Resolve Paradox: Relativistic Snake Cut or Unhurt?

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

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a paradox involving a relativistic snake traveling at a significant fraction of the speed of light (0.6c) and two cleavers being dropped simultaneously from the perspective of a stationary observer. The original poster presents the scenario and the conflicting interpretations of length contraction and simultaneity as perceived by both the observer and the snake.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of length contraction and simultaneity using Lorentz transformations. Some participants attempt to calculate the time difference in the snake's frame and question the results of their calculations, while others express confusion over discrepancies in their findings.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants actively engaging in calculations and questioning their results. Some guidance has been offered regarding the application of Lorentz transformations, but multiple interpretations and calculations are being explored without a clear consensus on the resolution of the paradox.

Contextual Notes

Participants note issues related to the use of gamma factors and the setup of their coordinate systems, indicating potential misunderstandings in applying the Lorentz transformation. There is also mention of corrections made to previous calculations, highlighting the complexity of the problem.

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
6K
  • · 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