DOCSLIB.ORG

The Conceptual Development of Einstein's General Theory of Relativity

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Conceptual Development of Einstein's General Theory of Relativity THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF EINSTEIN’S GENERAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY Patrick Girard To cite this version: Patrick Girard. THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF EINSTEIN’S GENERAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY. History, Philosophy and Sociology of Sciences. University of Wisconsin-Madison (Etats-Unis), 1981. English. tel-02532792 HAL Id: tel-02532792 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-02532792 Submitted on 6 Apr 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Ph.D. Thesis (U.S.A.) THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF EINSTEIN’S GENERAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY by PATRICK RALPH GIRARD University of Wisconsin-Madison, Graduate School Major Department : History of Science Minor : Physics Thesis Reading Committee : Major Professor : Daniel M. Siegel Geoffrey Joseph Robert March Date of Examination : 24 November 1981 This is an authorized facsimile printed by microfilm/xerography on acid-free paper in 1982 by UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS INTERNATIONAL Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A. London, England Licrolilmôd by Univ. ot Wi3€onsin-Madison g2_05S30 Liè(ùt Collacltm Lemlffia Ottica 'ladrdirl GlMnD, Patrick Ralph ÎI{E COT{CÊPIIJAL DEVELOPI{€IIT OF EIIIS1EIXIS G€ilERAL THÉORY OF RËIÂTIVITY thc Univcr:ity of lJl:con:ln-tladiron, ph.D., l98l University Microfilms lnternaliOnal Ârùo., titcntern 48t06 ^nn @ l98l Patrick Ralph Girard (ttlts titt e card prepared by the University of l,lisconsin) PLÊASÊ NOTE: The negative microfi'lm copy of this dissertatJon was prepared and lnspected by the school grant.ing the degree. lJe are using this fl1m withoùt furtËer {nspectlon or chanEe. If there are any questions about the fi'lm content, piease wrlte d.r'rectly to the school . UNIVERSITY MI CROFILI.IS CONCEPÎUAT'EreTOPITENÎ OF EINSISÏN,S GEIENÂI, ÎHEOAT OF R3I,AlrirIlY À thesi-s subE{tred to the Graduête School of the unLveralty of iflscossts-Hadrson Ln partlal furftllnent of the rêqulre!Êeats for the degree of Doctor of phlloeophy by PATRISIC NATPH 6TRA.R, Degree to be awatded: Dece$ber lg_g1_ llay 1g_ August 19 Âpproved by lteels Lead{ag Co!ûDlttee: t{ lÀ,!r}f^*q__.. THE CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPIV{ENT OF EINSTEIN'S GENERAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY by PATRICK RALPH GIRARD A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (History of Science) at the UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON 19 81 @ Copyrighr by patrick Ralph Gj-rard 198L All Rights Reserved 11 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank Daniel Siegel for his overall advice and particularly for the many hours he spent on editorial work because of ny restricted knowledge of the English language. I an also grateful for his patience with certain philosophical views somewhat in contrast with his ohrn. Further thanks go to Geoffrey Joseph and Robert March for a few suggestions. Fina11y, I want to thank the physics Department of the university of wisconsin-Madison, in particular C. H. Blanchard, for financial support in the form of a Teaching Assistantship while this di.ssertation was in progress, Charles Goebel for reading an early draft of the dissertation, and Jeanne Zwaska for typing the manuscript. 111 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCT ION 1 CHAPTER I " THE SPECIAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY 4 A. Einstein and the Development of the Special Theory of Relativity 4 1. Historical Background of the Principles of STR 5 2. Einstein's Approach 11 a. Einsteinrs early doubts about the concept of absolute velocity Lz b. Vain attempts to reconcile electrornagnetisn with the principle of relativity ?3 c. Rejection of the ether 25 d. Epistemological breakthrough 28 3. Einsteinfs Achievement 31 B. Einsteinrs Epistemological Dissatisfaction with STR 35 1. Historical Debate about the Concept of Absolute Acceleration 37 2, Einstein's Rejection of the Concept of Absolute Acceleration 4L II. THE EXTENSION OF THE SPECIAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY VIA THE EQUIVALENCE PRTNCTPLE (1907- 1912) 43 A. Early Use of the Equivalence Principle (190 