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
Now all the conclusions we have reached up to this point are quite
irrelevant to Einstein’s theory proper. They embody the discoveries
of classical science and, while they still hold in the relativity
theory, we shall see that Einstein’s contributions to the problem of
simultaneity lie in another direction entirely. If these points are
understood we may pass to a definite example and investigate how the
physicist will proceed when he wishes to determine whether or not two
external events occurring in different places are simultaneous in the
physical sense.
Suppose that two instantaneous flashes of light occur at two points,
and , on the road; and that we wish to discover whether
or not the two flashes were produced simultaneously (always in the
physical sense). The mere fact that we might perceive the two flashes
simultaneously or in succession would not of itself permit us to settle
the question, for the order of our perceptions would be found to vary
with our position (of course only to a very small degree in the case
of visual perceptions). But suppose now that we stood at the midpoint
between and , as measured with our rigid rods. If we
perceived the two flashes simultaneously (in the psychological sense),
should we be justified in asserting that the two flashes had occurred
simultaneously in the physical sense? Classical science answered no;
for we were not at all certain that the wave of light was propagated
from to with the same speed as the wave propagated in the
opposite direction from to . Classical science assumed that
the unknown velocity of the ether drift caused by the earth’s absolute
velocity would interfere with our determinations, so that nothing
definite could be said.
But the entire situation changes as soon as we accept Einstein’s
principle of relativity and his postulate of the invariant velocity
of light. We are then in a position to assert that the ether drift,
whether it exists or not, can have no physical significance; and that
we are therefore justified in assuming that the rays of light are
propagated with the same speed in all directions. If this is the case,
we have a right to conclude that the simultaneity of our perceptions
of the two light flashes (in the psychological sense) ensures the
simultaneous occurrence (in the physical sense) of the two external
events, namely, the two flashes on the road.
[Pg 169]
Now, in the particular example we have considered, the observer was
able to station himself at a midpoint between the two points and
. But situations may arise where a procedure of this sort would be
impossible. Suppose, for instance, that we wish to ascertain whether
two events occurring one on the sun and the other on the earth by our
sides are simultaneous or not. How shall we proceed?
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