- #71
David Lewis
- 846
- 253
Then I don't understand how an object can get shorter.PeterDonis said:No. The shape of the molecules plays no role, since, as pointed out in post #55, we are talking about SR, not quantum mechanics.
Then I don't understand how an object can get shorter.PeterDonis said:No. The shape of the molecules plays no role, since, as pointed out in post #55, we are talking about SR, not quantum mechanics.
David Lewis said:Then I don't understand how an object can get shorter. View attachment 243696
David Lewis said:Then I don't understand how an object can get shorter.
David Lewis said:I don't understand how an object can get shorter.
The string in Bell's scenario doesn't get shorter, so the contracted binding EM fields have to span the same distances. Hence the tension. To avoid the complications of QM don't go down to the atomic level, but instead consider the contracting links of a chain that is forced to keep a constant length.David Lewis said:
Then I don't understand how an object can get shorter.
A.T. said:The string in Bell's scenario doesn't get shorter, so the contracted binding EM fields have to span the same distances. Hence the tension. To avoid the complications of QM don't go down to the atomic level, but instead consider the contracting links of a chain that is forced to keep a constant length.
pervect said:It's unclear to me how one rigorously deals with the quantum aspects, but this argument can go in another forum such as the quantum forum.