data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1c126/1c12671285e5f1bebdb168fa36e954c861d38161" alt=""
Confusing no? We will come to that a little bit later. Before that lets grapple with the basis of this theory.
In High School and later at Technical/Pure Sciences courses in college,
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8b3bf/8b3bfb9c1cbd919bc8f4203247640a4721ace533" alt=""
1. Length Contraction: This postulate states that objects are observed to be shortened in the direction that they are moving with respect to the observer.
The problem here is that to observe this effect happening will require you run around with a measuring tape trying to observe and measure at the same time. It might not lead to the proof but it will definitely lead you to a hospital.
Simple Real Life Example: Aare bhai, just observe two guys comparing the size of their hardware, where the length will increase dramatically with respect to the other guy. Here also the observer "notices" that the length of the other person's hardware keeps getting "shorter" as the conversation "moves" forward.
2. Relativity of Simultaneity: Two events that appear simultaneous to Observer A might not appear simultaneous to Observer B, if B is moving relative to A.
Here again, for a person to understand what the postulate means, his knowledge of the Queen's language will be severely tested. Also the examples given in text books will require the poor guy to move at speeds close to the speed of light and till that happens, we will continue producing confused people.
Simple Real Life Example: Aare bhai, just ask any 2 person to recount an incident where both were present. You will be surprised at how different the same episode turns out to be. Other classic examples would be our politicians and sport persons being "mis-quoted" in the press, although there might be audio and video tapes to prove otherwise.
3. Time Dilation: Moving clocks appear "slower" than an observer's stationary clock.
This essentially means that if you move at speeds close to the speed of light, the length of a minute for you will be slower than a person who is stationary. Again the physical improbability and hazards involved prevent a student from fully grasping its meaning.
Simple Real Life Example: Aare bhai, ever felt an urgent need to take a dump and you run to the nearest loo, only to find that it is already occupied? Sample conversation:
You (outside the loo): Abe ...., jaldi ker bhai! gaa*d phat rehin hain (Translation: come out fast man!)
Friend (inside the loo): Haan bhai.. bas ek minute (Translation: Almost done. Gimme a min)
X secs pass with you prancing outside the door muttering some nice expletives while your friend is enjoying his time in the loo. Finally he decides to come out..
You (near explosion): Abe madarch*d, ek ghanta lagta hain kya hugne ke liye? (Trans: $#@#, you took an hour)
Friend (innocently): What are you saying? I was inside for precisely 3 minutes, that too counting the 2 minutes prior to when you came!
So with the simple example above, you observe this classic postulate neatly explained. In this case your friend is the static observer (as he is sitting) while you are the moving subject (as you are literally prancing about, outside the door) and so he notices that your watch has been moving at a faster rate to his and therefore, his "1 minute" was equivalent to "1++ minutes" for you.
So if you were to reword this postulate, it would be:
"The length of a minute depends on which side of the door you are"