveC426913

    DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,960
    I don't think you guys are getting Riv.
    He's simply asserting that the relativistic observer must measure the properties of the Moon remotely.
    Whizzing by the Moon at .9999c does not cause the Moon itself to undergo any time dilation or length contraction. Those effects are a property of the relative motion between the two FoRs.
    Anyone else who wishes to stop off at the Moon (in its rest frame), while the relativistic observer is whizzing by, does not observe or experience any dilation or contraction on the Moon.

    That's really all he's saying.
     
    DaveC426913, Apr 9, 2017
    #563

  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Dywyddyr

    Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,252
    Dywyddyr, Apr 9, 2017
    #564
Page 29 of 29

Share This Page