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
We have yet to show the connection between non-Euclidean geometry of
two dimensions defined as the geometry obtained with Euclidean rods on
a surface of constant curvature, and non-Euclidean geometry obtained
with squirming Euclidean rods, i.e., rigid non-Euclidean ones.
For this purpose consider a sphere resting on a plane. We may call the
south pole that point of the sphere which stands in contact with the
plane; and we shall assume that a point-source of light is located
at the north pole. If the sphere is transparent to rays of light all
figures traced on the surface of the sphere will cast shadows on the
plane. But the same will be true of our little Euclidean rods which we
place alongside these figures on the sphere for purposes of measurement.
It is easy to see that a circle, for instance, traced on the spherical
surface will, generally speaking, have for its shadow an ellipse on
the plane. As this circle is displaced on the sphere towards the north
pole, its shadow will grow larger and larger, tending finally, when any
point of the circle coincides with the north pole, to become a parabola
extending to infinity. But inasmuch as the shadows of the little rods
with which we measure lengths on the sphere vary in exactly the same
way as do the shadows of the figures measured, we shall obtain on the
plane exactly the same Riemannian results that endure on the sphere.
In short, if we assume that on the plane our standard measuring rods
are given by the shadows of the standard measuring rods used on the
sphere, we shall obtain Riemannian geometry on the plane. It is
scarcely necessary to state that with our Euclidean ideas of congruence
it would be impossible for us to accept the statement that these
successive squirming shadows of a Euclidean length displaced on the
[Pg 68]
surface of the sphere were all congruent to one another; but this is
not the point at issue. If we were perfectly flat, two-dimensional
beings, living on the plane, and if not only all the flat bodies
sliding over the plane behaved as did the shadows in our previous
example, but also our measuring rods and our own living bodies behaved
likewise, we should have no other alternative than to assume that
these shadows represented the displacements of bodies that moved while
remaining rigid or without change. We should accordingly regard the
geometry of our two-dimensional space as Riemannian.
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