Einstein's Pole in the Barn Paradox
Vložit
- čas přidán 31. 05. 2024
- Einstein's pole in the barn paradox. In this video we talk about aspects of special relativity like length contraction and simultaneous events to solve Einstein's pole in the barn paradox.
Hi I'm Jade. I stick to theoretical physics because my hands break things :)
**SUBSCRIBE**
/ upandatom
Visit the Up and Atom Store
store.nebula.app/collections/...
**Let's be friends**
TWITTER: upndatom?lang=en
**WATCH MY LAST VIDEO**
What is Quantum Teleportation? • What is Quantum Telepo...
**MUSIC**
bensound.com
**SOURCES**
Paradox: The Nine Greatest Enigma's in Physics - Jim Al-Khalili
________________________________________________________________
Today we dive into the weird and wonderful world of relativity with an Einstein Paradox:
There is a pole vaulter on a farm, and to get to the bar she needs to run through a barn. Earlier that day, she measured the length of her pole against the barn and found it was twice its length. Is there a way this pole vaulter can fit her pole inside the barn?
At any normal human speed, this would be impossible. But what if Alberta were running at nearly the speed of light? When objects are travelling at nearly the speed of light, they contract in length in a process known as length contraction.
So if Alberta is running toward the barn at near light speed, from your reference frame she contracts in length in the direction of travel. So it's perfectly possible her pole can fit inside the barn with both doors closed.
But this still isn't a paradox until we consider things from Alberta's reference frame, as all motion is relative. From Alberta's reference frame, she is stationary and the barn is moving, so the barn is what contracts in length. So there's no way she could fit inside, as it was already too small to begin with. So what's happening?
The solution lies in what we mean by "simultaneous events". Special relativity tells us that there is no absolute time, there are only reference frames. So from your reference frame, the timer goes off and the signal reaches both doors at the exact same time. But from Alberta's reference frame, the signal reaches the doors at different times, and so she experiences the doors closing and opening at different times. This is what allows both reference frames to coexist. That time is relative. - Věda a technologie
2:40 - Picture yourself on a train in a station
With plasticine porters with looking glass ties
Suddenly someone is there at the turnstile
The girl with the kaleidoscope eyes
LUCY IN THE SKY WITH DIAMONDS!!!
our age is showing lol
and shes gone
Halfway through the first sentence I found myself smiling and singing the rest in my head. Thank you !
Now that made sense!
I loved the example of viewing the train from space. Very nice! I never thought of that.
+The Science Asylum thanks! I can't take credit for it though. I got this paradox from a book by Jim Al-Khalili and he used it in his explanation. I saw your video about this topic by the way, very nice n_n
Up and Atom Ah yes... My video was just before I finally figured out color correction, so it's the last video of mine that looks terrible. Anyway, I love solving paradoxes. This one is especially fun because there are so many variants that all need solving.
Nice to see you both at same place :)
I loved your video on this paradox a couple years ago and am now curious about Jade's take on this :)
The Science Asylum, when you say "terrible" you're very harsh on yourself.
Thank you! I found this concept so hard to visualize for so long, and this video makes it simple and intuitive.
"Told ya it was juicy."
Haroer Haktak I had to rewind and watch that part about a dozen times.
Just for that I'm subscribing 🤣
My new text tone...
Lol
" That's what she said "
I've got news for ya, Alberta is going straight through that damn door if she's going nearly the speed of light.
The doors are moving faster
yeah, imagine ~60kg going c in 1atm, that Barn is the least of her problems, poor Alberta.
Damn you, Evil D, you made me laugh out loud at 5:30 in the morning when other people were sleeping.
@@clive7394 Not possible.
best answer congratulation
my kind of physics
I shared this on facebook with this blurb:
"An Aussie lady who has an excellent series explaining physics concepts.
Aimed mostly at young people, this is a great series for confused
parents to watch with their kids when these topics come up at school, so
that the kid can understand them quicker and explain them to the
still-struggling parent.
This is a great one in the series:"
Ahh yes this would have been great when I was in fourth grade and my teacher was teaching us special relativity.
@@OMGclueless I was thinking more in the middle-school range.
Interesting to see the beginnings of a channel that is going to blow up in the future. Great work!
+Dijo John Thank you! Hopefully your prophecy is true :)
@@upandatom It is!
