Advertisement

Einstein’s Time

  • C. K. Raju
Part of the Fundamental Theories of Physics book series (FTPH, volume 65)

Abstract

In the previous chapter we pointed out that the Michelson-Morley experiment was not designed to test either the constancy of the speed of light or the existence of the aether. Here we argue that a theoretical analysis of the concept of time in Newtonian theory is fundamental to an understanding of the special theory of relativity. Historically, Poincaré played a key role in carrying out this analysis. He emphasized the principle of relativity in classical mechanics, rejected the aether and the associated notion of absolute motion, pointed out that the qualitative problem of simultaneity was related to the quantitative problem of measuring equal intervals of time, or measuring velocity, and correctly postulated the constancy of the speed of light. We also point out that Abraham Pais’ treatment of the origin of relativity repeatedly misrepresents Poincaré. Relativity leads to a deterministic, B-series, continuum view of time.

Keywords

Null Cone Emphasis Mine Absolute Motion Quantitative Problem Complementary Hypothesis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and References

  1. 1.
    Jagdish Mehra, Einstein’s “First Paper” ‘, Science Today, 10, 125 (1971).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    H.A. Lorentz et al, The Principle of Relativity, Dover, New York, 1952, p 4.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ref. 2, pp 5–6.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    See, e.g., J.R. Reitz and F.J. Milford, Foundations of Electromagnetic Theory, India Book House 1978, p 397.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ref. 2, p 22.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ref. 2, p 18.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ref. 2, p 24.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Abraham Pais, ‘Subtle is the Lord…’, ( Oxford: University Press, 1982 ) p 167.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    H. Poincaré, Science and Hypothesis [1902], Eng. Trans., Dover, New York, 1952, p 111.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    H. Poincaré, The Value of Science [1905]. Eng. Trans. by G.B. Halstead, 1913. Reprinted, Dover 1958, p 98.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ref. 9, p 171.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ref. 9, pp 169–70.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ref. 9, p 141.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ref. 10, p 99.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ref. 9, p 217.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ref. 9, pp 160–61.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ref. 9, pp 171–72.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ref. 10, p 99.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ref. 10, p 103.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ref. 10, p 108.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ref. 10, p 107.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ref. 9, p 243.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ref. 9, pp 175–76.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ref. 10, p 98. See also Ref. 9, pp 243–4.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ref. 10, p 104.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ref. 10, p 102.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ref. 9, p 175.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ref. 10, p 104.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ref. 10, p 104.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ref. 10, p 32; petito principi,and post hoc (after this) ergo (hence) propter hoc (because of this) are names of classical logical fallacies, like the vicious circle.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ref. 10, p 27.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ref. 10, p 35.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ref. 10, p 35.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ref. 10, p 36.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ref. 10, p 99.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ref. 10, p 107.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Jagdish Mehra, Einstein, Hilbert and The Theory of Gravitation ( Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 1974 ).Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ref. 8, p 134.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ref. 8, p 168.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ref. 8, p 168.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ref. 8, p 172.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ref. 8, p 172.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ref. 10, p 100.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ref. 10, p 99.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Ref. 10, p 98.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Ref. 9, p 175.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Ref. 8, p 128.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Ref. 8, p 164.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Ref. 8, p 166.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Ref. 8, p 166.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Ref. 8, p 170.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. K. Raju
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Indian Institute of Advanced StudyRashtrapati NivasShimlaIndia
  2. 2.Centre for Development of Advanced ComputingNew DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations