Einstein, the searcher : $b his work explained from dialogues with EinsteinMoszkowski, Alexander
Philosophy
Einstein, the searcher : $b his work explained from dialogues with Einstein
Moszkowski, Alexander
Einstein, Albert, 1879-1955; Relativity (Physics)
_Firstly_, he might suspect--and this suspicion would be most likely to
occur to him--that his box was resting on some body in the heavens. For
if indeed the box were a cave in some part of the world, the falling of
the stone would suggest nothing unusual; it would be quite self-evident
to every occupant, and quite explicable to the physicist according to
Galilei's (or Newton's) Laws for Falling Bodies. He need not necessarily
restrict himself to the Earth, for if the box happened to be on some
other star, this phenomenon of falling would likewise occur, with
greater or less speed, and the body would certainly fall with uniform
acceleration. Thus the physicist could say: this is an effect of
gravitation, exhibiting the property of weight which I explain to myself
as usual, as due to the attraction of a heavenly body.
_Secondly_, another idea might strike him. For we stipulated nothing
about the position of the box, and assumed only that it was to exist
"somewhere in the universe." The physicist in the box might reason as
follows:
Supposing I am separated by incalculable distances from every attracting
heavenly body, and supposing gravitation existed neither for me nor for
the stone which I release from my hand, then it would still be possible
for me to give a complete explanation of the phenomena I observe. I
should only have to assume that the body is moving with uniform
acceleration "upwards." The motion previously interpreted by me as a
falling "downwards" need not take place at all. The stone, as an _inert_
body, could persist in its position (relative to the box or the
observer), and would, in spite of this, show exactly the same behaviour
when the box moves with acceleration upwards as if it were falling with
increasing velocity downwards.
Now since our physicist has no system which might serve for reference
and orientation, and since in his box which is shut off from the
universe he has no means at his disposal of determining whether he is in
the sphere of influence of an attracting heavenly body or not, both the
above explanations are feasible for him and both are equally valid, and
it is impossible for him to come to a decision in his choice. He can
interpret the acceleration in either way, as being upwards or downwards,
connected to one another by relativity; a fundamental reason for
preferring one interpretation to the other cannot be furnished, since
the phenomenon of falling is represented unchanged whether he assumes
the stone to be falling and the box to be at rest, or vice versa. This
may be generalized in these words:
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