On the interpretation of a spacetime diagram

In summary, the conversation discusses a spacetime diagram depicting the movement of two rods, one moving at a constant velocity of 0.6c relative to the other. The question arises as to whether the instruments on the moving rod are incorrect in measuring the length of the stationary rod to be 3.2 units instead of the known 4 units. The conversation then delves into the concept of time dilation and length contraction, explaining how the measurements of each rod are affected by their relative speeds. It is noted that the situation is symmetrical and that all laws of physics work the same way in the defined coordinate systems.
  • #71
You are correct that Lorentz considered the Fitzgerald contraction a physical deformation of the electron field about the atom. They assumed the body contacted in an aether that does not.

Einstein's length contraction is completely different, yes. If an aether exists, it doesn't matter at all per SR. Consider 2 bodies of the same frame, one in front of the other separated by some proper distance s. Now, assume yourself in motion wrt said bodies, with velocity vector parallel wrt the center-line connecting the 2 bodies. While viewed in motion, not only do the moving bodies length-contract, but all the space between them (and within them) does as well. IOWs, it's not that the moving body contracts in a space that does not ... but rather that the way in which space and time are measured changes with a change in one's own state of motion. This is why you remain unaffected when (say) 10 moving observers measure your length differently. Yet, their measurements are correct, and quite real. Theoretically, with sophisticated enough measuring systems using lasers, light signals must reveal what the math of SR predicts for any of said 10 moving measurers.

GrayGhost
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #72
GrayGhost said:
You are correct that Lorentz considered the Fitzgerald contraction a physical deformation of the electron field about the atom. They assumed the body contacted in an aether that does not.

Einstein's length contraction is completely different, yes. If an aether exists, it doesn't matter at all per SR. Consider 2 bodies of the same frame, one in front of the other separated by some proper distance s. Now, assume yourself in motion wrt said bodies, with velocity vector parallel wrt the center-line connecting the 2 bodies. While viewed in motion, not only do the moving bodies length-contract, but all the space between them (and within them) does as well. IOWs, it's not that the moving body contracts in a space that does not ... but rather that the way in which space and time are measured changes with a change in one's own state of motion. This is why you remain unaffected when (say) 10 moving observers measure your length differently. Yet, their measurements are correct, and quite real. Theoretically, with sophisticated enough measuring systems using lasers, light signals must reveal what the math of SR predicts for any of said 10 moving measurers.

GrayGhost

Nice summary of the situation, GrayGhost.
 

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
15
Views
447
  • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
78
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
16
Views
651
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
33
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
7
Replies
242
Views
33K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
14
Views
772
Back
Top