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
Visual angle in classical science is analogous to distance in
Einstein’s theory. Our rod has no true length any more than the
telegraph pole has any true visual angle. The whole significance of
relativity is precisely to deprive length and duration of the absolute
characteristics which classical science attributed to them. In short,
when we are asked whether the rod has really been contracted and lost
part of its length, we might counter by asking whether the telegraph
pole has really been modified and lost part of its visual angle. Just
as, if we omit to stipulate the position of the observer, the visual
angle of the pole has no meaning and can teach us nothing about the
pole, so now, in relativity, the length of the rod has no meaning in
itself and can teach us nothing about the rod.
All these arguments developed on the score of length apply in similar
fashion to duration. Both length and duration are relatives having no
absolute significance in the universe.
The critic will generally balk at these statements and be inclined to
say: “What nonsense! The length of the rod is immanent in the rod and
can in no wise be affected by the observer’s motion or by the frame’s
existence. The observer might die, the frame might disappear; what has
all this to do with the length of the concrete entity we call the rod?
The length of the rod may appear longer or shorter according to
its relative motion; but we must not confuse appearance and reality.
Thus, a man standing 100 yards away appears to us shorter than
when he is close up, but it would never enter our minds to say that
he was really reduced in stature. Just as the height of the man is
independent of our position and of our existence as observers, so is
the length of the rod independent of our relative velocity.”
[Pg 222]
Now we might readily concede to the critic the right to maintain
that the existence and absolute characteristics of the rod are in no
wise dependent on the motion or the existence of an observer. But the
critic is begging the question when he assumes without further ado that
these absolute characteristics are expressed by the length of
the rod. This length enters into existence only when a definite space
is specified; till then it is meaningless. And in the absence of an
observer there is no such thing as a space, but merely four-dimensional
space-time. The absolute characteristics of the rod thus refer to
space-time, and this eliminates all primary qualities such as length.
The situation is of course not easy to grasp at first blush and is
still less easy to explain, but in view of the extreme importance of
the matter we shall do our best to clarify it by slightly varying the
presentation.
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