7- 1911) 43 1V CHAPTER Page 1. The Idea of the Equivalence Principle 43 a. From the relativity of electri-c and magnetic fields to the relativity of the gravita- tional field 43 b. From the relativity of the gravitational field to the equivalence principle 48 2. Extension of the Principle of Relativity to Unifornly Accelerated Systens 55 a. Space and time in a uniformly accelerated reference system 58 b. Electromagnetic effects in a uniform gravitational field 63 3. Full Confidence in the Equivalence Principle and in a General Relativity (1911) 67 B. Further Use of the Equivalence Principle: The Static Theory of Gravi.tation 82 1. Historical Background 82 a. Prerelativistic theories of gravitation 82 b. The force laws of Poincaré and N{inkowski B5 c. Einstein's relati.vistic field approach 92 d. Abraham's theories 97 e. Nordstrôm's and tr{ie's theories 104 V CHAPTER Page 2. Einstein's Gravitat ion 109 a. Develop ment of the theory 110 b. Consequences 114 c. Problem s and modifications of the theory L20 d. Debate with lvlax Abraham I22 III. FIRST SKETCH OF THE GENERAL THEORY OF RELATTVTTY (1913- 1915) 131 A. Historical Remarks on Tensor Calculus 732 1. Tensors with Respect to the Groups 0 (3 ) and 0(a) 153 2. Tensors wi th Respect to the Groups Associated with a Quadratic Di ffe rent i al Form 141 B. The Einstein- G rossmann Tensor Theory (1913) L47 l. The Generally Covariant Equation of Nlotion 148 ) The Line arly Covariant Field Equations 158 3. Consequences of the Theory 166 a. The Newtonian gravitational field approxination . 166 b. The relativity of inertia . 169 C. Further Elaboration of the Theory . 175 1. The Problem of the Covariance of the Field Equations f75 2. New Hope for an Extended Covariance of the Field Equations I82 V1 CHAPTER Page D. Einstein's Philosophical Views and the Reception of the Theory 197 1 . Einstein's Epistemological Idealism 1g 7 2. Reception of the Theory 204 IV. THE GENERAL THEORY 0F RELATTVTTy (191s -1917) 2L4 A. The Generally Covariant Theory (1915-1916) ZIs 1. The Return to the Riemann- Christoffel Tensor ZIs 2. The Generally Covariant Field Equations ZZz a. Covariant field equations with respect to transfornations of Jacobian 1 ZZ3 b. Generally covariant field equations with the assumption Tuu = Q 231 c. Generally covariant field equations without the assumption TUu-o n3 B. Consequences of the Theory and Experirnental Veri f ication 240 1. First Order Effects: Newton's Law of Gravitation, Deflection of Light Rays, Behavior of Clocks and Rods in a Gravitational Field 240 2. Second Order Effect: Residual Precession of the perihelion of Mercury Z4S 3. Experimental Verification Z4g C. Extension of the Theory: The Cosmological Constant (1917) . 255 v]-1 CHAPTER Page 1. Einstein' s Epi-stenological Dissatisfaction 25s a. Epistemological background 25s b. The problem of the relativity of inertia 7.63 ) Modification of the Field Equations 26s CONCLUS I ON 27s APPENDIX: EINSTEINI S PRIORITY IN THE IVIATTER OF THE FIELD EQUATIONS 277 BI BL IOGRAPHY 294 INTRODUCT ION Among all the physical theories developed by Albert Einstein, the general theory of relativity (GTR) is generally considered as his masterpiece. This theory has yielded the most successful treatment of gravitation known so far, and has, to the present day (1981), brilliantly withstood all the experinental tests to which it has been submitted, while many competing theo ries have been e 1i-minated. Despite its success, the history of the general theory of relativity has received much less attention than the history of the special theory. Two basic circumstances are probably responsible for this. First, between the 1930s and the 1950s, the general theory of relativity was relati.vely neglected by the scientists thenselves because experimental rnethods had not yet reached the sophistication required for the further study of general-relativistic effects. Second, the technicality of the subject matter has hindered historical study of GTR. Though various aspects of the history of the general theory of relativity have been treated 2 elsewherer^1 no comprehensive, detailed historical account of the successive stages in the development of the general theory of relativity has, to my knowledge, been published. It is the purpose of this dissertation to fill that gap. The dissertation will not only analyze the mathematical development of the theory in detail, from 1907 to 1917, but will also pay close attention to Einstein's rnotivations. Though it is generally