Excellent prediction. Person from the future here. Jade has gotten better and better! She's awesome!
@@fletchro789 Haha the potential was obvious. The video is so polished for being one of her first CZcams videos.
@@yotodine Insulting on so many levels.
Note: the doors also have to move at near light speed. Therefore they are shorter... just stay away from the hinges and squeeze in the space at the other end. Also keep running since the pressure wave will destroy most of the continent.
What if we replace the thin pole with a moving rectangular brick so vertically tall that it can’t squeeze below the shortened doors?
Hi Jade, great video. That relativity stuff sure gets weird, but Einstein was wonderful at coming up with these thought experiments to help us visualize what's going on! It was really nice to meet and chat with you at VidCon last week. Cheers, Michael
Thank you Michael! It was great to meet you too :) It's funny, there was actually an experiment that proved that the speed of light was constant long before Einstein, but nobody knew how to infer the results. Einstein actually came up with the result without ever having known about the experiment!
+Martin Popplewell
That's actually one of the issues that led to Einstein's theory of Special Relativity. Using Newtonian mechanics, time is universal, but all motion is relative - there's no such thing as an absolute speed, only how fast something is moving relative to the ground, or to the Sun, or to the Milky Way, or to a river barge, or...
Then Maxwell's equations explained electromagnetism, but predicted that electromagnetic waves would have a specific speed - not a speed relative to anything, but a fixed, absolute speed. The obvious conclusion was that light's fixed speed is relative to the aether - the medium that transmits light waves - and that could provide a fixed reference frame to measure absolute speeds against. So the Michelson-Morley experiments used incredibly sensitive apparatus to try to measure the Earth's speed relative to the aether, by measuring the difference in the speed of light relative to the Earth in different directions and at different times.
The result of the Michelson-Morley experiments was that, to the limit of the accuracy of their measurements, Earth wasn't moving relative to the aether. Of course, it was possible that Earth is actually stationary, and the whole of the rest of the universe is rotating around it, and orbiting it in various strange paths. Or that the aether isn't static, but moves with nearby objects, so the speed of light varies from place to place as the aether's motion changes. Or that motion through the aether changes lengths and masses in particular ways.
Einstein wasn't the only person who could have come up with the answer - he was just the person who published first - but his solution was almost frighteningly elegant: take the Maxwell equations at face value, assume that the speed of light will always be the same relative to any object in motion, so wherever you are, however you're moving (provided you're not accelerating), you'll measure the speed of light relative to yourself to be the same fixed value. Following through on the consequences of that, you quickly get that your measurements of the elapsed time between two events will depend on your own motion - time is no longer universal.
So for anything traveling slower than light-speed, the speeds of other objects are always relative, but the speed of light (in a vacuum) is constant. And the universe is weirder than we imagined.
And you don't care that Einstein randomly became female for no reason? Umm..... sure.....
@@randomgrinn I thought Alberta was quite charming, unlike your comment. Did you get your pole stuck in a barn as a small child or something?
I know about this paradox for such a long time but it surprises me every time.
That's because in our daily experience space and time are absolute.
@@Lehmann108 Yeah, pretty much.
Possibly my favourite CZcams video ever, that blew my mind!
That's right ladies! I'm not short I'm just moving near the speed of light!
I'll have to remember that line.
Thought it was all about the technique that counted?
Damned, misunderstood that again.
Based on the animation shown in the video the comprehension happened parallel to the direction of movement so it would make you thin rather than short. 😜
@@RupertFoulmouth yeah, it was a dick joke.
But sadly they closed their barn door before you arrived.
Einstein's "pole in the barn" is the most suggestive thumbnail I have ever seen. It casts the great physicist in a whole other light, so to speak.
This video is AMAZING.
This Brainiac is AWESOME! Gotta love her, how she explains things, makes intricate stuff "easy" to understand and makes it so it's interesting. I really enjoy every video. Trying to learn something new every day :-) Thanks!
Great video! Good hook at the beginning and delivery at the end. I was at the edge of my seat the whole time, at least from my frame of reference.
Hyper-interesting, nicely-researched, and expertly presented. Jade is very good on camera. All good wishes!
