I Pole-Barn Paradox: Is My Understanding Correct?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter Grasshopper
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Paradox
Grasshopper
Gold Member
Messages
210
Reaction score
115
I want to make sure I have this right, and whatever I have wrong I would like to fix it.

Part I:

So in particular, I’m referring to a fast moving pole along the x-axis of an observer who is at rest with respect to the barn (the barn is a few feet away from the observer), and when the pole is at rest with respect to the barn and observer, it is longer than the barn. The pole goes through and fits completely inside the barn for a moment.

So my understanding of the situation is that, yes there is length contraction, however, to the pole, the barn is contracted as well. So what really matters is that the two ends are only in the barn simultaneously from the frame of reference of the observer standing next to the barn. For the pole, there is no such situation where both ends are in the barn simultaneously.

Part II: This time the doors of the barn are closed the moment both ends of the pole are inside.

This time, the observer sees both ends of the pole inside the barn at the same time, and the pole is crushed (because the sudden stop slows it down so that it is no longer length contracted).

But for the pole, first the door it is moving towards closes, it crashes into it, and then the signal of the sudden crash perpetuates through the pole at less than c, and when the back end the pole catches up so that it is inside the barn, THEN the back door closes.In summary, the solution to this apparent paradox is the relativity of simultaneity.

How close is that to correct? What did I get incorrect?

Thanks as always!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Grasshopper said:
however, to the pole, the barn is contracted as well.
I'd say "the barn is contracted instead", since the pole is not contracted in its rest frame. Other than that piece of pedantry what you wrote looks fine to me.
 
  • Like
Likes Grasshopper
That looks right. You can nail it even further by describing the sequence of events in each frame with some specific numbers.
 
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
Back
Top