It follows from the ambiguity of simultaneity between distant events
that we cannot speak unambiguously of "the distance between two
bodies at a given time." If the two bodies are in relative motion,
a "given time" will be different for the two bodies and different
again for other reference-bodies. It follows that such a conception
cannot enter into the correct statement of a physical law. On this
ground alone, we can conclude that the Newtonian form of the law of
gravitation cannot be quite right. Fortunately, Einstein has supplied
the necessary correction.
[Pg 53]
It will be observed that, as a consequence of the Lorentz
transformation, the mass of a body will not be the same when it is
in motion relatively to the reference-body as when it is at rest
relatively to it. The mass of a body is inversely proportional to the
acceleration produced in it by a given force, and two reference-bodies
in uniform relative motion will give different results for the
acceleration of a third body. This is obvious as a consequence of
the FitzGerald contraction. The increase of mass with rapid motion
was known experimentally before the special theory of relativity had
explained it; it is very marked for velocities such as those attained
by -particles (electrons) emitted by radio-active bodies,
since these velocities may be as great as 99 per cent, of the velocity
of light. This change of mass, like the FitzGerald contraction, seemed
strange and anomalous until the special theory of relativity explained
it.
One more point is important as showing how easily what seems axiomatic
may be false: it concerns the composition of velocities. Suppose three
bodies moving uniformly in the same direction: the velocity of the
second relatively to the first is , that of the third relatively
to the second is . What is the velocity of the third relatively to
the first? One would have thought it must be , but in fact it
is:
It will be seen that this ; if or , it
is , otherwise it is less than . This is an illustration of
the way in which the velocity of light plays the part of infinity in
relation to material motions.
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