Would love to have heard more about WHY things contact at the speed of light and HOW we know this. Also, wouldn't the device emitting the signal also be traveling towards alberta at the same speed as the two doors? And for that matter, wouldn't the signal itself also be traveling towards alberta at the same speed as everything else? I feel like a lot was left out.
it's all theoretical, no? Or maybe the earth is just flat and stationary and this is all bs.
Truly enlightening and entertaining description of that Special Relativity Paradox. Well done!
Conway you are a genius!! You are a great teacher and are able to explain abstruse physics concept with very illustrative videos. I plan to watch every physics video that you will post. So far I have seen about a dozen but I won't stop until I will be able to see them all!!
Jade, you are so wonderful! I totally enjoy all of your videos! My favorite is the one on the "impossible to solve" problems where you talked about rerouting roads etc. The ideas similar to the traveling salesman problem etc. You have a fantastic way that you present yourself and you emanate such warmth and positive energy! I absolutely love your animations! I live half a world away from you so I have to thank the presence of CZcams that allows me the opportunity to connect to such an intelligent, nice, gorgeous young woman! Have you every looked into the concepts of the electric universe model? Wal Thornhill and David Talbott. I find their theories very interesting. The crux of the idea is that electricity is the primary driving force of the universe, not gravity. Wal Thornhill postulates that gravity is just a special case of electrical attraction. This could be "fodder" for many many more videos that describe an alternate point of view of the forces of nature! Thank you for being you! Keep up the great work!
If there were another person running from the opposite direction at the same time, wouldn't the doors close farthest then closest relative to that runner also? what would the runners see for what the other is going through? or can you only have 2 points of reference at a time?
Not sure but I suspect the nature of the paradox is that because each opposing vaulter has a different perspective the only time they are running at the 'same time ' is at the exact moment they pass and that moment THE door that they are travelling towards are , relative to them ,open , thus paradoxically both are open and yet closed at the same time... I think?
The order of events can change based on the relative speed of observers. The outside observer would see both runners run past each other and fit into the barn with both doors closed around them as they would be equally squished. From each runner's perspective they see the doors closing in the order 'further one then nearer one' - which would be opposite for each runner. Finally, as taken from runner A's perspective, runner A would see runner B as even more squished than the barn (as to runner A, runner B would be be moving even faster than the barn) , and so A would see B fit easily even inside a squished barn just before the far-side door closed behind them, then the near-side door would close behind A, but B would still be inside and fit inside the barn due to their super-squishedness. Then the door would open and both runners would be on their way. Obviously the same set of events would be observed if you just switched the letters A and B in the above explanation - even though they don't agree on the order of events. When things move that close to the speed of light, order of events doesn't have to be consistent for all observers. Thank you for listening to my Ted Talk.
@@docfreeman3028 Yes, you are correct. The barn and its relationship to the pole is actually physically different for different observers. There are as many physical realities of the barn as there are observers when these observers or the barn/pole are traveling at a percentage of the speed of light. It is hard to understand this because relative to the barn/pole we are not traveling very fast at all and therefore experience the "same" barn/pole. If we had refined enough measuring tools we could quantify the infinitesimal difference between observers even at relatively slow speeds.
Yeah, but Alberta would already be inside and her pole would be even shorter than the barn reference frame.
This is actually the whole point of the paradox. Every point in space is it's own point of reference. The paradox exists only when you use 1 point of reference to explain both points of references. The paradox cease to exist the moment you look at each point seperately.
Love science and love your channel, Jade! Maybe some stuff regarding quantum reality?
Jade, thank you for explaining this in the most understandable way! I think I’ve finally got it!
Let's assume that the doors don't open again.
- What if she stops as soon as she reaches the middle of the burn?
We'll see the pole expand & hit the already closed doors, but she'll see the pole hitting the rear door before it closes.
How's that possible?
- Now assume that the barn is round, with a diameter a bit bigger than the pole's contracted length, but smaller than it's normal length.
Also assume that as soon as she enters, she starts running around (still at SoL).
We see her fit in the barn & running around, but what is she seeing?
If the stop signal travels at "c", the max it can, the front of the pole leaves the barn before it gets the "stop" info. The rear of the ladder enters the barn before it finds out. To understand acceleration and Lorentz contraction, you need to master Bell's Spaceship Paradox. The result is that no object can be perfectly rigid, and under uniform acceleration, there are mandatory stresses caused solely by relativity.
