The evolution of scientific thought from Newton to EinsteinD'Abro, A. (Aram)
Science
The evolution of scientific thought from Newton to Einstein
D'Abro, A. (Aram)
Relativity (Physics); Science -- Methodology
In Einstein’s theory, however, the significance of the transformations
is entirely different. It will be remembered that in ordinary
language these transformations implied the FitzGerald contraction
[Pg 145]
and the slowing down of time. In Lorentz’s theory these modifications
arose as a result of a real velocity through the ether; and though
it was impossible for the observer in the moving frame to detect
their presence, yet in spite of all they were physically real. In
Einstein’s theory, on the other hand, velocity through the ether
being meaningless, the modifications arise only as a result of the
relative motion of one frame with respect to the other, and are thus
due to conditions of observation and not to any intrinsic change.
For instance, if in any two Galilean frames originally at relative
rest, two identical clocks and two identical cubes are placed, and if
then the two frames are set in relative motion, either observer would
discover as a result of his measurements that the other man’s clock had
slowed down and that his cube had become flattened in the direction
of the relative motion. Nothing would have happened to the cubes and
clocks; only the conditions of observation would have been changed.
Expressed mathematically, this means that the variable which
enters into the Lorentz transformations now stands for the relative
velocity of one frame with respect to the other, and no longer for
velocity through the ether. In this measure the transformations
of Einstein’s theory, though identical in appearance with those
of Lorentz’s, are far different in meaning. To avoid confusion,
the appellation Einstein-Lorentz or Lorentz-Einstein
transformations is accordingly often made use of.[45]
There is still a further difference, a most important one,
distinguishing the implications of the transformations in the two
theories. In Lorentz’s theory there was a privileged observer situated
in the frame at rest in the ether. In Einstein’s theory there is no
such privileged observer; for since a privileged state of rest in the
ether is meaningless, all observers in Galilean frames are on the same
footing. Hence, Lorentz’s distinction between the true time of the
frame at rest and the distorted, local or electromagnetic times of the
frames in motion through the ether loses its significance. Henceforth,
all these so-called local times given by the Lorentz transformations
constitute the true times lived, sensed and experienced by the
respective observers in their respective Galilean frames.
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