Original content in Relativity Trail
03/09/2024 note. Einstein gets halfway there:
In February 2024, during the process of researching a
definition for use in my article, I stumbled upon an
obscure lecture delivered by Einstein at Leyden in 1920.
I learned, by way of reading the transcript of that lecture,
that Einstein had by that time (fifteen years after his
1905 paper on relativity) come around to thinking about
the nature of space as it relates to special relativity.
Specifically, he forcefully argued that there is necessarily
an underlying frame of reference for the effects of special
relativity, i.e., a structure of space which imparts physical
properties and provides "standards of space and time,
[specifically] our measuring-rods and clocks". He stated:
"Space without ether is unthinkable" and "the ether has to
serve as medium for the effects of inertia".
That is in sharp contrast to his original treatment, in which
he had simply disregarded the nature of space.
Having spent my entire adult life searching the literature
for anyone other than myself who has understood and
articulated why that background (call it ether or the
totality of the cosmos) is not merely an option when it
comes to explaining the effects of relativity, it seems safe
to say that only Einstein himself rose to the task.
Poincare, Lorentz and Fitzgerald did not come close.
Einstein partially rose to the task. He never did go back
and rework special relativity in absolute terms with new
postulates. That fell to poor me alone. It was a task
I never wanted or felt I should have to do. I did it in
2008. It's my book Relativity Trail, which I sell
at the U of M.
You can read what Einstein said in my article.
Take the challenge. It's a short read.
The link:
relativitytrail.com/preprint.special_relativity.pdf
-----------------------------------------------------------
Meanwhile:
Original content in Relativity Trail
------------------------------------
Postulates, observations and assumptions:
The time-keeping differential between reunited
clocks, which necessarily favors one party over
the other, serves as proof of an absolute
(though experimentally indiscernible) frame of
reference. i.e. there is a "truth of the matter".
Spacetime is a geometrical construct, dependent
on Einstein's clock synchronization method.
It comes up short in representing physical
reality, as it describes a sudden perceived
time gap upon a change in inertial motion.
The ramifications of Einstein's two versions
of his second postulate are analyzed and
explained.
See: pages 76-77
It is shown that the elimination of a universal
(absolute) frame of reference leaves us with a
circular definition of inertial frame, and with
an unresolvable twins paradox of one's own making.
See: page 25
Mach's Principle is shown to apply to a
hierarchy of inertial motion.
Actual constancy of light-speed is given a basis
in the interchangeability of matter and energy.
Clock functioning is defined.
A basis is provided for the equivalence
of clock functioning and biological aging.
The Galilean Principle of Relativity is properly
considered to be inextricably bound with
synchronization of motion along different axes.
Length contraction is given a Machian basis
and is formally derived.
Results
Symmetry of measuring across inertial frames
is diagrammed in absolute terms.
Constancy of light-speed measure, independent
of inertial frame, is diagrammed in absolute terms.
The twins paradox is trivially dispensed with.
The indeterminacy of one's motion relative
to the universe is demonstrated.
Einstein's clock synchronization
is diagrammed in absolute terms.
Einstein's mu and lambda are explained and
derived in absolute terms.
The symmetrical measure of inelastic collisions
across inertial frames, with transfer of mass,
is diagrammed in absolute terms.
E = mc^2 is derived from an absolute basis.
Also, importantly
Complexity gives rise to the meaningfulness
of inertial properties.
"Simple universe" twins paradoxes are debunked.
(And, of course, much more.)
Phrases/terminologies originated in Relativity Trail include:
Time differential between reunited clocks
Inertial properties
Hierarchy of clock rates
Heirarchy of inertial motion
From light's perspective, it is everywhere at once.
From page 86 of Relativity Trail:
Let's examine Einstein's assignment of tA - tB = tB - t'A
in the context of the universal frame.
Consider the following situation in the context of the
universal frame:
Clock B is in the positive direction of the AB motion from
clock A, the AB system has an absolute velocity of 0.6, and
A and B have a rest spatial separation of 1 ls (0.8
contracted) as seen against the universal reference frame.
Einstein's definition of what constitutes a synchronization
of those two clocks dictates that B's reading will be
0.6 second less than A's reading as seen against the universal
frame, 0.6 being the velocity of AB. (1)
Keep in mind that Einstein had no awareness of this
superimposition onto the universal frame, and thus no
awareness of these numerical values. (2)
Using this convention (the assignment of tA - tB = tB - t'A)
amounts to a disregard of an analytical incorporation of an
absolute frame of reference. It is in keeping with
Einstein's notion of simultaneity, wherein he elevates a
direct observation of distant events to a pseudo-reality
of simultaneity, or lack thereof, for a given observer.
1. See the appendix for my (quite long) formal derivation
of this.
2. This superimposition diagram is unique to
Relativity Trail. You won't find it elsewhere.
© 2008 Roger Luebeck
Updated 05/12/2025
See site map for all my articles.
Home: relativitytrail.com
|