Talk:PlanetPhysics/Apparent Incompatability of the Law of Propagation of Light
Add topicOriginal TeX Content from PlanetPhysics Archive
[edit source]%%% This file is part of PlanetPhysics snapshot of 2011-09-01 %%% Primary Title: The Apparent Incompatability of the Law of Propagation of Light %%% Primary Category Code: 03.30.+p %%% Filename: ApparentIncompatabilityOfTheLawOfPropagationOfLight.tex %%% Version: 2 %%% Owner: bloftin %%% Author(s): bloftin %%% PlanetPhysics is released under the GNU Free Documentation License. %%% You should have received a file called fdl.txt along with this file. %%% If not, please write to gnu@gnu.org. \documentclass[12pt]{article} \pagestyle{empty} \setlength{\paperwidth}{8.5in} \setlength{\paperheight}{11in}
\setlength{\topmargin}{0.00in} \setlength{\headsep}{0.00in} \setlength{\headheight}{0.00in} \setlength{\evensidemargin}{0.00in} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{0.00in} \setlength{\textwidth}{6.5in} \setlength{\textheight}{9.00in} \setlength{\voffset}{0.00in} \setlength{\hoffset}{0.00in} \setlength{\marginparwidth}{0.00in} \setlength{\marginparsep}{0.00in} \setlength{\parindent}{0.00in} \setlength{\parskip}{0.15in}
\usepackage{html}
% this is the default PlanetMath preamble. as your knowledge % of TeX increases, you will probably want to edit this, but % it should be fine as is for beginners.
% almost certainly you want these \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{amsfonts}
% used for TeXing text within eps files %\usepackage{psfrag} % need this for including graphics (\includegraphics) %\usepackage{graphicx} % for neatly defining theorems and propositions %\usepackage{amsthm} % making logically defined graphics %\usepackage{xypic}
% there are many more packages, add them here as you need them
% define commands here
\begin{document}
\subsection{The Apparent Incompatability of the Law of Propagation of Light
with the Principle of Relativity} From \htmladdnormallink{Relativity: The Special and General Theory}{http://planetphysics.us/encyclopedia/SpecialTheoryOfRelativity.html} by \htmladdnormallink{Albert Einstein}{http://planetphysics.us/encyclopedia/AlbertEinstein.html} There is hardly a simpler law in physics than that according to which light is propagated in empty space. Every child at school knows, or believes he knows, that this propagation takes place in straight lines with a \htmladdnormallink{velocity}{http://planetphysics.us/encyclopedia/Velocity.html} $c= 300,000$ km./sec. At all events we know with great exactness that this velocity is the same for all colours, because if this were not the case, the minimum of emission would not be observed simultaneously for different colours during the eclipse of a fixed star by its dark neighbour. By means of similar considerations based on observations of double stars, the Dutch astronomer De Sitter was also able to show that the velocity of propagation of light cannot depend on the velocity of \htmladdnormallink{motion}{http://planetphysics.us/encyclopedia/CosmologicalConstant.html} of the body emitting the light. The assumption that this velocity of propagation is dependent on the direction ``in space" is in itself improbable.
In short, let us assume that the simple law of the constancy of the velocity of light $c$ (in vacuum) is justifiably believed by the child at school. Who would imagine that this simple law has plunged the conscientiously thoughtful physicist into the greatest intellectual difficulties? Let us consider how these difficulties arise.
Of course we must refer the process of the propagation of light (and indeed every other process) to a rigid reference-body (co-ordinate \htmladdnormallink{system}{http://planetphysics.us/encyclopedia/GenericityInOpenSystems.html}). As such a system let us again choose our embankment. We shall imagine the air above it to have been removed. If a ray of light be sent along the embankment, we see from the above that the tip of the ray will be transmitted with the velocity $c$ relative to the embankment. Now let us suppose that our railway carriage is again travelling along the railway lines with the velocity $v$, and that its direction is the same as that of the ray of light, but its velocity of course much less. Let us inquire about the velocity of propagation of the ray of light relative to the carriage. It is obvious that we can here apply the consideration of the previous \htmladdnormallink{section}{http://planetphysics.us/encyclopedia/IsomorphicObjectsUnderAnIsomorphism.html}, since the ray of light plays the part of the man walking along relatively to the carriage. The velocity $w$ of the man relative to the embankment is here replaced by the velocity of light relative to the embankment. $w$ is the required velocity of light with respect to the carriage, and we have
$$w = c-v.$$
The velocity of propagation ot a ray of light relative to the carriage thus comes cut smaller than $c$.
But this result comes into conflict with the principle of relativity set forth in Section V. For, like every other general law of nature, the law of the \htmladdnormallink{transmission}{http://planetphysics.us/encyclopedia/FluorescenceCrossCorrelationSpectroscopy.html} of light in vacuo [in vacuum] must, according to the principle of relativity, be the same for the railway carriage as reference-body as when the rails are the body of reference. But, from our above consideration, this would appear to be impossible. If every ray of light is propagated relative to the embankment with the velocity $c$, then for this reason it would appear that another law of propagation of light must necessarily hold with respect to the carriage---a result contradictory to the principle of relativity.
In view of this dilemma there appears to be nothing else for it than to abandon either the principle of relativity or the simple law of the propagation of light in vacuo. Those of you who have carefully followed the preceding discussion are almost sure to expect that we should retain the principle of relativity, which appeals so convincingly to the intellect because it is so natural and simple. The law of the propagation of light in vacuo would then have to be replaced by a more complicated law conformable to the principle of relativity. The development of \htmladdnormallink{theoretical physics}{http://planetphysics.us/encyclopedia/PhysicalMathematics2.html} shows, however, that we cannot pursue this course. The epoch-making theoretical investigations of H. A. Lorentz on the electrodynamical and optical phenomena connected with moving bodies show that experience in this \htmladdnormallink{domain}{http://planetphysics.us/encyclopedia/Bijective.html} leads conclusively to a theory of electromagnetic phenomena, of which the law of the constancy of the velocity of light in vacuo is a necessary consequence. Prominent theoretical physicists were theref ore more inclined to reject the principle of relativity, in spite of the fact that no empirical data had been found which were contradictory to this principle.
At this juncture the theory of relativity entered the arena. As a result of an analysis of the physical conceptions of time and space, it became evident that \emph{in realily there is not the least incompatibilitiy between the principle of relativity and the law of propagation of light}, and that by systematically holding fast to both these laws a logically rigid theory could be arrived at. This theory has been called the \emph{special theory of relativity} to distinguish it from the extended theory, with which we shall deal later. In the following pages we shall present the fundamental ideas of the special theory of relativity.
\subsection{References}
This article is derived from the Einstein Reference Archive (marxists.org) 1999, 2002. \htmladdnormallink{Einstein Reference Archive}{http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/einstein/index.htm} which is under the FDL copyright.
\end{document}