Einstein's Theory of Relativity
Wednesday July 5, 2006
Though it revolutionized the way we look at physics, Einstein never received a Nobel Prize for his theory of relativity. It was deemed too controversial. Learn about it in our About Physics features on the theory of relativity:
- Theory of Special Relativity - originally presented by Einstein in 1905, this theory defines localized effects of particles moving at extreme velocities.
- Lorentz Transformations - the complex mathematics involved in applying the coordinate transformations required by special relativity.
- Theory of General Relativity - expanding on special relativity, Einstein defines gravitation as a coordinate shift in spacetime coordinates
- Controversies in Relativity - the theory of relativity has generated much controversy over the years.
- Relativistic Doppler Effect - one of many effects of special relativity, where a moving light source generates non-classical changes in the waves emitted.
Comments
EINSTEIN’S SIN
The experiment of Michelson-Morley should have led to two competing interpretations:
1. As far as the speed of light is concerned, Newton’s particle model of light is correct. The speed of light is variable, c’=c+v, where c is the speed of photons relative to the light source and v is the relative speed of the light source and the observer. This interpretation is simple, even trivial: no miracles (time dilation, length contraction etc.) can be introduced.
2. The speed of light is constant, c’=c, independent of v, the relative speed of the light source and the observer. In this case miracles (time dilation, length contraction etc.) are obligatory – without them the falsehood of the principle of constancy of the speed of light would be obvious.
The first interpretation is true, the second wrong, and yet the second was adopted. That was the beginning of a wrong science of course but by no means a sin. The sin started when Einstein implicitly introduced the true c’=c+v interpretation, thereby obtaining correct results (e.g. the frequency shift factor), and conserved the false principle of constancy of the speed of light plus appended miracles, thereby destroying the rationality of generations of scientists.
In 1911 Einstein showed that in a gravitational field the speed of light is variable and advanced the formula
c’ = c(1 + V/c^2)
where V is the gravitational potential. One can apply the equivalence principle as shown in
http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~phys16/Textbook/ch13.pdf pp.2-4
Note that V=gh=cv. Substitute this in Einstein’s formula and you obtain c’=c+v.
Pentcho Valev
I understand that on occasion, really brilliant concepts come from fairly ordinary sources. I know nothing about physics or math, but I had an Idea. I would try to prove it if I had the background to do so. Since I don’t, I thought one of you brains out there could run with this little ball, or if it is mere fluff, let me know.
Here it is: The smaller you get, the closer you get to the speed of light.
Where did this come from? Since everything is relative, Observing on a large scale, watching the stars for instance, things appear to move more slowly. The smaller your reference point, the faster they appear to move. At the subatomic scale, everything approaches the speed of light. What do you think? Can it be proven?
In my opinion this is several things that Einstien was not correct in. The basic reason is, a lightsource does not exist forever. In order for the speed of light to be constant, the lightsource would have to continuously radiate light. All objects deteroirate over time, even stars die. Therefore logic dictates, if a lightsource cannot last forever, the speed of light cannot be constant, because so to will the light radiating from the dying object cease to be. Also light would be increasing in brightness if it were accelerating constantly as it would be growing bigger.
I also believe Einstien was not correct in his twin theory. Mainly he was viewing his ideas of time on planets time and not understanding that two independent timestates were occuring. Ie if martian day is equal to 365 earthdays, then a martian day is 365×24 hours long, it all evens out. Time dialation or any other nonsense does not occure during travel, if it takes two hours to travel somewhere and back, its two hours later. The further you move outward planets, the slower the planets revolve, ie timechanges dont occure, just the amount of daylight the planet gets. Time as far as seconds on a watch is universal and does not change based on speed, other than location time.
Part of the problem is when highly respected scientists make theories about things that no one can ever rationaly prove, like black holes or ants farting on mars. It becomes an empty and proveless argument of folly. Ie. If Einstiens right go build a rocket, travel about the speed of light and see if people are actualy older. Einstien also never bothered to think about friction and gravitational forces, you would probably be crushed and disentegrate do to friction and the amount of force needed to propel someone at that speed. Friction wasnt understood greately even in Einstiens time and in the early 1900s meteors were not believed in by astronomers.
While I greatly respect Einstiens humanitariasm views, when we place people on pedstels, often we forget Einstien is just like us and the laws of newton are not the laws of moses, they are the opinions and idea of Issac Newton. The only difference between you, me E and Newton is luck and popularization.
Thier are two kinds of people in the world
1. those who follow trends
2. those who set trends.
no one ever contributed in a relevant way by being #1 kind in any human endeavor. And all were also put underhouse arrest and crucified by the intellectual community for doing so
. Except Einstien. :p