Here from Answers with Joe.
I've discovered I love paradoxes too!
haha they're the greatest aren't they
This is an interesting concept, and being the kind of person that loves to think about things (especially when it comes to physics), something like this appeals to me. I had questions but after some thought, I was able to work them out.
I love your videos. You break the complex down into juicy, bite sized pieces and I love the animations not to mention your personality and genuine passion for the subjects! Perhaps it is just me, and to be clear I am not a mathematician but it seems most paradoxes are rooted in the contradictory nature of communication. Even math or the game of numeration seems to forget the fundamental role of the "counter" (the observer). I mean in Einstein's pole in the barn paradox, the definition of the terms used to pose the idea change in the middle. The doors close and open at the "same time" but time is relative and each door closes and opens differently dependent on the speed and position of the relative observer (the pole). Also, the pole length is clearly defined as longer than the width of the barn but then those terms become fuzzy when dealing once again with the relative pole. I can see the front of the pole is shorter when moving quickly but doesn't that contradict the earlier claim the pole was longer than the barn? The terms are fluid and the role of the observer is key. The same with the idea of the continuum vs the discreet in math. It's and easy thing to say something is discreet but a much harder thing to define. Pairing up oranges and apples to denote equivalency numeracy is just as hard. How do we distinguish an apple from an orange. We can agree but that is not quite good enough for math (or is it). Where is the edge of an orange? If size is relative and speed is relative then defining a thing as "bigger" or "smaller", "inside" or "outside" becomes much more difficult and so the questions using those terms are not very clear. Perhaps some wacky "external" perspective "moving" at some wacky rate through wacky "positions" may conclude the pole entered the barn but never exited or it entered it and exited at the same "time" or nothing is moving at all and the relative sizes simply change.
It seems to me paradox is rooted in perspective and reflects the contradiction of being (terms require definitions which require terms). Classic chicken and the egg. Perhaps the discreet and continuum are the same "thing" but viewed from different perspectives.
Anyway, after such long wind I want to end by thanking you for your work! It's so much fun and very informative! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!
I seen this guy in a tracksuit carrying a long stick. I asked are you a pole vaulter? He replied Nein, I’m a German, how did you know my name is Walter?
nice
@@BDRmongoose a joke by Glasgow surreal comedian Chic Murray.
It isn't just cold outside, but I also ran at nearly the speed of light!
Yeah....thats it!
This is the best explanation of time dilation _and_ length contraction I've seen so far. (My first exposure was in Nigel Calder's _Einsteins Universe_ in secondary school.)
Textbook example explained very clearly! Cool video
Wow this is what I'm looking for.Thank sister
+chetiya kavinda my pleasure :) why exactly were you looking for something like this?
Because I like to study physics deeply.So what about about you.
+chethiya kavindu I guess physics is something I find so fundamental to reality but a lot of people seem to be intimidated by it, so I'm trying to make it more accessible to people who think you have to be a genius to enjoy it.
please do a video on the spin of fermions and bosons, and explain physically that why and how these particles have half spin and integer spin
Isn’t it more of an analogy than a physical explanation?
Spin arises from the depths of quantum mechanics and electromagnetism, and can't be fully explained in a CZcams comment, but (very) briefly: particles, such as electrons, have magnetic dipole moments, which can be measured. This moment can be explained by ascribing to the particle an intrinsic angular momentum, which is called 'spin' for brevity, although nothing is literally spinning. This intrinsic angular momentum is distinct from the so-called "orbital" angular momentum (although nothing is actually orbiting, either).
That was a really cool paradox! You explained it perfectly.
Wow, cool channel! Subbed and added you to my other science CZcamsrs.
Thanks for doing what you do
Hah glad to be a part of the club. Feeling honored :)
"This is where things start to get a bit crazy" (1:20 in the video). Dunno, but seems to me that a female pole-vaulter running through a barn in which a mad scientist is opening the front and back doors simultaneously is ALREADY a bit crazy.
*Krazy
I'm a complete novice... But what happens if the doors close and don't open again? From the observer's point of view, Alberta would still be stuck in the barn, but from Alberta's point of view?
