- #1
PhizzicsPhan
- 118
- 0
Hendrik Lorentz, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist who was a mentor to Einstein, developed his own theory of relativity before Einstein. Einstein's theory uses the "Lorentz transformations" explicitly, but the interpretation of these formalisms is quite different in each theory.
Einstein made the speed of light absolute in his theory, as a postulate, which results necessarily in the malleability of space and time (because the speed of light is measured necessarily by distance/time, so, if the speed of light is kept constant, distance and/or time must be malleable). Ironically, then, in Einstein's theory only the speed of light is absolute and all other relevant variables are relative.
Lorentz, however, viewed the null result of Michelson-Morley, and thus the Lorentz transformations themselves, as resulting from the interaction of matter with an immaterial ether. That is, as matter speeds up it becomes compressed in the direction of motion, similar to how matter will expand as it is heated and contract when cooled. For Lorentz, space and time were absolute and the speed of light was relative, depending on the motion of the observer, as is the case with all other motion in our universe.
Lorentzian and Einsteinian relativity are today viewed as being empirically equivalent because they share the same key formalisms, though of course Lorentz is remembered as a footnote to Einstein's renown.
However, I'm curious what people can suggest about a generalized approach to Lorentzian relativity? Did Lorentz himself generalize his theory of relativity to apply to all frames and not just inertial frames, as Einstein did, or have others successfully generalized Lorentzian relativity?
With increasing interest in the "vacuum" or "Higgs field" as the modern-day equivalents of the ether, it seems that more physicists are taking background dependent theories seriously. This would of course make unification with quantum mechanics that much easier because QM is background dependent (even though QFT is not).
Einstein made the speed of light absolute in his theory, as a postulate, which results necessarily in the malleability of space and time (because the speed of light is measured necessarily by distance/time, so, if the speed of light is kept constant, distance and/or time must be malleable). Ironically, then, in Einstein's theory only the speed of light is absolute and all other relevant variables are relative.
Lorentz, however, viewed the null result of Michelson-Morley, and thus the Lorentz transformations themselves, as resulting from the interaction of matter with an immaterial ether. That is, as matter speeds up it becomes compressed in the direction of motion, similar to how matter will expand as it is heated and contract when cooled. For Lorentz, space and time were absolute and the speed of light was relative, depending on the motion of the observer, as is the case with all other motion in our universe.
Lorentzian and Einsteinian relativity are today viewed as being empirically equivalent because they share the same key formalisms, though of course Lorentz is remembered as a footnote to Einstein's renown.
However, I'm curious what people can suggest about a generalized approach to Lorentzian relativity? Did Lorentz himself generalize his theory of relativity to apply to all frames and not just inertial frames, as Einstein did, or have others successfully generalized Lorentzian relativity?
With increasing interest in the "vacuum" or "Higgs field" as the modern-day equivalents of the ether, it seems that more physicists are taking background dependent theories seriously. This would of course make unification with quantum mechanics that much easier because QM is background dependent (even though QFT is not).