It's length contracted simply due to simultaneity breaking down. Moving objects has different times depending on where in its length; back side happens later than the front side, and you can check via lorenz transformation. Stationary observers can only perceive just a single instant of time, hence the contraction.
11 months ago | 18
I listened to stephen wolfram when he spoke about computational limits and he claims it fits: more computationally intesive place less space to traverse, slower clocks.
9 months ago | 0
I wrote a paper in Physics Essays back in 2022 that may interest you: "Classical Doppler Shift Explains the Michelson-Morley Null Result". (I'm not going to link to it because I think YouTube bans comments with links, but you can google it and find the paper online.) In my paper, I show how Doppler shift explains the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment by deriving the equation for Doppler shift at a general angle, then applying this formula to the interferometer in the experiment. I also derive the equation for transverse Doppler shift in your video as a special case of the general formula. See figure 12 if you're impatient. In my opinion, "relativistic" experiments are absolutely explained by classical wave mechanics.
10 months ago | 0
All relativistic effects are just a consecuence of how rotations work in pseudo-Riemannian geometry and how observers perceive it. This is a simple and mathematically rigorous explanation that requires the fewest assumptions. This point of view is leading in modern science, and I cannot disagree with it.
11 months ago | 1
I really do not know what to think about all this. To me, the invariance of the speed of light is still a great mystery. As to how space contracts, it is yet something my brain should start considering. So many questions and so few answers, if not none. Most people do physics only because they wish to know “how”, “how much does it measure” or even “what is the equation that describes it”. To me physics is more philosophical than that. I really do not care about how many amps is going through a conductor. I care about why are amps flowing inside the conductor. It doesn’t matter if gravity on earth’s surface measures ~9.81m/s^2, what matters is really what is causing the gravity to act the way it is. I guess I could be happy by just accepting and quantifying things, like everyone does, but, in the end, when I was conceived into this world, I chose to question the nature of things. Sometimes I wish I could just go back and be happy with “how many amps” or “how fast”. My mind would be at peace if I was normal. I guess this has gotten personal in the end, but what was asked is basically how I feel about everything. Can’t wait for the video.
11 months ago | 2
I could probably vacillate on this depending on the time of day, how hungry or sleepy I am, the weather lol. I make no pretensions to philosophical consistency.
10 months ago (edited) | 1
Dependent on both the first two options. It's coordinative, yet real.
10 months ago | 0
I believe that the Lorentz transformation is physically correct. Length contraction as well as time dilation and relativity of simultaneity follow from it (they are expressed in the transformation). Yet I still struggle with their interpretation. I tend to think that they are effects caused by what we perceive or conclude will happen in another inertial frame of reference, different from ours, at points in spacetime separate from us. I don't believe that these effects are "physical" or "real" in the sense that the distance between atoms actually shrinks when viewed from outside or something similar.
9 months ago | 0
Based on a monetary strange thought, I have to wonder if there is a relationship between the conservation of energy & local time/space curvature where a body in motion tends to stay in motion, essentially falling towards curvature it never reaches and this local curvature results in time dilation & length contraction
9 months ago | 0
Length contraction does occur, but mainly as a function of input energy, like a plasmoid contacts when the input energy increases. For example, an object can contract due to an increased velocity WRT the ether medium. Length contraction has nothing to do with Einstein's failed 2nd postulate of his failed Special Theory. Both Einstein and Lorentz, from whom Einstein plagiarized as time-dilation derivation, use substitutions which make their derivations invalid when two objects move or accelerate WRT each other.
11 months ago (edited) | 0
I feel like it can be real, but not physical, from an outside observer, the contraction is happening but it does not impact anything physically in the point of view of who it is happening to
11 months ago | 0
Can someone explain what the contradiction between the first two is?
11 months ago | 0
Hate to break it to the half who voted for “purely coordinative” but the frame invariance of light speed is convention — based on observers choosing epsilon values 1/2 for synchronizing their clocks. A different synchronization convention does NOT lead to light speed invariance, however length contraction (and time dilation) still always appears no matter what convention one chooses. The implication of this of course is that length contraction (and time dilation) are both indeed physically real phenomena.
11 months ago | 1
Hello Dialect et al. In your alternate view of the physics related to relativity, do you have room for faster-than-light travel and if so would that mean going backwards in time?
9 months ago | 0
Real length doesn’t contract. It’s only the perceived / measured length that contracts. External reality should not be confused with our measure of it.
10 months ago | 0
Length contraction must occur because we are measuring lengths in at least one coordinate system. If the coordinate system contracts, so do the lengths. But at the same time we cannot say that it is physically real effect. Because the coordinate systems do not exist as physically real.
11 months ago | 0
I choose (B). If the only thing that was significant about Lorentz Transformations was that the speed of light was left invariant, then sure, length contraction would be purely coordinative . But, Lorentz Transformations are also the correct transformations between inertial frames (those frames in which physical laws like NLM take their simplest form). Each inertial coordinate system is an equally valid way to describe motion. Hence, a rod moving w.r.t to an inertial frame is length contracted in the true PHYSICAL sense.
11 months ago | 1
I bet it's related to the observer problem in QM. On the one hand, you have the “outside world” in which a physical phenomenon occurs. On the other hand, you have the internal model of the observer. We do have a very good understanding of the interplay between the two (Active Inference). The ultimate nature is that interplay and what it means to be an observer.
11 months ago | 1
I always kind thought it had to do with the relationship between Time, Distance, and Velocity, but i dont know enough lol
11 months ago | 0
Dialect
What do you believe to be the ultimate nature of length contraction?
11 months ago | [YT] | 63