Door B would close first and before Alberta could stop and get out, Door A would close too. Then she'd have to stop running cause she'd be stuck. Remember that all this is happening at near light speed so most of it would really be simultaneous.
Henk Cilliers as soon as the door in front of Alberta closed and didn’t open again, she would have to stop running and because she would no longer be moving the speed of light, the pole would no longer be shorter than the barn from the observer’s point of view.
great question - there would certainly be an explosion (as gacekky1 mentioned), but the details are a bit tricky. your example includes acceleration, because Alberta slows down rapidly either when she realizes that the door is closing or when she crashes into the door. now einstein's "special theory of relativity", on which the thought experiment in the video is based, doesn't describe accelerations. for that, the far more complex "general theory of relativity" is needed.
Everything you say doesnt make really sense when you think of what would the other observer see. For sure Alberta has to stop at some moment and when she stops she cant fit in the barn, and as long she moves in one direction it means that the back end of the pole never will enter the barn. But the doors will close when Alberta is in the barn (from the outside observator#), so the front end of the pole has to enter the barn. so whats happening from the different point of views, when it has to come to the same situation when she stops? Here the solution, again the key is time:
From Albertas view: Because of the length contraction the barn is smaller than a half of its static size, so it doesnt seem Alberta will even get inside, but before the front pole reaches door B, the door closes and alberta has to stop. As she is stopping the barn, expands to its original size and Alberta will fit inside, but not the back of the pole, so door a will not close because of the pole.
From the outside: Alberta is contracted and runs in the barn, but she starts stopping before she fully is inside the barn (way before, because remember, the back of the pole, at the end will be outside the farm and if you look just at the back of the pole, it has to make a trajectory only in the forward direction.). So Alberta starts expanding and before the front side of the pole reaches door B, both doors close simultaneously, but door A wont close, because of the pole.
The barn would explode, and the atmosphere would be burned away.
Very, very good! I learned a lot from this video. Thank you!
Fascinating special relativity weirdness that I had never heard before. Thanks!!!
Sooooo. I think the real question now is, Did Alberta make it over the bar with her shortened pole?
if she's traveling at close to the speed of light and jams the pole into the pocket for the jump... there's going to be a HUGH explosion. and going back to non-close to light speed Alberta, the poles are made to bend and flex so the pole, when trapped by the doors coming back down, would have just bent and arched into the space of the barn depending on the strength of the closing mechanism.
Yes, as the pole turns vertical its angle of speed changes. It becomes longer and thinner.
This is a fantastic explanation of the paradox. This is at least as or more cogent than the explanation I got in physics class (I went on to get a physics degree).
I've never heard the part that the "signal" propagating forwards and backwards is why the non-simultaneous doors work in Alberta's reference frame, but that makes a lot of sense. I like this.
Great video. Cool!
Jade i think might be my new fav educational channel
The more I read/watch about relativity, the more I don't get it. 😂
Why is this 3 year old video in my feed right now? I mean, I’m glad it is, but why?
What a great explanation of simultaneity!!
Cool and very easy for anyone to understand. Good teachers are a rare breed.
So she fit's in there relatively easy, but absolutely not. I get it now. xD
*fits*
lel.
"length contraction" happens to me in swimming pools.
Boy you must be able to swim really, really fast.
@@oldtimer5111 😊
@3:50 Twist: The juicy part of the solution is the doors have windows ...and they're always open.
Great video btw!!
Excellent explanation that I'll require several more watches to understand fully. Thank you for this illumination.
All I know about Albert is, he plays cards with Isaac, Steven and Data and they're not relatives.
I also know he was born male, stayed male, did not have a blonde ponytail, and was not a millennial.
Your drawings are soo cool :)
+Chris Nostalgic thanks! I just checked out your channel it's hilarious. "PhD in little shits" haha
Haha thanks for watching :))
Every time I think I understand Einsteinian relativity, something like this comes up, and I'm confused once again. Great video!
Wow such a cool explanation! Thanks!!
Imagine a guillotine.
It is 1 light second long and the height difference between one side of the blade and the other is 1 m. Now bend the blade, so it is an arc. This way you can stand in the center exactly the same distance from every point of the blade - just like if you stood in an arena of a circus.
Now the blade moves down at a steady pace of 0.9c. All along the blade there are pins that are cut whenever the the blade meets the straight edge in the guillotine. At what speed does the information of what pin is cut travel from one end of the arc to the other end, and at what speed does this information travel to the center of the arc?
