Einstein's redshift derivations: its history from 1907 to 1921

Circumscribere: International Journal for the History of Science 22:1-16 (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Einstein's gravitational redshift derivation in his famous 1916 paper on general relativity seems to be problematic, being mired in what looks like conceptual difficulties or at least contradictions or gaps in his exposition. Was this derivation a blunder? To answer this question, we will consider Einstein’s redshift derivations from his first one in 1907 to the 1921 derivation made in his Princeton lectures on relativity. This will enable to see the unfolding of an interdependent network of concepts and heuristic derivations in which previous ideas inform and condition later developments. The resulting derivations and views on coordinates and clocks are in fact not without inconsistencies. However, we can see these difficulties as an aspect of an evolving network understood as a “work in progress”.

Other Versions

No versions found

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-07-13

Downloads
488 (#55,987)

6 months
149 (#26,917)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Mario Bacelar Valente
Pablo de Olavide University

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

The gravitational red shift as a test of general relativity: History and analysis.John Earman & Clark Glymour - 1980 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 11 (3):175-214.
Mesh and measure in early general relativity.Olivier Darrigol - 2015 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 52 (Part B):163-187.
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science part c: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences.[author unknown] - 1997 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 28 (4):V.

Add more references