known that Einstein was notivated by epistemological reasons in the development of GTR, this is the first time that this claim is thoroughly docurnented. By 1905, Einstein had already successfully applied epistemological con- siderations to physics: it was his rejection of the concept of absolute time that made the special theory of relativity (STR) possible. Einstein's next move was to attempt to elininate the concept of absolute space (in particular the concept of absolute acceleration) by extending the principle of relativity. In order to show the continuity of Einstein's concerns in the developrnent of STR and GTR, I will in the 1S"u in particular Jagdish lr{ehra, Einstein, Hilbert, and the Theory of Gravitation: HiEToÏfâÏ o11and/ Boston, U.S.A.: D. Reidel, I974). I shal1 argue against Mehrafs clairn that Hilbert discovered the field equations independently of Einstein. For other accounts, see the b ib 1 io graphy 3 first chapter briefly review the development of the special theory of relativity, and analyze Einstein's dissatisfaction with that theory.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Special Theory of Relativity
    THE SPECIAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY Lecture Notes prepared by J D Cresser Department of Physics Macquarie University July 31, 2003 CONTENTS 1 Contents 1 Introduction: What is Relativity? 2 2 Frames of Reference 5 2.1 A Framework of Rulers and Clocks . 5 2.2 Inertial Frames of Reference and Newton’s First Law of Motion . 7 3 The Galilean Transformation 7 4 Newtonian Force and Momentum 9 4.1 Newton’s Second Law of Motion . 9 4.2 Newton’s Third Law of Motion . 10 5 Newtonian Relativity 10 6 Maxwell’s Equations and the Ether 11 7 Einstein’s Postulates 13 8 Clock Synchronization in an Inertial Frame 14 9 Lorentz Transformation 16 9.1 Length Contraction . 20 9.2 Time Dilation . 22 9.3 Simultaneity . 24 9.4 Transformation of Velocities (Addition of Velocities) . 24 10 Relativistic Dynamics 27 10.1 Relativistic Momentum . 28 10.2 Relativistic Force, Work, Kinetic Energy . 29 10.3 Total Relativistic Energy . 30 10.4 Equivalence of Mass and Energy . 33 10.5 Zero Rest Mass Particles . 34 11 Geometry of Spacetime 35 11.1 Geometrical Properties of 3 Dimensional Space . 35 11.2 Space Time Four Vectors . 38 11.3 Spacetime Diagrams . 40 11.4 Properties of Spacetime Intervals . 41 1 INTRODUCTION: WHAT IS RELATIVITY? 2 1 Introduction: What is Relativity? Until the end of the 19th century it was believed that Newton’s three Laws of Motion and the associated ideas about the properties of space and time provided a basis on which the motion of matter could be completely understood.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Status of the Geodesic Principle in Newtonian and Relativistic Physics1
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by PhilSci Archive On the Status of the Geodesic Principle in Newtonian and Relativistic Physics1 James Owen Weatherall2 Logic and Philosophy of Science University of California, Irvine Abstract A theorem due to Bob Geroch and Pong Soo Jang [\Motion of a Body in General Relativ- ity." Journal of Mathematical Physics 16(1), (1975)] provides a sense in which the geodesic principle has the status of a theorem in General Relativity (GR). I have recently shown that a similar theorem holds in the context of geometrized Newtonian gravitation (Newton- Cartan theory) [Weatherall, J. O. \The Motion of a Body in Newtonian Theories." Journal of Mathematical Physics 52(3), (2011)]. Here I compare the interpretations of these two the- orems. I argue that despite some apparent differences between the theorems, the status of the geodesic principle in geometrized Newtonian gravitation is, mutatis mutandis, strikingly similar to the relativistic case. 1 Introduction The geodesic principle is the central principle of General Relativity (GR) that describes the inertial motion of test particles. It states that free massive test point particles traverse timelike geodesics. There is a long-standing view, originally due to Einstein, that the geodesic principle has a special status in GR that arises because it can be understood as a theorem, rather than a postulate, of the theory. (It turns out that capturing the geodesic principle as a theorem in GR is non-trivial, but a result due to Bob Geroch and Pong Soo Jang (1975) 1Thank you to David Malament and Jeff Barrett for helpful comments on a previous version of this paper and for many stimulating conversations on this topic.
