From my interpretation of it, it seems to be just a quirk of how humans see things; namely that light from the thing being seen must hit a person’s eye(s).
Given this, it would make sense that M’ saw flash B first, since the light from B has to travel less distance to M”s eyes than the light from flash A (because M’ is traveling right at a high speed). While with M, the two flashes were equal distance from him *and* he was stationary, so the light from both flashes has the same distance to cover to meet his eyes, making it appear simultaneous.
Am I misunderstanding something?
In: Physics
Space an time are linked. So essentially what Einstein was saying is that unless two events occupy the same space they do not occupy the same time. That is to say, they cannot be *absolutly* simultaneous, though they may appear to be so locally.
As you move through space you also move through time, meaning that if we were moving in reference to the first event (or point) and not traveling perfectly perpendicular to both events, then we would see the events as slightly staggered, where as someone standing still might see them as simultaneous
There’s also a mistake I think you’re possibly making regarding light. The speed of light in a vaccume (“C”) is the same regardless of the reference point of the observer.
In otherwords if you were on a train traveling towards a light source then the light from that source would appear to be moving towards you at a speed of C. If you were then to reverse course and travel away from the light source the light would also be moving towards you at C.
This is only really relevant to your specific example, the light from the flashes would reach your eye at different times because they occupy different spaces, but your movement relative to the light is irrelevant.
I probably fucked that up somehow, but that’s basically what I remember from AP physics
Edit: a word
Latest Answers