Taking all this into account, and doing prodigies of mathematical
skill of which we have sufficiently indicated the object, Einstein
has succeeded in expressing the law of gravitation in a completely
invariant form.
In calculating, on the ground of Newton’s law, the “Interval” of
two astronomical events—for instance, the successive falls of two
meteorites into the sun—we should find that the “Interval” has not
precisely the same value for observers who are moving at different
velocities.
With the new form given to the law by Einstein the difference
disappears. The two laws, however, differ little from each other, as
was to be expected in view of the accuracy with which astronomers found
Newton’s law verified during a couple of centuries. The improvement
made in Newton’s law by Einstein means, in a word (and to use the old
language of the Euclidean universe), that we consider the law accurate
with the reserve that the distances of the planets from the sun are
measured by a scale which decreases slightly in length as the sun is
approached.
* * * * *
It is surprising that Newton and Einstein agree in expressing the
movements of gravitating stars in an _almost_ identical form,
because their starting-points are very different.
Newton starts from the hypothesis of absolute space, the empirical
laws of the motions of the planets expressed in Kepler’s laws, and
the belief that gravitational attraction is a force proportional to
mass. Einstein, on the other hand, in making his calculations starts
from the conditions of invariance which we indicated. He starts, in a
sense, from the philosophical principle or postulate or impulse to hold
that the laws of nature are invariant and independent of the point of
view—irrelative, if I may use the word.
Einstein even abandons the hypothesis which ascribed the curving of
gravitational paths to a distinct force of attraction. Yet, starting
from a point of view so different from that of Newton, and one that
seems at first less overloaded with hypotheses, Einstein reaches a law
of gravitation which is _almost_ identical with Newton’s.
This “almost” is of immense interest, because it enables us to test
which is the accurate law, that of Newton or that of Einstein. They
give the same results when there is question of velocities that are
feeble in comparison with that of light, but their results differ a
little when there is question of very high velocities. We have already
seen that, near the sun, light itself is bent out of its course in
exact conformity with Einstein’s law, and in a way that Newton’s law
did not predict as such.
But there is another divergence between the two laws. According to the
Newtonian law the planets revolving round the sun describe ellipses
which—neglecting the small perturbations due to the other
planets—have a rigorously fixed position.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account