    [Show full text]
  • A Mathematical Derivation of the General Relativistic Schwarzschild
    A Mathematical Derivation of the General Relativistic Schwarzschild Metric An Honors thesis presented to the faculty of the Departments of Physics and Mathematics East Tennessee State University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Honors Scholar and Honors-in-Discipline Programs for a Bachelor of Science in Physics and Mathematics by David Simpson April 2007 Robert Gardner, Ph.D. Mark Giroux, Ph.D. Keywords: differential geometry, general relativity, Schwarzschild metric, black holes ABSTRACT The Mathematical Derivation of the General Relativistic Schwarzschild Metric by David Simpson We briefly discuss some underlying principles of special and general relativity with the focus on a more geometric interpretation. We outline Einstein’s Equations which describes the geometry of spacetime due to the influence of mass, and from there derive the Schwarzschild metric. The metric relies on the curvature of spacetime to provide a means of measuring invariant spacetime intervals around an isolated, static, and spherically symmetric mass M, which could represent a star or a black hole. In the derivation, we suggest a concise mathematical line of reasoning to evaluate the large number of cumbersome equations involved which was not found elsewhere in our survey of the literature. 2 CONTENTS ABSTRACT ................................. 2 1 Introduction to Relativity ...................... 4 1.1 Minkowski Space ....................... 6 1.2 What is a black hole? ..................... 11 1.3 Geodesics and Christoffel Symbols ............. 14 2 Einstein’s Field Equations and Requirements for a Solution .17 2.1 Einstein’s Field Equations .................. 20 3 Derivation of the Schwarzschild Metric .............. 21 3.1 Evaluation of the Christoffel Symbols .......... 25 3.2 Ricci Tensor Components .................
    [Show full text]
  • The Geodesic Spacetime Equation for Body Motion in Gravitational Fields
    The Geodesic Spacetime Equation for Body Motion in Gravitational Fields "The eternal mystery of the world is its comprehensibility" - Albert Einstein ( 1879 - 1955 ) § Einstein's "Law of Equivalence of Acceleration and Gravity" or "The Principle of Equivalence" : Fields of acceleration and fields of gravity are equivalent physical phenomenon. That is, if there's no "upward" acceleration, then there's no "downward" gravity. Preliminary Understanding of the following Mathematical Symbols Naïve realism easily allows ordinary understanding of the mathematical symbols of ; however, for deeper understanding of physical reality it becomes necessary to invent newer and more powerful mathematical tools such as the Christoffel symbol by which a deeper probing of external reality is made entirely possible. Hence, a certain amount of patient indulgence is asked of the serious reader of this mathematical essay since it is strongly suggested that by a thorough reading of these general relativity equations and the tightly woven logic by which they are presented, that with final patience the reader of Relativity Calculator will have a fairly good grasp of the underlying mathematical physics of Einstein's ultimate gravitational equation! A Quick Introductory Meaning of Geodesic Motion Sir Arthur Eddington ( 1882 - 1944 ) on May 29, 1919 tentatively, but empirically, confirmed Einstein's mathematical general relativity conjecture that light passing near the gravity field of the sun was slightly, but convincingly, bent in the spacetime proximate vicinity of the sun, thus showing that on grand cosmic scales there is no such reality for Euclid's straight geometry lines. Likewise, gyroscopic motion will equivalently follow the curvilinear contours of spacetime fabric as influenced by other gravitational fields.
