- #51

- 31,517

- 8,273

Probably not. Can you re-explain your thought experiment, this time carefully specifying which frame each quantity is measured in or in which frame any given temporal ordering is?You did not understand my thought experiment.

I understand it quite well. However, the relativity of simultaneity doesn't apply from a single reference frame. If you want to invoke the relativity of simultaneity you need at least two different frames. It may be that you intended that, but it wasn't clear which measurements were intended for which frames from your description.I am not contradicting myself if you understand the concept of Relativity of Simultaneity.

None of the relativistic effects are due to the finite speed of light. They are due to the invariance of the speed of light.You have to understand the inherent relativity of the finite speed of light.

For example, suppose that pre-Lorentz aether theories were correct and Maxwell's equations only held in the aether frame and that other inertial frames were related to the aether frame via the Galilean transform. In that case, the speed of light in other frames would be c+v where v is the speed of the frame wrt the aether, i.e. the speed of light would still be finite but not invariant. Since the Galilean transform holds, there would be no time dilation, nor length contraction, and no relativity of simultaneity.

Therefore the relativistic effects are due to the invariance of c, not the finite-ness of c. All of the features of relativity are effects that remain even after correctly accounting for the finite speed of light.

This is not correct. I would encourage you to actually work out the math of the Lorentz transform and see for yourself.Of course from a observer at rest the ship and the distance light traveled is the same so the observer at rest sees the two pulses at the same place. The result is the observer at rest sees no length to the ship.

I would encourage you to work out the math for yourself for this also. Light and the Lorentz transform simply do not work the way you think they do.If your assertion were true than we would not have an invariant speed of light in every frame.

If you have trouble working out the math for either of these then I can show you. But it will be more valuable for you if you can do it yourself. If you get stuck please let me know and I will try to help.

Last edited: