Most definitely! I was in an advanced language program which was conducted completely in the target language. In a rotating order, each student had to discuss and teach a topic for one hour. The most difficult thing was teaching the meaning of a new vocabulary word in that language, not falling back on English. By doing that I found ways to better describe very difficult, esoteric concepts in a foreign language and not rely on my native tongue.

It appears history will have to make that judgement. Spending money just because it’s “science” isn’t always a good idea. There should be a payoff at some point. A case in point: nuclear fusion. A fusion reactor would change history, making cheap, nearly limitless, clean energy. But for the past 50 years, a workable fusion reactor has been “only 20 years away.” That may prove to be money not well spent. The LHC could very well have a large payoff in how humans live in the future in ways we don’t yet understand. But today, I’m not particularly sure we understand that payoff yet.

There are two things in play here. The volume changes according to the stationary frame of reference since volume is (length)(width)(height). Width and height won’t change but the length (in the direction of motion) will be shorter. Then, also, the m(v) will be higher than the rest mass. Since there will be more mass per cubic measurement, the density, which is mass/volume will be higher. (speculation) At the speed of light, the density will be undefined since mass will be infinite and volume will be zero (since the length will be infinitely small in the direction of travel; (zero length)(width)(height)=0 and infinite mass/zero volume is division by zero.

It will depend on who is doing the measuring. From the Barn’s perspective, the pole is shortened in the direction of travel so it will fit in the barn. Blamo! From George’s perspective, the Barn is in motion and is shortened in the direction of its motion. No harm, no foul! But if Gracie is standing beside the Barn getting ready to set it off is the pole fits inside, Blamo. Of course, George’s feelings will be hurt because he’s sure the pole fits inside.

I understand what Prof. Greene is saying, but I’m trying to wrap my head around the direction of the angle and its implications. Any way to discuss the math for that? My guess is it is related to light cone diagrams. But I’d like to see if I can replicate the math.

The last question from Office Hours showed the real difference between Newtonian physics and Relativistic physics. It’s not hard at all to see how Newton had no chance at getting past his observations – there was much more information about the structure of matter and energy to discover before Uncle Albert was able to put it together into Special Relativity. I think Sir Isaac would approve.

Everything in my frame of reference will progress at the same rate just as everyone in my initial frame of reference will continue to move through time at their rate. These two rates, while they won’t coincide, will not change the way they see things around them, although separately. Odd to think of time not being absolute, but it is, if you think about it, within each point of reference at the same rest velocity.

I’m still wrestling with the closure rate of a light beam fired by “George” while “Gracie” is moving toward George’s position. The closure rate of the light sent by George is actually faster than light if I understand you’re discussion earlier.