- #1
darkchild
- 155
- 0
I was reviewing this concept last night, and it occurred to me that the statement
Two spatially separated events simultaneous in one reference frame are not simultaneous in any other inertial frame moving relative to the first
is not specific enough. If the simultaneous (as seen in S) events occur along an axis that is perpendicular to the direction of motion of the second reference frame S', won't they also appear simultaneous in S'?
It seems like the paragraphs and paragraphs used to explain this phenomenon are a complicated way of saying that events that are simultaneous in one frame S are not simultaneous in another frame moving with respect to the first S' because the moving frame S' is moving toward one of the events and away from the other, thus inducing an observed time delay between the closer event and the further event, in which case the axis along which the events occur is a crucial factor.
Two spatially separated events simultaneous in one reference frame are not simultaneous in any other inertial frame moving relative to the first
is not specific enough. If the simultaneous (as seen in S) events occur along an axis that is perpendicular to the direction of motion of the second reference frame S', won't they also appear simultaneous in S'?
It seems like the paragraphs and paragraphs used to explain this phenomenon are a complicated way of saying that events that are simultaneous in one frame S are not simultaneous in another frame moving with respect to the first S' because the moving frame S' is moving toward one of the events and away from the other, thus inducing an observed time delay between the closer event and the further event, in which case the axis along which the events occur is a crucial factor.
Last edited: