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
Einstein’s next attempt was therefore to weld Newton’s law
into the general fabric, a result he achieved about 1914. The
mathematical generalisation which would allow this result to be
obtained seems almost obvious to-day, since (as will be explained in
Chapter XXV) it reduces to assuming that
in the neighbourhood of matter, four-dimensional space-time loses its
flatness and becomes non-Euclidean or curved. However, it appears to
have been through the medium of physical observation that Einstein was
led to his superb generalisation, so we shall proceed to follow the
historical order by explaining the significance of his postulate of
equivalence.
[Pg 250]
CHAPTER XXIV
THE POSTULATE OF EQUIVALENCE
EINSTEIN’S Postulate of Equivalence consists essentially in an
identification of forces of gravitation and forces of inertia. This
identification he considered permissible because of certain well-known
empirical facts which we shall discuss presently.
Let us first recall that a field of force is exemplified by a region of
space, at each and every point of which a definite force would be found
to be acting on a test-body with which the field might be explored.
Several different types of fields were known to classical science.
Electric fields acted on electrified bodies, magnetic fields acted on
magnets, and both inertial and gravitational fields acted on material
bodies in general, whether electrified or not. For the present we shall
be concerned solely with the inertial and gravitational fields.
These two species of fields of force were regarded by classical science
as of a totally different nature. There appeared to be very good
reasons for this distinction. Suppose, for instance, that a train is
slowing down. If we are standing in the train, we shall feel a force
pulling us towards the engine and it may require a certain effort on
our part to resist its pull. As such, the force is obviously real,
in that it is experienced. But suppose now that an observer on the
embankment views these same happenings. He will argue as follows: No
force is pulling the passenger; but as the train is slowing down and
as the passenger’s body tends to maintain a constant velocity along
a straight line, in conformity with the laws of motion (law of
inertia), the net result is that he will overtake the engine unless
he holds on to the seat. Thus we see that according to whether we
judge these same happenings from the standpoint of the train or of the
embankment, the force exists or becomes a fiction.
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