I'm trying to understand special relativity well enough to explain it to others, ANY others, including myself. I am trying to use Robert Resnick's Introduction to Special Relativity to inform my thinking. In introducing length contraction, he introduces L' as the length measured by an observer in the moving frame and then inserts this result in the Lorentz transformation equation to find L, the length measured by an observer in the stationary frame. (section 2.3 p. 62) Why does he not use the inverse transformation Directly? (Yes, I know: doing so would give length dilation) For time dilation, he does use the inverse transformation directly and gets time dilation, but if he followed the same procedure as he did for length contraction, he would get time contraction.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

My instinct is that if the observer in S' measures L' and (delta x)' while the observer in S measures L and (delta x). To go from S' measurements to S measurements, the most direct rout in the Inverse Transformation while to to from S measurements to S' measurements, the most direct route is the Transformation.

I realize that I am missing a major conceptual point here and am grateful in advance for any help you can give me. Thank you

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Length contraction and time dilation from Lorentz S

Have something to add?

Draft saved
Draft deleted

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**