When the blade has moved 1 m down, the point where pins are cut has moved 1 light second. So when the blade moves down 0.9c how fast is this point moving? Does the point contain information (well if it is not pins, but your neck it is an important information whether your head is chopped off or not).
You need to explain that more clearly bro.
You can't have a circular blade 1 light second in diameter/circumference and have the highest edges of it be 1m above the cutting block unless it has already cut almost all the way through your pins...
For more practical numbers let's say the blade is a semi-circle 10 meters in diameter. If the highest edges are 1 meter above the cutting block then you've got 4 meters of blade already sticking through the block.
But either way, no, you cannot transmit information based on where the edge of the blade is. There is a more famous example of this with a pair of scissors a light year long, where the point the blades cross is allowed to move faster than light because it doesn't transmit information. For a much clearer example, you can shine a laser at the moon. If you flick the laser across the moon really fast the laser dot may appear to move faster than the speed of light across the moon's surface, but there's no information being transferred between the different points you shine the laser at so that doesn't violate relativity.
@@danieljensen2626 It is not a circular blade. It is a flat blade, that is bent.
Another way to explain the setup is:
Imagine a knife. Stretch the blade so it is 1 light second long. Stretch the blade so that it is 2 m tall. Now cut a triangle from the blade: The triangle is 1 m tall and 1 light second long. This leaves a 1 light second long blade that is 1m tall at one end and 2 m tall at the other. This is the guillotine.
Now bend the blade (just like you would could do with a long knife) into a circle.
@@OleTange Ah, I see, the bend is in the horizontal direction while the blade is falling vertically? That makes a lot more sense. In that case, yes, the point where the blade meets the cutting block (which I assume is also circular) would move much faster than the speed of light, but that doesn't violate relativity because the point doesn't have mass and doesn't transmit information. The information about when each pin would be cut would arrive to you at the same rate the pins were cut, but with a constant delay. For ease of calculation let's say 1 light second is the radius of the semi circle rather than the half circumference, then the delay would be exactly 1 second.
Physically you're going to have a lot of trouble getting a blade that long to move all at the same speed though. If you take a knife and swing it the force of your swing is only transmitted from your hand to the tip of the blade at about the speed of sound within the metal. That's also why you can't cheat by using a light year long stick to push a button in order to transmit information. It would take much more than a year for the far end of the stick to move after you started pushing your end.
I have wanted to know the answer to this since I hit puberty.
+Bagels Truth well hopefully now you know!
+Bagels Truth You didn't!
Love these videos.
I get more confuse than I was before :))
That video was amazing thank you
The fastest any of us have traveled? Wouldn't that be 108,000 kph (70,000 mph)? :D
Another good video. Thanks.
+Karl Kiefer haha well yes I guess technically it would be... Thank you I appreciate it :)
about the speed earth revolves around the sun, 'eh? nice one. if we're going there, might as well throw in the orbital speed of the sun around the galaxy core.. and the speed the galaxy orbits the local groups center of mass.. then..
wait a minute..
at some point we lose sight of what we are moving relative to! :P
So you can claim your questionable manhood magnitude is actually due to the near light speed velocity you have achieved.
I can't get an erection as fast as can explain the "shortage"
Very cool, thanks for sharing.
Wow, just wow !! 👏 great work
When are we going to Stop the confusion of 'light physics' (perception) and 'physical physics' (actuals) ... ? Contraction is just our perception ....
when you realize that without the physical light has nothing to bounce off of! duh
Actually no. At a percentage of the speed of light the pole really is shorter. To understand this "paradox", because it really is not a paradox, you have to understand special relativity. In short, special relativity reveals that time and space are variables that change with the speed of the object being measured. Time and space are not constant for all observers. If and when you truly "grok" this it will blow your mind. If you really want to get this, read the slim volume that explains this and offers a brilliant geometric proof, "The Universe and Dr. Einstein."
It is NOT just perception, time and space do actually change depending on the relative velocities between the objects in question.