    [Show full text]
  • Einstein's Mistakes
    Einstein’s Mistakes Einstein was the greatest genius of the Twentieth Century, but his discoveries were blighted with mistakes. The Human Failing of Genius. 1 PART 1 An evaluation of the man Here, Einstein grows up, his thinking evolves, and many quotations from him are listed. Albert Einstein (1879-1955) Einstein at 14 Einstein at 26 Einstein at 42 3 Albert Einstein (1879-1955) Einstein at age 61 (1940) 4 Albert Einstein (1879-1955) Born in Ulm, Swabian region of Southern Germany. From a Jewish merchant family. Had a sister Maja. Family rejected Jewish customs. Did not inherit any mathematical talent. Inherited stubbornness, Inherited a roguish sense of humor, An inclination to mysticism, And a habit of grüblen or protracted, agonizing “brooding” over whatever was on its mind. Leading to the thought experiment. 5 Portrait in 1947 – age 68, and his habit of agonizing brooding over whatever was on its mind. He was in Princeton, NJ, USA. 6 Einstein the mystic •“Everyone who is seriously involved in pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe, one that is vastly superior to that of man..” •“When I assess a theory, I ask myself, if I was God, would I have arranged the universe that way?” •His roguish sense of humor was always there. •When asked what will be his reactions to observational evidence against the bending of light predicted by his general theory of relativity, he said: •”Then I would feel sorry for the Good Lord. The theory is correct anyway.” 7 Einstein: Mathematics •More quotations from Einstein: •“How it is possible that mathematics, a product of human thought that is independent of experience, fits so excellently the objects of physical reality?” •Questions asked by many people and Einstein: •“Is God a mathematician?” •His conclusion: •“ The Lord is cunning, but not malicious.” 8 Einstein the Stubborn Mystic “What interests me is whether God had any choice in the creation of the world” Some broadcasters expunged the comment from the soundtrack because they thought it was blasphemous.
    [Show full text]
  • Hypercomplex Algebras and Their Application to the Mathematical
    Hypercomplex Algebras and their application to the mathematical formulation of Quantum Theory Torsten Hertig I1, Philip H¨ohmann II2, Ralf Otte I3 I tecData AG Bahnhofsstrasse 114, CH-9240 Uzwil, Schweiz 1 [email protected] 3 [email protected] II info-key GmbH & Co. KG Heinz-Fangman-Straße 2, DE-42287 Wuppertal, Deutschland 2 [email protected] March 31, 2014 Abstract Quantum theory (QT) which is one of the basic theories of physics, namely in terms of ERWIN SCHRODINGER¨ ’s 1926 wave functions in general requires the field C of the complex numbers to be formulated. However, even the complex-valued description soon turned out to be insufficient. Incorporating EINSTEIN’s theory of Special Relativity (SR) (SCHRODINGER¨ , OSKAR KLEIN, WALTER GORDON, 1926, PAUL DIRAC 1928) leads to an equation which requires some coefficients which can neither be real nor complex but rather must be hypercomplex. It is conventional to write down the DIRAC equation using pairwise anti-commuting matrices. However, a unitary ring of square matrices is a hypercomplex algebra by definition, namely an associative one. However, it is the algebraic properties of the elements and their relations to one another, rather than their precise form as matrices which is important. This encourages us to replace the matrix formulation by a more symbolic one of the single elements as linear combinations of some basis elements. In the case of the DIRAC equation, these elements are called biquaternions, also known as quaternions over the complex numbers. As an algebra over R, the biquaternions are eight-dimensional; as subalgebras, this algebra contains the division ring H of the quaternions at one hand and the algebra C ⊗ C of the bicomplex numbers at the other, the latter being commutative in contrast to H.
    [Show full text]
  • Review Study on “The Black Hole”
    IJIRST –International Journal for Innovative Research in Science & Technology| Volume 2 | Issue 10 | March 2016 ISSN (online): 2349-6010 Review Study on “The Black Hole” Syed G. Ibrahim Department of Engineering Physics (Nanostructured Thin Film Materials Laboratory) Prof. Ram Meghe College of Engineering and Management, Badnera 444701, Maharashtra, India Abstract As a star grows old, swells, then collapses on itself, often you will hear the word “black hole” thrown around. The black hole is a gravitationally collapsed mass, from which no light, matter, or signal of any kind can escape. These exotic objects have captured our imagination ever since they were predicted by Einstein's Theory of General Relativity in 1915. So what exactly is a black hole? A black hole is what remains when a massive star dies. Not every star will become a black hole, only a select few with extremely large masses. In order to have the ability to become a black hole, a star will have to have about 20 times the mass of our Sun. No known process currently active in the universe can form black holes of less than stellar mass. This is because all present black hole formation is through gravitational collapse, and the smallest mass which can collapse to form a black hole produces a hole approximately 1.5-3.0 times the mass of the sun .Smaller masses collapse to form white dwarf stars or neutron stars. Keywords: Escape Velocity, Horizon, Schwarzschild Radius, Black Hole _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ I. INTRODUCTION Soon after Albert Einstein formulated theory of relativity, it was realized that his equations have solutions in closed form.
