The nature of the physical worldEddington, Arthur Stanley, Sir
Philosophy
The nature of the physical world
Eddington, Arthur Stanley, Sir
Physics -- Philosophy; Science -- Philosophy
But stay a moment. Is it so certain that we are on a slow-moving
planet? I can imagine the astronomers in that nebula observing far away
in space an insignificant star attended by an insignificant planet
called Earth. They observe too that it is moving with the huge velocity
of 1000 miles a second; because naturally if we see them receding
from us at 1000 miles a second they will see us receding from them at
1000 miles a second. “A thousand miles a second!” exclaim the nebular
physicists, “How unfortunate for the poor physicists on the Earth!
[Pg 10]
The FitzGerald contraction will be quite appreciable, and all their
measures with scales will be seriously wrong. What a weird system of
laws of Nature they will have deduced, if they have overlooked this
correction!”
There is no means of deciding which is right—to which of us the
observed relative velocity of 1000 miles a second really
belongs. Astronomically the galaxy of which the earth is a member
does not seem to be more important, more central, than the nebula.
The presumption that it is we who are the more nearly at rest has no
serious foundation; it is mere self-flattery.
“But”, you will say, “surely if these appreciable changes of length
occurred on the earth, we should detect them by our measurements.” That
brings me to the interesting point. We could not detect them by any
measurement; they may occur and yet pass quite unnoticed. Let me try to
show how this happens.
This room, we will say, is travelling at 161,000 miles a second
vertically upwards. That is my statement, and it is up to you to prove
it wrong. I turn my arm from horizontal to vertical and it contracts
to half its original length. You don’t believe me? Then bring a
yard-measure and measure it. First, horizontally, the result is 30
inches; now vertically, the result is 30 half-inches. You must allow
for the fact that an inch-division of the scale contracts to half an
inch when the yard-measure is turned vertically.
“But we can see that your arm does not become shorter; can we not trust
our own eyes?”
Certainly not, unless you remember that when you got up this morning
your retina contracted to half its original width in the vertical
direction; consequently it is now exaggerating vertical distances to
[Pg 11]
twice the scale of horizontal distances.
“Very well”, you reply, “I will not get up. I will lie in bed and watch
you go through your performance in an inclined mirror. Then my retina
will be all right, but I know I shall still see no contraction.”
But a moving mirror does not give an undistorted image of what is
happening. The angle of reflection of light is altered by motion of
a mirror, just as the angle of reflection of a billiard-ball would
be altered if the cushion were moving. If you will work out by the
ordinary laws of optics the effect of moving a mirror at 161,000 miles
a second, you will find that it introduces a distortion which just
conceals the contraction of my arm.
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