Luigi Fortunati
2020-11-13 20:02:51 UTC
The bridge and the train have the same length at rest.
The bridge collapses only if the entire weight of the train rests on
it.
In the reference of the train (traveling at relativistic speed) the
bridge (contract) is shorter and the weight of the train never rests
entirely on the bridge: the passengers are safe.
Instead, in the reference of the ground, the train is shorter and there
is a time interval in which the weight of the train rests entirely on
the bridge which, therefore, collapses: for the observer on the ground
the passengers of the train are doomed.
Who's right? Are train passengers saved or not?
[Moderator's note: This is essentially the same puzzle as the ladder
paradox, which even has its own Wikipedia entry. In fact, it is closer
to the "man falling into grate" version originally discussed by the
late, great Wolfgang Rindler. -P.H.]
The bridge collapses only if the entire weight of the train rests on
it.
In the reference of the train (traveling at relativistic speed) the
bridge (contract) is shorter and the weight of the train never rests
entirely on the bridge: the passengers are safe.
Instead, in the reference of the ground, the train is shorter and there
is a time interval in which the weight of the train rests entirely on
the bridge which, therefore, collapses: for the observer on the ground
the passengers of the train are doomed.
Who's right? Are train passengers saved or not?
[Moderator's note: This is essentially the same puzzle as the ladder
paradox, which even has its own Wikipedia entry. In fact, it is closer
to the "man falling into grate" version originally discussed by the
late, great Wolfgang Rindler. -P.H.]