This paper by Cacioppo and Gangopadhyaya deals with two variations on the Pole and Barn paradox. Both paradoxes are successfully resolved. However, with regard to the first paradox, an electromagnetic wave comes into being in one frame, but not in the other. I consider this to be a paradox in its own right. The scenario is a battery which slides on a rail. At one end of the battery is the positive terminal; the negative terminal is at the other end. There is a small gap between each terminal and the rail. At a certain spot on the rail is a copper plate. The rest length of the plate is the same as the rest length of the battery. The thickness of the plate is the same as the gap between the terminals and the rail. The battery moves along the rail at some fraction of light speed. An observer at rest on the rail will find that the battery is shorter than the plate, so that for some elapsed time both terminals are in contact with the plate. An observer at rest on the battery will find that the plate is shorter than the battery, so that there is never a time at which both terminals are in contact with the plate. The paradox is presented this way: In the rail frame, the battery is shorted, but in the battery frame it is not. The paradox is resolved by this note: "[In the rail frame a] circuit is not made until the negative terminal reaches the copper section, at which time the information that the negative terminal is now on the copper section must reach the forward (positive) terminal in order for the circuit to be completed." It is then shown that the information, which travels at the speed of light, cannot reach the positive terminal before it loses contact with the plate. Hence, the battery is not shorted. While it is true to say that the battery is not shorted, that is not the whole story. The information that the second terminal has come into contact with the plate travels from terminal to terminal in the form of an electromagnetic wave. That wave comes into existence at the instant the rear terminal makes contact with the plate, and ceases to exist when the front terminal loses contact with the plate. In the battery frame, there is never a time when both terminals are in contact with the plate. The electromagnetic wave is a physical entity that exists in the rail frame, but not in the battery frame. Have I got this right?