David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In The Principle of Relativity. Dover 35-65 (1923)
It is known that Maxwell’s electrodynamics—as usually understood at the present time—when applied to moving bodies, leads to asymmetries which do not appear to be inherent in the phenomena. Take, for example, the reciprocal electrodynamic action of a magnet and a conductor. The observable phenomenon here depends only on the relative motion of the conductor and the magnet, whereas the customary view draws a sharp distinction between the two cases in which either the one or the other of these bodies is in motion. For if the magnet is in motion and the conductor at rest, there arises in the neighbourhood of the magnet an electric ﬁeld with a certain deﬁnite energy, producing a current at the places where parts of the conductor are situated. But if the magnet is stationary and the conductor in motion, no electric ﬁeld arises in the neighbourhood of the magnet. In the conductor, however, we ﬁnd an electromotive force, to which in itself there is no corresponding energy, but which gives rise—assuming equality of relative motion in the two cases discussed—to electric currents of the same path and intensity as those produced by the electric forces in the former case. Examples of this sort, together with the unsuccessful attempts to discover any motion of the earth relatively to the “light medium,” suggest that the phenomena of electrodynamics as well as of mechanics possess no properties corresponding to the idea of absolute rest. They suggest rather that, as has already been shown to the ﬁrst order of small quantities, the same laws of electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of reference for which the equations of mechanics hold good.1 We will raise this conjecture (the purport of which will hereafter be called the “Principle of Relativity”) to the status of a postulate, and also introduce another postulate, which is only apparently irreconcilable with the former, namely, that light is always propagated in empty space with a deﬁnite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body..
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Dimitria Electra Gatzia & R. D. Ramsier (2015). On Special Relativity and Temporal Illusions. Erkenntnis 80 (2):433-436.
Steven Gimbel (2004). Un-Conventional Wisdom: Theory-Specificity in Reichenbach's Geometric Conventionalism. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 35 (3):457-481.
Ben Almassi (2009). Trust in Expert Testimony: Eddington's 1919 Eclipse Expedition and the British Response to General Relativity. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 40 (1):57-67.
Robert Disalle (1995). Spacetime Theory as Physical Geometry. Erkenntnis 42 (3):317-337.
Diego Meschini & Markku Lehto (2006). Is Empty Spacetime a Physical Thing? Foundations of Physics 36 (8):1193-1216.
Similar books and articles
John Norton, Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity and the Problems in the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies That Led Him to It.
Robert Rynasiewicz & Jürgen Renn (2006). The Turning Point for Einstein's Annus Mirabilis☆. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 37 (1):5-35.
Marton Gomori & Laszlo E. Szabo, Is the Relativity Principle Consistent with Electrodynamics? Towards a Logico-Empiricist Reconstruction of a Physical Theory.
Roberto Torretti (1983/1996). Relativity and Geometry. Dover Publications.
Added to index2009-04-07
Total downloads48 ( #70,025 of 1,725,580 )
Recent downloads (6 months)15 ( #48,703 of 1,725,580 )
How can I increase my downloads?