Graduate studies at Western
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 29 (2):223-243 (1998)
|Abstract||Einstein's 1935 derivation of mass-energy equivalence is philosophically important because it contains both a criticism of purported demonstrations that proceed by analogy and strong motivations for the definitions of the 'new' dynamical quantities (viz relativistic momentum, relativistic kinetic energy and relativistic energy). In this paper, I argue that Einstein's criticism and insights are still relevant today by showing how his derivation goes beyond Friedman's demonstration of this result in his Foundations of Spacetime Theories. Along the way, I isolate three distinct physical claims associated with Einstein's famous equation that are sometimes not clearly distinguished in philosophical discussions of spacetime theory.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Amit Hagar (2008). Length Matters: The Einstein–Swann Correspondence and the Constructive Approach to the Special Theory of Relativity. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 39 (3):532-556.
Robert DiSalle (1992). Einstein, Newton and the Empirical Foundations of Space Time Geometry. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 6 (3):181 – 189.
Arthur Fine, The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Argument in Quantum Theory. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Francisco Flores (1999). Einstein's Theory of Theories and Types of Theoretical Explanation. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 13 (2):123 – 134.
Francisco Flores (1998). Einstein's 1935 Derivation of E=Mc2. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 29 (2):223-243.
Francisco Flores (2005). Interpretations of Einstein's Equation E = Mc. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 19 (3):245 – 260.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads10 ( #114,693 of 754,244 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,000 of 754,244 )
How can I increase my downloads?