A New Thought Experiment on Relativistic Length Contraction

Relativistic length contraction is revisited and a simple but new thought experiment is proposed in which an apparent asymmetric situation is developed between two different inertial frames regarding detection of light that comes from a chamber to an adjacent chamber through a movable slit. The proposed experiment does not involve gravity, rigidity or any other dynamical aspect apart from the kinematics of relative motion; neither does it involve any kind of nonuniformity in motion. The resolution of the seemingly paradoxical situation has finally been discussed.

Relativistic length agony continued

We made an attempt to remedy recent confusing treatments of some basic relativistic concepts and results. Following the argument presented in an earlier paper (Redzic 2008b), we discussed the misconceptions that are recurrent points in the literature devoted to teaching relativity such as: there is no change in the object in Special Relativity, illusory character of relativistic length contraction, stresses and strains induced by Lorentz contraction, and related issues. We gave several examples of the traps of everyday language that lurk in Special Relativity. To remove a possible conceptual and terminological muddle, we made a distinction between the relativistic length reduction and relativistic FitzGerald-Lorentz contraction, corresponding to a passive and an active aspect of length contraction, respectively; we pointed out that both aspects have fundamental dynamical contents. As an illustration of our considerations, we discussed briefly the Dewan-Beran-Bell spaceship paradox and the ?pole in a barn? paradox.

On the Experimental Proofs of Relativistic Length Contraction and Time Dilation

Recent advances in the theory of electromagnetic retardation have made it possible to derive the basic equations of the special relativity theory and to duplicate the most important practical results of this theory without using the concepts of relativistic length contraction and time dilation. Thus the reality of these concepts appears to be questionable. It is imperative therefore to reexamine the experimental evidence supporting these concepts. The calculations presented in this paper show that some of the experiments allegedly proving the reality of length contraction and time dilation can be unambiguously interpreted as manifestations of velocity-dependent dynamical interactions taking place within the systems involved in the experiments rather than as manifestations of length contraction or time dilation.