The Adolescence of Relativity: Einstein, Minkowski, and the Philosophy of Space and Time (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Conservation of Simultaneity: a Critique of Einstein's 1905 Reasoning about Time
A review and critique is offered of Albert Einstein's argument for rejecting the idea of absolute time. He first stated this logic in the celebrated 1905 paper which introduced his theory of Special Relativity. There's now a long history of wide acceptance for Einstein's reasoning in that paper for the relativity of simultaneity. Even so, my essay spells out in scientific terms how this argument was actually both logically unsound and highly deceptive. I explain not only how the line of reasoning he presented was erroneous, but also how it successfully diverted attention from the fact that his postulates really lead to a very different conclusion. When properly applied to the sort of situations Einstein chose as good illustrative examples, his views actually imply that simultaneity is conserved. This realisation raises challenging questions. What made him try to reason in opposition to this true outcome in such a very strangely illogical manner? And even more peculiarly, why were generations of even highly expert readers taken in by the unsound scientific argument he presented?
Spacetime weltanschauung: a reconstruction of Minkowski’s and Einstein's worldviews
The goal of the present paper is to reconstruct the history of Minkowski spacetime, focusing on the specific understanding that Minkowski had of his own model in the context of his worldview. To achieve it, we will first take a look at Minkowski’s personal academic history. By exploring his scientific development, certain key elements in his approach to mathematics and physics will be highlighted, so that his worldview is put into perspective and supported by evidence. Afterwards, a brief summary of Einstein’s work on special relativity is presented, with the aim to speculate on Einstein’s own way of interpreting spacetime. This will also set up the foundation for a comparison with Minkowski. Then, we will analyze the main lectures through which Minkowski presented his geometric model of spacetime to the German scientific community, focusing especially on Raum und Zeit. Here, Minkowski’s worldview is further articulated. Last but not least, we will endorse that, despite Minkowski’s work becoming crucial for Einstein and Einstein's interpretation of spacetime most likely growing closer to Minkowski's, the two scientists ultimately shared crucial differences in weltanschauung.
The problem of the relativity of simultaneity and the causal solution
Draft, 2019
In this essay, I address some fundamental features of Albert Einstein's special theory of relativity and its repercussion on the problem of the reality of time. I centrally consider Kurt Gödel's argument against the reality of time constructed from the relativity of simultaneity, one of the consequences of special relativity. Supported by Hans Reichenbach's interpretation of the theory of relativity, I defend that a causal theory of time provides an adequate response to Gödel's argument. Furthermore, I approach the relationship between John McTaggart's time series and the concept of simultaneity. I argue that the relativity of simultaneity implies a rejection of the temporal absolutism supposed by McTaggart and Gödel, but not in a denial of the reality of time.
MATHEMATICAL PHILOSOPHY OF TIME IN MINKOWSKIAN SPACE
Time is a monotonic strictly increasing single valued real parameter that exists in spacetime. Here we consider an observer in his rest frame belonging to the Minkowskian spacetime.The order of the sequence of events on his World line is strictly preserved in the sense that the order of the sequence of events remains invariant under Lorentz transformations in Minkowskian spacetime: because the world line of the observer is always time-like. 1.INTRODUCTION Time is awake when all things sleep. Time stands straight when all things fall. Time shuts in all and will not be shut. Is,was,and shall be are Time`s children. O Reasoning, be witness, be stable. [1] VYASA,the Mahabharata [ca.A.D 400] This universe has basic temporal structure. The fundamental nature of TIME in relation to human consciousness is evident as soon as we think that our judgements related to time and events in time appear themselves to be IN TIME. Our analysis concerning SPACE do not appear in any obvious sense to be IN SPACE. But SPACE seems to be appeared to us all of a piece, whereas TIME comes to us only BIT by BIT. The Past exists only in our memory and the Future is hidden from us. Only the Present is the physical reality experienced by us. Thus TIME is always an ONE-WAY membrane. We cannot go from Present to the Past; while one can perform backward and forward motion in SPACE. The free mobility in SPACE leads to the idea of transportable rigid rods. The absence of free mobility in TIME leads to the concept ONE-WAY membrane TIME is a monotonic strictly increasing single valued real parameter corresponding to a non - spatial dimension represented by a straight line in Minkowskian spcetime and the SPACE is three dimensional. Minkowski unified space and time to a single entity called spacetime which is absolute. Einstein used the concept of spacetime for constructing spacetime geometry so that physics becomes part and parcel of geometry in Minkowskian spacetime. Einstein introduced the concept square of the distance between two events ds2 = -dx2-dy2-dz2+dT2 [2] here ds is distance between two events P(x,y,z,T) and Q(x+dx,y+dy,z+dz,T+dT).If ds2 is greater than zero the separation between events is called time-like;if ds2= 0, the separation between events is called null-like leading to the concept of Light Cone Structure in Special Theory of Relativity([3] &[4]) and if ds2 is less than zero, the separation between events is