    [Show full text]
  • ON the GALILEAN COVARIANCE of CLASSICAL MECHANICS Abstract
    Report INP No 1556/PH ON THE GALILEAN COVARIANCE OF CLASSICAL MECHANICS Andrzej Horzela, Edward Kapuścik and Jarosław Kempczyński Department of Theoretical Physics, H. Niewodniczański Institute of Nuclear Physics, ul. Radzikowskiego 152, 31 342 Krakow. Poland and Laboratorj- of Theoretical Physics, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 101 000 Moscow, USSR, Head Post Office. P.O. Box 79 Abstract: A Galilean covariant approach to classical mechanics of a single interact¬ ing particle is described. In this scheme constitutive relations defining forces are rejected and acting forces are determined by some fundamental differential equa¬ tions. It is shown that the total energy of the interacting particle transforms under Galilean transformations differently from the kinetic energy. The statement is il¬ lustrated on the exactly solvable examples of the harmonic oscillator and the case of constant forces and also, in the suitable version of the perturbation theory, for the anharmonic oscillator. Kraków, August 1991 I. Introduction According to the principle of relativity the laws of physics do' not depend on the choice of the reference frame in which these laws are formulated. The change of the reference frame induces only a change in the language used for the formulation of the laws. In particular, changing the reference frame we change the space-time coordinates of events and functions describing physical quantities but all these changes have to follow strictly defined ways. When that is achieved we talk about a covariant formulation of a given theory and only in such formulation we may satisfy the requirements of the principle of relativity. The non-covariant formulations of physical theories are deprived from objectivity and it is difficult to judge about their real physical meaning.
    [Show full text]
  • PSY 4960/5960 Science Vs. Pseudoscience Human Life
    PSY 4960/5960 Science vs. Pseudoscience •What is science? Human Life Expectancy Why has the average human lifespan doubled over the past 200 years? 1 Quick Quiz • True or false? • Most people use only about 10% of their brain capacity • Drinking coffee is a good way to sober up after heavy drinking • Hypnosis can help us to recall things we’ve forgotten • If you’re unsure of your answer while taking a test, it’s best to stick with your initial answer Common Sense? •Look before you leap. •He who hesitates is lost. •Birds of a feather flock together. •Opposites attract. •Absence makes the heart grow fonder. •Out of sight, out of mind. • •Better safe than sorry. •Nothing ventured, nothing gained. •Two heads are better than one. •Too many cooks spoil the bthbroth. •The bigger the better. •Good things come in small packages. •Actions speak louder than words. •The pen is mightier than the sword. •Clothes make the man. •Don’t judge a book by its cover. •The more the merrier. •Two’s company, three’s a crowd. •You’re never too old to learn. •You can’t teach an old dog new tricks. Lilienfeld et al. (2007) Operational Definition • Science is – “A set of methods designed to describe and interpret observed or inferred phenomena, past or pp,resent, and aimed at building a testable body of knowledge open to rejection or confirmation.” – A toolbox of skills designed to prevent us from fooling ourselves – Learning to minimize your thinking errors – Self‐correcting Shermer (2002) 2 What Makes a Good Scientist? • Communalism –a willingness to share data • Disinterestedness –trying not to be influenced by personal or financial investments • A tiny voice saying “I might be wrong” • “Utter honesty –a kind of leaning over Merton (1942) backwards” Sagan (1995) Feynman (1988) Quick Quiz Write down the names of as many living scientists as you can, including their fields.
