🚀 go-pugleaf

On Jun 12, 7:51 am, Pentcho Valev :

> You own a barn, 40m long, with automatic doors at either end,
> that can be opened and closed simultaneously by a switch.

Of course "simultaneously" has not been carefully defined here.

> 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.

Of course an instant is a time of zero duration.

> 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.

Of course these doors should open and close faster than light.

> 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.

Of course the door can't stand the kinetic energy of the rod.

> 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."

Of course this is Disneyworld.

> 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.

Ykes !