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 short, the modifications are due to variations (as a result of
relative motion) in our space and time measurements and perceptions,
and in every case they are irrelevant to the microscopic constitution
of matter. We see, then, that so far as all these curious modifications
are concerned, Einstein s theory does not require any particular
knowledge of the microscopic constitution and hidden mechanisms that
are assumed to underlie matter. Herein resides one of the principal
advantages of Einstein’s theory over that of Lorentz; for we know very
little about the mysterious nature of electricity and matter, and were
all progress to be arrested until such knowledge was forthcoming, we
might have to wait many a day without result.
One of the chief difficulties attendant on an atomistic theory such
as Lorentz’s was due precisely to this interpretation of observable
effects in terms of invisible ones about which practically nothing
could be known and where hypotheses ad hoc had to be invoked
at each stage. As for the mathematical difficulties, they, of course,
grew in proportion to the complexity of the hidden mechanisms which
we had to postulate. Einstein’s theory is thus a return to universal
principles induced from experiment, and in this respect is analogous
to the physics of the general principles which appeared in the course
of the nineteenth century. There again such comprehensive universal
principles as those of entropy, of least action, of the conservation
of energy, mass and momentum, took the place of the hidden mechanisms
whereby the atomists had endeavoured to account for observed phenomena.
These periodic swings in the scientific viewpoint have always been
necessitated by the continuous advance of knowledge. Both attitudes
are fruitful and have yielded important results. In the present case
Lorentz had progressed about as far as it was possible to go in his
speculations on hidden mechanisms, and a theory such as Einstein’s
was the necessary antidote to the increasing difficulties which were
hampering further developments.
We have now to consider certain important consequences of Einstein’s
theory which affect our traditional concepts of space and time. The
FitzGerald contraction is no longer a real physical contraction, as it
[Pg 151]
was assumed to be in Lorentz’s theory. It no longer arises as a result
of a perfectly concrete motion of a body through a stagnant ether; the
stagnant ether with respect to which velocity acquired its significance
having been banished by Einstein. The FitzGerald contraction is now
solely due to the relative motion existing between the observer and the
body observed.
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