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
At this stage we must mention the premonitions of Riemann on the
subject of the metrical field of real space. Riemann did not attribute
this structure of space to the presence of some invisible medium, the
ether, possessing a structure of its own. According to him the origin
of the metrical field should be sought elsewhere. He felt that the
metrical field of space should be compared to a magnetic or an electric
field pervading space. And just as a magnetic field exists in the
space surrounding a magnet, Riemann searched for the physical cause of
the metrical field. With characteristic boldness, he found it in the
matter of the universe; the metrical field thus became a species of
material field. If Riemann’s ideas are accepted we can understand how a
redistribution of the star matter in the universe, altering as it would
the lay of the metrical field, would produce deformations in the shape
of a given body and variations in the paths of light rays. As Weyl
tells us, a spherical ball of clay compressed into any other form might
again be made to appear spherical were all the matter in the universe
to be redistributed in a suitable way.
It would also follow that were all the matter in the universe to be
annihilated, and as a result the metrical field to vanish, space
(assuming that any physical meaning were left the term) would become
completely amorphous, just like mathematical space; light rays would
not know where to move, all geodesics having disappeared; and were one
lone material body to be introduced into otherwise empty space, it
would not know what shape to take. Without the metrical field, physical
space would be unthinkable.
Still further important consequences follow from this matter-moulding
[Pg 58]
hypothesis of Riemann. Prior to these views, the principle of
sufficient reason appeared to imply that physical space would
always turn out to be homogeneous—the same in all places. This
does not necessarily mean Euclidean, for, as we know, Riemann’s and
Lobatchewski’s geometries also correspond to homogeneous spaces;
but all varying degrees of non-Euclideanism from place to place
were thought to be excluded a priori. Of the vast realm of
possible types of geometries or spaces discovered by Riemann, only the
homogeneous types survived; a situation which Weyl finds appropriately
expressed by the classical line: “Parturiunt montes, nascetur
ridiculus mus.”
But with the new views advocated by Riemann the situation changes
entirely; for now the texture, structure or geometry of space is
defined by the metrical field, itself produced by the distribution of
matter. Any non-homogeneous distribution of matter would then entail a
variable structure or geometry for space from place to place.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account