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
Finally, if this invariant velocity were infinite, we should have the
separate space and time of classical science entailing the absoluteness
of simultaneity, length and duration. There is nothing in Dr.
Whitehead’s mathematical deductions to suggest which of these values
the invariant velocity is to have; it might even be an imaginary number.
[Pg 208]
At all events, we see that the precise magnitude of the invariant
velocity is not a matter of any small importance; hence it should
inevitably be defined by the definition. Yet this essential piece of
information Dr. Whitehead’s definition fails to give, by reason of its
being compatible with a whole class of possible invariant velocities
ranging from zero to infinity, just as a definition of New York as “a
city by the sea” gives us a whole class of possible cities. Definitions
of this sort are ambiguous, they are indefinite, and therefore are no
definitions at all. The best that can be said of them is that they
constitute partial descriptions.[68]
Up to this point we have discussed Whitehead’s definition in the light
of a self-supporting mathematical definition that would necessitate
no appeal to physical measurements in order to acquire a determinate
significance. Such appeared to be his intention. Thus interpreted, the
definition is a failure, as we have seen.
It should therefore be obvious that our only means of rendering it
determinate must be to establish the existence, then the magnitude of
this elusive critical velocity. But this can be done only through
the medium of physical measurements. It matters not whether the
measurements be accomplished with rods, clocks, light rays, or by
electromagnetic means. In every case they will be physical; hence, when
finally the value of the invariant velocity is obtained, this magnitude
will be fixed, determined or defined by means of physical measurements.
Dr. Whitehead’s purely formal definition cannot emancipate us from this
restriction. It seems strange, therefore, that he should criticise in
Einstein a procedure which he himself is unable to avoid.
At any rate, inasmuch as scientists convinced themselves years ago
that in the matter of physical definitions, physical measurements could
not be avoided, their aim has always been to select a definition which
would define the unknown quantity in terms of magnitudes already known.
If this method fails them, they attempt to present their definition in
a form which will be of aid to the physicist, directing him towards his
goal.
When these requirements are considered, it is seen that Einstein’s
definition of the invariant velocity as that of light in vacuo
cannot easily be improved upon. To understand this point, we shall
contrast the situation of an experimenter to whom Dr. Whitehead’s
definition, then Einstein’s, would be given.
[Pg 209]
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