Nah, I’m missing nowt. How do you explain the path lengths?
Aaaaahhhhhh, therein lies the crux of the matter.
The fact is that because the light travels in a straight line all the time, it hits the opposite wall always at the same time whether the box stand still, goes up, or goes down, and the light beam will always hit the opposite wall at exactly the same time, because the distance between the walls remains the same regardless of the box’s motion.
But to the man in the box it will appear that the light is diagonal or curved and follow an apparent longer path to the opposite wall which seems to produce a paradox.
The following is my own speculation but I believe it follows sound physics.
Here is where the motion of the box becomes important . The faster the box travels, the more time slows down the inside the box and the light will hit the wall inside the box in the same amount of (slowed down) recorded time as the (regular) recorded time observed from outside the box.
Chew on that for a moment… 
My take is that they’re quantized, so they are all the same length.
1 Like
It reminds me of that famous paradox where regardless if you walk or run up an escalator travelling at SOL, you get to the top at the same time.
1 Like
If the elevator walls were CCD covered in a grid, the same number of devices would would be fired ‘o’ assuming one perpendicular photon per CCD
oooooo static
o
xo
xxo
xxxo
xxxxo
xxxxxo at constant near luminal velocity
o
xo
x
xxo
x
x
x
xxxo
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
xxxxo
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
xxxxxo at accelerating near luminal velocity
[quote=“martin-peter-clarke, post:123, topic:6389”]
My take is that they’re quantized, so they are all the same length.
I like that interpretation
stationary box; [ x x x x x x x x x ] <--------- X (light source)_
moving box; ----[ x
--------------------[–x
--------------------[----x
--------------------[------x
--------------------[--------x
--------------------[----------x
--------------------[------------x
--------------------[--------------x
--------------------[----------------x] <--------- X (light source)
Same distance same time. The illusion is a continuous line, but it is quantized .
1 Like
You cannot progress up an escalator moving at SOL faster than it can. All you can do is jump up and down, run on the spot more. No paradox.
Right, at SOL relativity stops and in a vacuum there would be perfect synchronicity. i.e. “entanglement” ?
Why do you ask? I don’t see any connection whatsoever to my statement of fact.
At SOL time becomes irrelevant. Hence entanglement becomes possible? Maybe?
What’s the connection?
If there is no time then everything happens all at once in different spatial coordinates.
What’s that got to do with being synchronized on an escalator of light?
Without Temporal separation, Spatial distance disappears and there is only a singularity
David Bohm “Wholeness and the Implicate Order”
At SOL, it doesn’t matter if you walk or run. You get there at the same time.
Sorry, I don’t understand.
If time stands still there are no spacetime coordinates . There are only space coordinates and everything is One timeless expanding wholeness
I’m sure it is, I just can’t see the connection.
Truly, if you are interested in pursuing this, do read David Bohm’s “Wholeness and the Implicate Order”
Here is free PDF;
http://www.gci.org.uk/Documents/DavidBohm-WholenessAndTheImplicateOrder.pdf
What’s the connection with running faster on the spot at the SOL?
If I travel at SOL and time stands still a twelve noon on earth, I could travel anywhere on earth and arrive at twelve noon at any and all destinations I wanted to visit.
It would not be temporal travel but timeless spatial travel. I can move but everything else stands still frozen in the same present moment. That’s why it would make no difference if I was travelling at SOL, if I walked or ran. I’d get there always at the same time.
The speculation is that if we could go faster than SOL, we could be travelling back in time on earth . IOW we would see people walking backwards, like playing a movie backward.
But I believe that would create an immediate paradox. Trying to rewind and going backwards in time requires the reassembly of all prior change in space as well, and to me that seems physically impossible.
Althoygh David Bohm demonstrated that if rewinding is slow and without turbulence , physical change can be reversed.
He demonstrated this in the famous glycerine experiment where he slowly wound colored droplets in a bath of glycerine, any when reversing the process the original droplets could be restored to their original state as when they were introduced into the glycerine. The process is called “laminar flow”
The strange thing is while can rewind spactial change, we are still going forward in time.