Prev: Aether Displacement
Next: Aether Displacement
From: train on 2 Jun 2010 10:57 Much discussion has taken place about SRT, however much of it seems to alternate between what Einstein said, what he meant, what he is taken to have meant and modern interpretations of the Theory Of Special Relativity Going back to the original document written by AE at http://www.bartleby.com/173/7.html we may be able to discern what he said and what he meant, at least, and discuss the self - consistency of the theory from this point "THERE is hardly a simpler law in physics than that according to which light is propagated in empty space. Every child at school knows, or believes he knows, that this propagation takes place in straight lines with a velocity c = 300,000 km./sec" First question: What does he mean by 'empty space?' If space is empty there are no reference points against which to measure the speed of light. Should he not have said that the velocity of light between two points in empty space is c = 300,000 km /sec ?
From: paparios on 2 Jun 2010 11:13 On 2 jun, 10:57, train <gehan.ameresek...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Much discussion has taken place about SRT, however much of it seems to > alternate between what Einstein said, what he meant, what he is taken > to have meant and modern interpretations of the Theory Of Special > Relativity > > Going back to the original document written by AE at > > http://www.bartleby.com/173/7.html > > we may be able to discern what he said and what he meant, at least, > and discuss the self - consistency of the theory from this point > > "THERE is hardly a simpler law in physics than that according to which > light is propagated in empty space. Every child at school knows, or > believes he knows, that this propagation takes place in straight lines > with a velocity c = 300,000 km./sec" > > First question: What does he mean by 'empty space?' If space is empty > there are no reference points against which to measure the speed of > light. Should he not have said that the velocity of light between two > points in empty space is c = 300,000 km /sec ? You should read the complete document before commenting this. A couple of paragraphs below, in that very same document, Einstein wrote: "Of course we must refer the process of the propagation of light (and indeed every other process) to a rigid reference-body (co-ordinate system)." And then he goes to explain why c is frame independent. Miguel Rios
From: Androcles on 2 Jun 2010 12:35 "train" <gehan.ameresekere(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:ca4c6bdf-6ac7-4239-adc9-b81cd5d9dc83(a)v29g2000prb.googlegroups.com... | Much discussion has taken place about SRT, however much of it seems to | alternate between what Einstein said, what he meant, what he is taken | to have meant and modern interpretations of the Theory Of Special | Relativity | | Going back to the original document written by AE at | | http://www.bartleby.com/173/7.html | | we may be able to discern what he said and what he meant, at least, | and discuss the self - consistency of the theory from this point | | "THERE is hardly a simpler law in physics than that according to which | light is propagated in empty space. Of course there is. 'A' meets 'B' when 'B' meets 'A' is much simpler. | Every child at school knows, or | believes he knows, that this propagation takes place in straight lines | with a velocity c = 300,000 km./sec" No child at school "knows" anything, they are at school to learn, and none have ever been in empty space to measure the speed of light there. Einstein was lying. | First question: What does he mean by 'empty space?' If space is empty | there are no reference points against which to measure the speed of | light. Should he not have said that the velocity of light between two | points in empty space is c = 300,000 km /sec ? | That just shows he wasn't a scientist. The modern term is "spin doctor". You don't have the original document, though. That one is 15 years later, the kiddy in school version. The original is here: http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
From: BURT on 2 Jun 2010 14:32 On Jun 2, 7:57 am, train <gehan.ameresek...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Much discussion has taken place about SRT, however much of it seems to > alternate between what Einstein said, what he meant, what he is taken > to have meant and modern interpretations of the Theory Of Special > Relativity > > Going back to the original document written by AE at > > http://www.bartleby.com/173/7.html > > we may be able to discern what he said and what he meant, at least, > and discuss the self - consistency of the theory from this point > > "THERE is hardly a simpler law in physics than that according to which > light is propagated in empty space. Every child at school knows, or > believes he knows, that this propagation takes place in straight lines > with a velocity c = 300,000 km./sec" > > First question: What does he mean by 'empty space?' If space is empty > there are no reference points against which to measure the speed of > light. Should he not have said that the velocity of light between two > points in empty space is c = 300,000 km /sec ? Light move through absolute space a C. Matter moves through absolute space at less than C. Mitch Raemsch
From: harald on 2 Jun 2010 18:44
On Jun 2, 4:57 pm, train <gehan.ameresek...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Much discussion has taken place about SRT, however much of it seems to > alternate between what Einstein said, what he meant, what he is taken > to have meant and modern interpretations of the Theory Of Special > Relativity > > Going back to the original document written by AE at > > http://www.bartleby.com/173/7.html That is a popular account. Here is a translation of his original document: http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/ In case something isn't clear, you do well to compare those two; the second is a summary of the first. > we may be able to discern what he said and what he meant, at least, > and discuss the self - consistency of the theory from this point > > "THERE is hardly a simpler law in physics than that according to which > light is propagated in empty space. Every child at school knows, or > believes he knows, that this propagation takes place in straight lines > with a velocity c = 300,000 km./sec" Yes. > First question: What does he mean by 'empty space?' The vacuum, in which light waves propagate - he referred to Maxwell's theory for stationary systems. At first he didn't think much of that but over time he changed his mind, as he explained here: http://www.tu-harburg.de/rzt/rzt/it/Ether.html > If space is empty > there are no reference points against which to measure the speed of > light. Should he not have said that the velocity of light between two > points in empty space is c = 300,000 km /sec ? What difference does that make? If a booklet in the seat pocket of an airplane states that its cruise speed is 900 km/h, do you need it to add "two points" in order to understand it? However, you do need to consider a material reference system relative to which you think you can define empty space -- as he next discusses. Note also that in 1905 he formulated it as follows: "light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body." Harald |