Resolve Paradox: Relativistic Snake Cut or Unhurt?

  • Thread starter Thread starter runevxii
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Relativistic
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on a paradox involving a relativistic snake, 100 cm in proper length, traveling at 0.6c. A student attempts to cut the snake with two cleavers held 100 cm apart, leading to conflicting interpretations of whether the snake is harmed. The resolution utilizes the Lorentz transformation, revealing that the time difference between the cleaver cuts in the snake's frame results in a distance of 1.25 m between the cuts, which exceeds the snake's length of 80 cm, confirming the snake remains unhurt. The calculations involve the Lorentz transformation formula and the gamma factor, correcting earlier miscalculations regarding the cleaver's positions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of special relativity concepts, particularly length contraction.
  • Familiarity with the Lorentz transformation equations.
  • Knowledge of the gamma factor and its calculation.
  • Basic grasp of relativistic velocity addition.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation and application of the Lorentz transformation in various inertial frames.
  • Explore the implications of length contraction in relativistic physics.
  • Learn about the gamma factor and its significance in special relativity.
  • Investigate relativistic velocity addition and its effects on moving objects.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those focusing on special relativity, as well as educators seeking to clarify concepts related to relativistic effects and paradoxes.

runevxii
Messages
7
Reaction score
1
A relativistic snake, of proper length 100cm is traveling across a table at V = 0.6c. To tease the snake, a student holds two ends of a cleaver 100cm apart and plans to bounce them simultaneously on so that the left one lands just behind the snake's tail. The student reasons, "the snake is moving with Beta=0.6 so its length is contracted by the factor gamma=5/4 and its length measure in my frame is 80cm. Therefore, the cleaver in my right hand bounces well ahead of the snake, which is unhurt. The snake reasons "the cleavers are approaching me at B=0.6 so the distance between them is contracted to 80cm, and I shall certainly be cut. Use the Lorentz transformation to resolve this paradox.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
runevxii said:
A relativistic snake, of proper length 100cm is traveling across a table at V = 0.6c. To tease the snake, a student holds two ends of a cleaver 100cm apart and plans to bounce them simultaneously on so that the left one lands just behind the snake's tail. The student reasons, "the snake is moving with Beta=0.6 so its length is contracted by the factor gamma=5/4 and its length measure in my frame is 80cm. Therefore, the cleaver in my right hand bounces well ahead of the snake, which is unhurt. The snake reasons "the cleavers are approaching me at B=0.6 so the distance between them is contracted to 80cm, and I shall certainly be cut. Use the Lorentz transformation to resolve this paradox.
You have to use the Lorentz transformation to determine when, in the snake's frame, the two cleavers cut.

t' = (t \pm vx/c^2)\gamma

If t is the same for each cleaver (ie. in the rest frame) we can see that the t' is different for each of the two events because x differs by 1 m. So the time difference between the cuts in the snakes frame is:

\Delta t' = \gamma vx/c^2 = 1.25 * .6 * 1/c = .75/c

In that time interval, the cleavers move x' = v\Delta t' = .75 * .6 = .45 m. Add this to the separation observed by the snake (.8 m) to give the distance between cuts (1.25 m) so the cleavers miss the snake at both ends.

AM

[Edit: I was using the reciprocal of gamma instead of gamma. Now corrected]
 
Last edited:
I actually have the same problem as well. But when I do out the problem, I don't get the same numbers you do and I don't see what I did wrong.

I call one cleaver A and another B and set A as the origin in both inertial frames so that it's described by the 0 vector in both frames. Then B in the boy's frame is (t, x, y, z) = (0, 1, 0, 0). So if I do the Lorentz Transform with the 4x4 matrix lambda:
(B = beta, y = gamma)
[y -By 0 0]
[-By y 0 0]
[0 0 1 0]
[0 0 0 1]
then I end up with B in the snake's frame = (-By, y, 0, 0). By my calculations, t' = -By/c = -2.5 E -9 sec. I don't understand where the 0.48/c = 1.6 E-9 sec that you got came from.

I also see that I end up with x' = y = 1.25m, but it should be 0.8m I believe. Did I do something wrong and if so, what?
 
Jibobo said:
I actually have the same problem as well. But when I do out the problem, I don't get the same numbers you do and I don't see what I did wrong.

I call one cleaver A and another B and set A as the origin in both inertial frames so that it's described by the 0 vector in both frames. Then B in the boy's frame is (t, x, y, z) = (0, 1, 0, 0). So if I do the Lorentz Transform with the 4x4 matrix lambda:
(B = beta, y = gamma)
[y -By 0 0]
[-By y 0 0]
[0 0 1 0]
[0 0 0 1]
then I end up with B in the snake's frame = (-By, y, 0, 0). By my calculations, t' = -By/c = -2.5 E -9 sec. I don't understand where the 0.48/c = 1.6 E-9 sec that you got came from.

I also see that I end up with x' = y = 1.25m, but it should be 0.8m I believe. Did I do something wrong and if so, what?
I was using the reciprocal of \gamma so my numbers were not quite right (now corrected). The answer is 1.25 m. That is the distance between cleaver chops in the snake's frame. That distance is greater than the separation between the cleavers observed by the snake because in the snake's frame the cleavers are moving and the chops are NOT synchronous. Fortunately for the snake it is also greater than the snake's length.

AM
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 60 ·
3
Replies
60
Views
5K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
8K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 75 ·
3
Replies
75
Views
7K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
6K