🚀 go-pugleaf

On Jun 11, 11:58 pm, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/
>
> http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/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. Now someone takes the pole and tries to run (at nearly the
> speed of light) through the barn with the pole horizontal.  Special
> Relativity (SR) says that a moving object is contracted in the
> direction of motion: this is called the Lorentz Contraction.  So, if
> the pole is set in motion lengthwise, then it will contract in the
> reference frame of a stationary observer.....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.  The
> runner emerges from the far door unscathed.....If the doors are kept
> shut the rod will obviously smash into the barn door at one end.  If
> the door withstands this the leading end of the rod will come to rest
> in the frame of reference of the stationary observer.  There can be no
> such thing as a rigid rod in relativity so the trailing end will not
> stop immediately and the rod will be compressed beyond the amount it
> was Lorentz contracted.  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."
>
> The premise on which this conclusion is based is Einstein's 1905 light
> postulate so if rationality in science had not been destroyed,
> Einsteinians would have presented the above deduction as REDUCTIO AD
> ABSURDUM and, accordingly, would have rejected the light postulate as
> false. In the era of Postscientism the compressed 80m long pole inside
> the 40m long barn can only be a glorious manifestation of the validity
> of Divine Albert's Divine Theory.
>
> Pentcho Valev
> pva...@yahoo.com
What is "barn"? Why did you chose a "barn" if it is just a prob? Why
not just say "an arbitrary object"?