The perfect proof of this is muons. They are formed in the upper atmosphere by cosmic rays colliding with air molecules. We know how long muons last before they decay, and in that time it should be impossible for them to reach the ground from the atmosphere even traveling at the speed of light. But they DO reach the ground before decaying. This is possible because in our reference frame time moves slower for the muons, and in the muon reference frame the distance from the upper atmosphere to the ground is shorter. Here is a video explaining this. czcams.com/video/rVzDP8SMhPo/video.html
Time changes to space and space changes to time. As simple as I can put it. ;)
Yes its a dilation effect like the doppler effect, the pole doesn't get shorter, also if she is traveling near the speed of light the doors couldn't close faster than she could run through the barn
i read this as "Epsteins pole in the barn paradox" lmao it was so much more interesting before i realized it was einstein lol
Good explanation. "Length contraction" describes the pole getting shorter, and Door A opening after Door B is "time dilation".
So the lesson here is dont run at high speeds or your pole will look shorter to other observers
Excellent! Thank you!
why does she say juicy so seductively...and why is the title a sexual innuendo
Seek therapy before you hurt someone.
HOW TF is that tittle a sexual innuendo?
Bowzin cuz it sells.uf it takes INNUENDNO to learn this is just get views its win win formula WHY NOT? STILL I LEARNT SOMETHING..IM A STRAITGRL.
Leah Hovart, the current title is fine, and I don't think it is sexual at all. The previous title was "How To Fit Something Long Inside Something Short", which judging from Jade's other videos was probably an innocent mistake.
Don't worry everyone, he is a 12y/o
I think Alberta is a distant relative of Albert Einstein.
The doppler effect in a spacial frame of reference instead of an audio frame of reference. Makes perfect sense
I enjoy these mind-bending concepts.
I always had this question, glad I found it
Great video, and a good look at what Einstein proposed. (Your background music had me searching for a ringing phone, though!)
I love this stuff. It’s juicy!!!
Thank you. I could not understand it until you mentioned the time in frames part when it actually made sense.
I never missed any video. Really it is great Delivering style is also great 😊 thanks mam from india
Great video!
There's a distinct problem with this, it's based on a perfect scenario. If Alberta was able to travel at near light speed, then for her to be trapped inside the barn, she would have to come to a complete halt, thus increasing the length of the pole back to it's regular dimensions and preventing the doors from shutting. Also, given that she is travelling at near lightspeed, both doors would have to close at the same speed or faster than her, closing at the precise moment she and the pole entered the barn AND were contracted to trap her. Since both she and the doors are moving at near equivalent speeds, surely she would perceive them to either be closing very slowly, or not closing at all.
Love u
Nicely explained 😊😊
After following your channel for a good amount of time, I stumbled upon this vid, and just wanted to say hi to the old amazing you.
I think this paradox is a good example of science trying to make their hypothesis fit the universe. Sometime in the future people will look back at us and say "remember when people used to think that they shrunk when approaching the speed of light", and laugh.
One of my favourite physics paradoxes
I was completely ok with physics .... now I realize I’m a total noob.
I love this :)
Great stuff
Thanks a lot, it was great!
It was juicy...and I am experiencing the opposite of length contraction. Thanks.
It is even more fun when Bob is running in the opposite direction with a pole of the same length and he sees the doors open and close in the opposite order!
Fantastic!
You make things look so easy ... or the other way around :)
The video is awsome. I love it very much. And I have a paradox in my mind which I heard from my friends.
It is:The Paradox of Laplace’s Demon
Excellent!
Dear Jade, I have a question for you.
When the barn is moving towards Alberta from her reference frame, shouldn't the signalling instrument also move, and have to cover the same distance along with the barn, towards Alberta?
(Assuming the signal is passed from inside the barn as depicted in the video)
Thank you
Watch out physics girl. I have a new fav! She has videos not post. Love them keep them coming. Subscribed!
Awesome! Mind blown.
Wow! Fascinating. This means time in front is moving kinda faster for the speeder, like a time travel doppler effect. This video could be longer to let some of this sink in, and talk more about the weird implications.
this is what explaining physics should be. thank you
Never heard this one before. Very interesting... thanks! :) Rikki Tikki.
Would love to hear/see your take on The Three Body problem. Either the math problem itself, or some of the juicy ideas discussed in the Sci-Fi novel series (recently translated to English).
I've been thinking about doing the three body problem. It's definitely in the maybe pile :)
Loved it.