Science Forums
User Name
Password
Science Social Network
home    members    help/rules    who is online    contact   
Welcome to Hypography, a forum for science and technology. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Go Back   Science Forums > Science News > Technology News

Einstein's Lamentation That Special Relativity Was Not A Fundamental Theory
Become a science forums sponsor today
Comment
 
LinkBack Article Tools
Published by Shubee 06-04-2008
I recall reading something by A. Einstein years ago where Einstein was lamenting the fact that his theory of special relativity was not a fundamental theory because he had defined distance with measuring rods and this presupposes more than should be assumed.

Does anyone here recall the reference?

Shubee
The Axiomatization of Physics - Step 1
  #1  
By modest on 06-04-2008
Re: Einstein's Lamentation That Special Relativity Was Not A Fundamental Theory
There are some remarks from Einstein and notes by Ehrenfest in this book (The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein) on the topic:
Google Book

I can't be sure this is what you read, but it may well be. The link will take you to the appropriate page.

There is also a recent paper discussing the topic by an oxford university physicist, but I can't find a free copy online:

"Einstein's misgivings about his 1905 formulation of special relativity"

The abstract:

Quote:
When Einstein formulated his 1905 treatment of relativistic kinematics, the template in his mind was thermodynamics. This was because a more desirable 'constructive' account of the behaviour of moving rods and clocks, based on the detailed physics governing their microscopic constitution, was unavailable. The price to be paid was appreciated by Einstein and a handful of others since 1905.
-modest
Reply With Quote
  #2  
By Shubee on 06-05-2008
Smile Einstein's Lamentation That Special Relativity Was Not A Fundamental Theory
Quote:
Originally Posted by modest View Post
There is also a recent paper discussing the topic by an oxford university physicist, but I can't find a free copy online:

"Einstein's misgivings about his 1905 formulation of special relativity"
Thank you modest. I was able to find similar papers online by that author, Harvey R. Brown, and at least one of those papers referred to Einstein's Autobiographical Notes (1949), which is where I must of read Einstein's lamentations originally.

Here was the key description from Harvey R. Brown that sounded very familiar to what I had read before:

Quote:
Einstein became increasingly uneasy about the role played by rods and clocks in this approach. This unease is seen in a paper entitled “Geometry and Experience” he published in 1921, and in particular in his 1949 Autobiographical Notes:

“One is struck [by the fact] that the theory [of special relativity] . . . introduces two kinds of physical things, i.e., (1) measuring rods and clocks, (2) all other things, e.g., the electromagnetic field, the material point, etc. This, in a certain sense, is inconsistent; strictly speaking measuring rods and clocks would have to be represented as solutions of the basic equations (objects consisting of moving atomic configurations), not, as it were, as theoretically self-sufficient entities.”
Thanks for the very good hint. The lamentation that I read many years ago is in Einstein's Autobiographical Notes (1949).
Reply With Quote
Comment

Bookmarks

« Relativity discussion from "Origin of the Universe,,,,Bang or no Bang" | Gold and relativity »

Currently Active Users Viewing This Article: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Article Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Article Article Starter Category Comments Last Post
Moving Objects Observation Theory Replacing Special Relativity Li Zifeng Physics and Mathematics 4 08-17-2006 02:11 PM
The Theory of Special Relativity for the Totally Confused Beginner Damo2600 Strange Claims Forum 30 08-04-2006 07:59 PM
Resolving an apparent problem with the theory of Special Relativity CraigD Physics and Mathematics 11 08-29-2005 11:57 AM
Einstein's Special Relativity Fails? Mac Physics and Mathematics 264 05-20-2005 08:11 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:24 AM.

Hypography?

Hypography [n.]: A combination of "hyperlink" and "bibliography" - ie, a list of links to electronic documents. Comparable to discography and bibliography, but not cartography.

We have been online since May 2000, and aim to be the best place to find and share science-related content of all kinds.

Share the love!

Please add more science to your life. Use our RSS feeds on your blog, your portal, or your favorite feedreader!
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0 ©2008, Crawlability, Inc. Copyright © 2000-2008 Hypography
Part of the Hypography - Science for Everyone Network
Powered by GARS © 2005-2008
Contact Us - Hypography Science Forums - Top