But let us push the comparison further. Let us consider the shell fired
by one of the guns, and imagine that it hits a target at a certain
spot, and that, when it reaches the target, the residual velocity of
the shell is, let us say, fifty metres a second. I imagine the target
mounted on a motor tractor. If the latter is stationary the velocity of
the shell in relation to the target will be, as we said, fifty metres a
second at the point of impact. But let us suppose that the tractor and
the target are moving at a speed of, for instance, ten metres a second
toward the gun, so that the target passes to its preceding position
exactly at the moment when the shell strikes it. It is clear that the
velocity of the shell relatively to the target at the moment of impact
will not now be fifty metres, but 50 + 10 = 60 metres a second. It
is equally evident that the speed will fall to 50-10 = 40 metres a
second if (other things being equal) the target is travelling away from
the gun, instead of toward it. If, in the latter case, the velocity
of the target were equal to that of the shell, it is clear that the
relative velocity of the shell would now be _nil_.
So much is clear enough. That is how jugglers in the music-halls can
catch eggs falling from a height on plates without breaking them. It is
enough to give the plate, at the moment of contact, a slight downward
velocity, which lessens by so much the velocity of the shock. That is
also how skilled boxers make a movement backward before a blow, and
thus lessen its effective force, whereas the blow is all the harder if
they advance to meet it.
If the luminous rays behaved in all respects like the shells, as they
do in the Michelson experiment, what would be the result? When one
advances very rapidly to meet a ray of light, one ought to find its
velocity increased relatively to the observer, and lessened if the
observer recedes before it. If this were the case, all would be simple;
the laws of optics would be the same as those of mechanics; there
would be no contradiction to sow discord in the peaceful army of our
physicists, and Einstein would have had to spend the resources of his
genius on other matters.
Unfortunately—perhaps we ought to say fortunately, because, after all,
it is the unforeseen and the mysterious that lend some charm to the
way of the world—this is not the case. Both physical and astronomical
observation show that, under all conditions, when an observer advances
rapidly toward luminous waves or recedes rapidly from them, they still
show always the same velocity relatively to him. To take a particular
case, there are in the heavens stars which recede from us and stars
which approach us; that is to say, stars from which we recede, or which
we approach, at a speed of tens, and in some cases hundreds, of miles a
second. But an astronomer, de Sitter, has proved that the velocity of
the light which reaches us is, for us, always exactly the same.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account