Thanks
@PeroK . Going once more thorough the comments, I saw
@Nugatory explanation:
But, doesn't this contradict with the bellow statement?
I'm having troubles seeing those statements as non-mutually exclusive.
Well, but I guess
@Ibix's last comment cleared things out for me.
This is what I was not understanding actually, the physical change of the object length. No I get it, it's not an actual physical length change but a measurement of length in a different system of coordinates. A transformation applied to the mathematical model which reads different values from a different points of view.
That's great, so the physical properties of the object remain unchanged no matter what the speed. This is perfectly acceptable.
Still, reverting back to what
@Nugatory said earlier, shouldn't a real world array of detectors like the ones that he described, register the proper length for the moving object?
At least, I see no reason as to why the detectors would measure anything else but the proper length in any situation (since the physical properties of the object remain unchanged no matter what the speed).