called space-like. Time-like events are causally connected and also null-like events are causally connected; there is no causal connection between events separated by space-like interval. All real particles trace curves in space time. These curves are called time-like curves. Light rays travel along null curve in spacetime.Here we are concerned only with time-like curve so that the order of sequence of occurrence of events shall be the same for every observer under admissible co-ordinates transformations. The world view proposed by Minkowski is often termed as Minkowskian spacetime [5] or M-space. It is said to have a (3+1) description of spacetime. Here “3” represents the Three Dimensional Euclidean space and “1” the One Dimensional time. We introduce spacetime co-ordinates to order events. In Mspace, the co-ordinates of an event can be represented by an ordered set of four real numbers, <x1,x2,x3,x4>. Here the numbers x1, x2, x3 and x4 are taken to be PURE real numbers. 1,2,3,4 are superscripts used to specify the co-ordinates. It is always convenient to consider a Lorentz frame with orthonormal basis vectors e1,e2,, e3, and e4 [1]. Relative to the origin of this frame the time-like worldline of a particle with real non-zero restmass has a co-ordinates description
Minkowski, mathematicians, and the mathematical theory of relativity
The expanding worlds of general relativity, 1999
The importance of the theory of relativity for twentieth-century physics, and the appearance of the Gottingen mathematician Hermann Minkowski at a turning point in its history have both attracted significant historical attention. The rapid growth in scientific and philosophical interest in the principle of relativity has been linked to the intervention of Minkowski by Tetu Hirosige, who identified Minkowski's publications as the turning point for the theory of relativity, and gave him credit for having clarified its fundamental importance for all of ...
An extensive review of Einstein's theory of special relativity and his writings from today's scientific and philosophical perspectives found that at the turn of the 20th century, the scientific and philosophical views were not sufficiently developed to understand the problems that physicists faced and that Einstein tried to solve with his theory. Regardless how brilliant a scientist he was, in his pursuit, Einstein was guided by incorrect philosophical views; views prevalent at that time. These views misled him into an incorrect method and unrealistic theory with circular definitions, inconsistencies in the explanations and principles that contradict those developed from the empirical evidence. In particular, this study found that neither Einstein nor Poincaré expressed sufficiently the " inertial frames of reference " (coordinate systems) in their respective relativity principles. They expressed them in terms of the uniform movement of translation instead of absence of external forces. Because of that they both overlooked that fields generated in one frame of reference cause forces at a distance in the other frames of reference turning them into noninertial ones. Thus, their respective principles of relativity cannot be valid for field-based processes when field is generated outside of the frame of reference. Einstein's use of his relativity principle for conditions when it cannot be valid, in combination with an incorrect idealistic ontological view of the term " Law of Nature " and insufficient rationalistic understanding of the term " time, " misled him into an incorrect method of developing his theory and to incorrect inferences of the other principles and concepts of this theory. Thus, the foundations of Einstein's theory of special relativity, his two postulates (principle of relativity and the invariance of velocity of light) as well as the relativity of simultaneity cannot be any longer justified. With that, Einstein's attempt to unify light and electro-magnetism with mechanics, his concept of light, space, time and the whole theory of relativity with its other consequences cannot correctly represent the realities of the physical world. Apart from the philosophical, conceptual and logical problems of this theory, the invariance of velocity of light is in serious need for the experimental verification or refutation. Although the technology of Einstein's time was insufficient to carry out such test, it is technologically feasible to do so today. Therefore, it is recommended, and it should be of the utmost importance, for physicists to carry out such a test today. V C 2014 Physics Essays Publication. [http://dx. Résumé: Un examen approfondi de la théorie de la relativité restreinte d'Einstein et de ses e ´crits, réalisé au travers des connaissances scientifiques et philosophiques actuelles, montre qu'a ` l'orée du 20 ième siècle, les visions scientifiques et philosophiques n'e ´taient pas suffisamment développées pour comprendre les problèmes auxquels les physiciens faisaient face alors quand Einstein essayait de les résoudre avec sa théorie. Quand bien même il fut un brillant scientifique, Einstein e ´tait guidé par une approche philosophique incorrecte, approche qui e ´tait courante a ` l'e ´poque. L'environnement philosophique d'alors l'a amené a ` développer une méthode incorrecte et une théorie irréaliste basée sur des assertions, des explications inconsistantes et des principes qui contredisent ceux développés a ` partir de l'e ´vidence empirique. Cette e ´tude montre, en particulier que ni Albert Einstein ni Henri Poincaré n'ont suffisamment approfondi les " référentiels inertiels " dans leurs respectifs principes de la relativité. Ils les ont définis par le mouvement de translation uniforme au lieu de les définir par l'absence de forces extérieures. Pour cette raison, ils ont tous les deux négligé le fait que des champs générés dans un cadre de référence provoquent des forces a ` distance dans les autres cadres de référence les transformant en noninertiels. Ainsi leurs respectifs principes de la relativité ne peuvent e ˆtre valides pour des processus basés sur le champ quand le champ est généré en dehors du cadre de référence. L'utilisation par Einstein de ses principes de la relativité dans des conditions qui ne peuvent e ˆtre validées, en combinaison avec une vision ontologique incorrecte et idéaliste du terme " Loi de la Nature " et une compréhension rationnelle a) pkos40@gmail.com 0836-1398/2014/27(3)/411/37/$25.00 V C 2014 Physics Essays Publication 411 PHYSICS ESSAYS 27, 3 (2014) insuffisante du terme " Temps " , l'amenèrent a ` développer sa théorie au moyen d'une méthode incorrecte et tirer des conclusions erronées sur les autres principes et concepts de sa théorie. Ainsi, les bases de la théorie d'Einstein sur la relativité restreinte, ses deux postulats (principe de la relativité et l'invariabilité de la vitesse de la lumière) ainsi que la relativité de la simultanéité ne peuvent plus e ˆtre justifiés. Avec cela, la tentative d'Einstein d'unifier lumière et e ´lectromagnétisme avec la mécanique, son concept sur la lumière, l'espace, le temps et toute la théorie sur la relativité y compris ses autres conséquences ne peuvent pas représenter les réalités du monde physique. Mis a ` part les problèmes philosophique, conceptuel et logique de sa théorie, l'invariabilité de la vitesse de la lumière a un sérieux besoin d'une vérification ou réfutation expérimentale. Mais si la technologie au temps d'Einstein e ´tait insuffisante pour mener a ` bien un tel test, c'est techniquement faisable de nos jours. C'est pourquoi, il est conseillé aux physiciens, et c'est de la plus haute importance, de procéder a ` ce test aujourd'hui.
Time as an Empirical Concept in Special Relativity
The Review of Metaphysics, 2019
According to a widespread view, Einstein’s definition of time in his special relativity is founded on the positivist verification principle. The present paper challenges this received outlook. It shall be argued that Einstein’s position on the concept of time, to wit, simultaneity, is best understood as a mitigated version of concept empiricism. He contrasts his position to Newton’s absolutist and Kant’s transcendental arguments, and in part sides with Hume’s and Mach’s empiricist arguments. Nevertheless, Einstein worked out a concept empiricism that is considerably more moderate than what we find in the preceding empiricist tradition and early logical positivism. He did not think that the origin of concepts is in observations, but in conventions, and he also maintained a realist ontology of physical events, which he thought is necessary for his theory. Consequently, his philosophy of time in special relativity is not couched in terms of an anti-metaphysical verificationism.
Time Coordinates and Clocks: Einstein's Struggle
arXiv: History and Philosophy of Physics, 2018
In his Autobiographical Notes, Einstein mentioned that on his road to the final theory of general relativity it was a major difficulty to accustom himself to the idea that coordinates need not possess an immediate physical meaning in terms of lengths and times. This appears strange: that coordinates are conventional markers of events seems an obvious fact, already familiar from pre-relativistic physics. In this paper we explore the background of Einsteins difficulties, going from his 1905 paper on special relativity, through his 1907 and 1911 papers on the consequences of the equivalence principle, to the 1916 review paper on the general theory. As we shall argue, Einstein's problems were intimately connected to his early methodology, in which clarity achieved by concrete physical pictures played an essential role; and to the related fact that on his route to the general theory he focused on special situations that were easily accessible to physical intuition. The details of thi...
On the Principle of Relativity
1992
In a recent article [1] MA Oliver argues there is a conflict between Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity (STR) and Cosmology. In ascertaining this conflict (see below), Oliver finds allies in Bergmann [2] and Bondi [3]. To resolve this conflict, he proposes to restore “the classical (mechanical) concepts of space and time”[1, p. 666] and an absolute rest-frame.
MINKOWSKI'S DISCOVERY OF THE MULTISPACE PARADIGM OF REALITY
Convergetics Research Center , 2024
This article explores Hermann Minkowski's groundbreaking 1908 lecture Space and Time, which introduced the concept of four-dimensional spacetime. Contrary to popular belief, Minkowski's Theory of the Absolute World proposed a multispace paradigm, suggesting that reality consists of multiple independent spacetimes. This theory challenges the conventional singular spacetime continuum and addresses fundamental questions in physics and cosmology, including wave-particle duality, the constancy of the speed of light, and quantum entanglement. The article examines the misinterpretation of Minkowski's theory by the scientific community and its implications for modern physics. Key concepts such as worldpoint, worldlines, and proper time are explained. Practical applications of the multispace paradigm, like electromagnetic travel, are also discussed. Minkowski's work provides new insights into unresolved issues and has the potential to revolutionize our understanding of the universe. "While there exists an unanimous consensus on the mathematical significance of spacetime for theoretical physics, for a hundred years there has been no consensus on the nature of spacetime itself."-Vesselin Petkov[1] I dedicate this work to Hermann Minkowski, who discovered the Paradigm of Multispace Reality. I hope this contribution will help the world recognize his exceptional genius. License CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 Contents 7 References 9 Notes 9