"kenseto" wrote in message
...

"Martin Hogbin" wrote in message
...

"Artful" wrote in message
...
Come on now .. admit that you were wrong. Its not hard. You
completely
stuffed up what SR predicts happens wrt length contraction. Now be a
good
boy and admit it .. and an apology for all your unprovoked name calling
and
criticizing my correct position would really show that you are a person
worth of respect. Or will you be a remain a laughing stock forever?

In case you've forgotten:

"There is a large class of thought experiments (the pole in the barn
being
one of them) that rely on the misguided idea that length contraction
allows
larger objects (like the pole) to fit inside smaller enclosures (like
the
barn) as a byproduct of rapid relative motion. This is not the case"

It is not clear to me who said what, but according to SR you can
(very briefly) fit a long pole into a short barn.

This is what LET says. LET says that the contraction is physical. So are
you
saying that SR also says that the contraction is physical???

You understand neither theory well enough to comment.