    [Show full text]
  • Anton Pannekoek: Ways of Viewing Science and Society
    STUDIES IN THE HISTORY OF KNOWLEDGE Tai, Van der Steen & Van Dongen (eds) Dongen & Van Steen der Van Tai, Edited by Chaokang Tai, Bart van der Steen, and Jeroen van Dongen Anton Pannekoek: Ways of Viewing Science and Society Ways of Viewing ScienceWays and Society Anton Pannekoek: Anton Pannekoek: Ways of Viewing Science and Society Studies in the History of Knowledge This book series publishes leading volumes that study the history of knowledge in its cultural context. It aspires to offer accounts that cut across disciplinary and geographical boundaries, while being sensitive to how institutional circumstances and different scales of time shape the making of knowledge. Series Editors Klaas van Berkel, University of Groningen Jeroen van Dongen, University of Amsterdam Anton Pannekoek: Ways of Viewing Science and Society Edited by Chaokang Tai, Bart van der Steen, and Jeroen van Dongen Amsterdam University Press Cover illustration: (Background) Fisheye lens photo of the Zeiss Planetarium Projector of Artis Amsterdam Royal Zoo in action. (Foreground) Fisheye lens photo of a portrait of Anton Pannekoek displayed in the common room of the Anton Pannekoek Institute for Astronomy. Source: Jeronimo Voss Cover design: Coördesign, Leiden Lay-out: Crius Group, Hulshout isbn 978 94 6298 434 9 e-isbn 978 90 4853 500 2 (pdf) doi 10.5117/9789462984349 nur 686 Creative Commons License CC BY NC ND (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0) The authors / Amsterdam University Press B.V., Amsterdam 2019 Some rights reserved. Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, any part of this book may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise).
    [Show full text]
  • Equivalence Principle (WEP) of General Relativity Using a New Quantum Gravity Theory Proposed by the Authors Called Electro-Magnetic Quantum Gravity Or EMQG (Ref
    WHAT ARE THE HIDDEN QUANTUM PROCESSES IN EINSTEIN’S WEAK PRINCIPLE OF EQUIVALENCE? Tom Ostoma and Mike Trushyk 48 O’HARA PLACE, Brampton, Ontario, L6Y 3R8 [email protected] Monday April 12, 2000 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We wish to thank R. Mongrain (P.Eng) for our lengthy conversations on the nature of space, time, light, matter, and CA theory. ABSTRACT We provide a quantum derivation of Einstein’s Weak Equivalence Principle (WEP) of general relativity using a new quantum gravity theory proposed by the authors called Electro-Magnetic Quantum Gravity or EMQG (ref. 1). EMQG is manifestly compatible with Cellular Automata (CA) theory (ref. 2 and 4), and is also based on a new theory of inertia (ref. 5) proposed by R. Haisch, A. Rueda, and H. Puthoff (which we modified and called Quantum Inertia, QI). QI states that classical Newtonian Inertia is a property of matter due to the strictly local electrical force interactions contributed by each of the (electrically charged) elementary particles of the mass with the surrounding (electrically charged) virtual particles (virtual masseons) of the quantum vacuum. The sum of all the tiny electrical forces (photon exchanges with the vacuum particles) originating in each charged elementary particle of the accelerated mass is the source of the total inertial force of a mass which opposes accelerated motion in Newton’s law ‘F = MA’. The well known paradoxes that arise from considerations of accelerated motion (Mach’s principle) are resolved, and Newton’s laws of motion are now understood at the deeper quantum level. We found that gravity also involves the same ‘inertial’ electromagnetic force component that exists in inertial mass.
    [Show full text]
  • Special Relativity
    Special Relativity April 19, 2014 1 Galilean transformations 1.1 The invariance of Newton’s second law Newtonian second law, F = ma i is a 3-vector equation and is therefore valid if we make any rotation of our frame of reference. Thus, if O j is a rotation matrix and we rotate the force and the acceleration vectors, ~i i j F = O jO i i j a~ = O ja then we have F~ = ma~ and Newton’s second law is invariant under rotations. There are other invariances. Any change of the coordinates x ! x~ that leaves the acceleration unchanged is also an invariance of Newton’s law. Equating and integrating twice, a~ = a d2x~ d2x = dt2 dt2 gives x~ = x + x0 − v0t The addition of a constant, x0, is called a translation and the change of velocity of the frame of reference is called a boost. Finally, integrating the equivalence dt~= dt shows that we may reset the zero of time (a time translation), t~= t + t0 The complete set of transformations is 0 P xi = j Oijxj Rotations x0 = x + a T ranslations 0 t = t + t0 Origin of time x0 = x + vt Boosts (change of velocity) There are three independent parameters describing rotations (for example, specify a direction in space by giving two angles (θ; ') then specify a third angle, , of rotation around that direction). Translations can be in the x; y or z directions, giving three more parameters. Three components for the velocity vector and one more to specify the origin of time gives a total of 10 parameters.
    [Show full text]