This is something that arose out of a section in Richard Mould's(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); Basic Relativity.

He begins SR with his so-called "Physical Threorms (PT)," which are gedanken experiments used to show the effects time-dilation, length-contraction, and the concept of simultaneity in relativity, in that order.

I'll give a gist of his second PT:An observer, in whose frame a rod of length L is at rest, obserevs a clock that reads 5:00 as it passes the left end of the rod (event A) with velocity v to the right. By the time (say, an hour) it reaches the other end, the moving clock reads [itex]5:\frac{L}{\gamma v}[/itex] due to time dilation(event B). Both observers must agree on the "facts" (events A and B).

Now, the second observer agrees that his clock does read [itex]5:\frac{L}{\gamma v}[/itex] when the moving rod's end B passes him. But according to him, it is because a rod of length [itex]\frac{L}{\gamma }[/itex] is moving with a velocity v to his right.

Mould does not talk about how the first observer's clock appears to the second.

Now here's my question: If I were to replace the rod with two asteroids (assumed to be moving at the same uniform velocity) seperated by a distance L, with event A and B corresponding to passing asteroid 1 and 2, respectively. How would I explain the fact that both observers agree that the second observer's clock reads [itex]5:\frac{L}{\gamma v}[/itex] when passing asteroid two, since there is no contraction of length involved.

I hope my question is clear.

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

Join Physics Forums Today!

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

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

# Yet another question that is supposed to turn SR on its head

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