Could this experiment prove special relativity to be wrong?

In summary: A link to a published paper in a peer-reviewed journal, or an article on a reputable website, is acceptable. A link to a random website or an unpublished paper is not.
  • #1
Steven2007
10
0
Think about an electric charged object moves linely, it will produce current hence the magnetic field.

But if the obserser moves together with the electron charged object, so there is no relative movement between them, that means the electric charged object is static to the observer, hence there is no current and no magnetic field to the observer.

What does that mean? It means that if you bound a magnetic field detector with the object, the detector will not detect the magnetic filed, but if you separate them, the detector will detect the magnetic field! That is unbelievable!

In fact it was an done experiment by a group of researchers and it proved the bounded detector could detect the magnetic field.

I think that means "ether" may be exist, and a lot of concepts might be different as defined, like space, speed, time etc.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
No, that just means there is no frame-invariant meaning to "there is a magnetic field" or "there is an electric field". The magnetic field in one frame, maybe an electric field in another frame. Its correct that you may measure the magnetic field but the measurement doesn't come with the label "magnetic field"!
Its a very well known situation which can be addressed with special relativity very well. See here and here!
 
  • #3
In fact it is special relativity (the fact the Maxwell Equations are invariant under Lorentz Transformations) what explains those experimental results. :-)
 
  • #4
Steven2007 said:
In fact it was an done experiment by a group of researchers and it proved the bounded detector could detect the magnetic field.
Please provide the reference for this claim.
 
  • #5
DaleSpam said:
Please provide the reference for this claim.
Hi DaleSpam,

The reference is published in Chinese, I have tried to find the English version but failed. The link is here
<<unacceptable link removed>>

It has some discription in English:

"
The Experiments Which is Contradictory of the Special Theory of Relativity

Zhu Yong Qiang

(Department of Physics, Fudan University, Shanghai, 20433) Hao Ji

(Shanghai East electromagnetic wave’s research institute, shanghai, 202150)
Abstract: The paper introduce the successful two experiments in noearch’s inertia system: one is the experiment of used the smashed electro magnetic wave to determine the self-velosity in any vehide on the earth, another is the experiment of the regerence somebody following up the motion of charged body can determine the week magnetic by the motion of charged body.

Key Word: the special theory of relativity, the SEW (smashed electro magnetic wave) , reference somebody following up the motion of charged body.

"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #6
Shyan said:
No, that just means there is no frame-invariant meaning to "there is a magnetic field" or "there is an electric field". The magnetic field in one frame, maybe an electric field in another frame. Its correct that you may measure the magnetic field but the measurement doesn't come with the label "magnetic field"!
Its a very well known situation which can be addressed with special relativity very well. See here and here!

Thanks for reply.
According to the experiment I have mentioned(unfortunately it was published in Chinese), the charged object and detector moved at the speed of 1m/s, I don't think it's necessory to take the effect of relativity into account.

If a detector shows different results in these two situation(bounded and separated ), it means the detector detects the effect of relativity at such low speed, I don't think it would be real.
 
  • #7
mattt said:
In fact it is special relativity (the fact the Maxwell Equations are invariant under Lorentz Transformations) what explains those experimental results. :-)

Thanks.
But moving electric charge produce current and current produce magnetic field, it doesn't have to get this answer through Maxwell Equations, does it? :)
 
  • #8
Steven2007 said:
Hi DaleSpam,

The reference is published in Chinese, I have tried to find the English version but failed. The link is here
<<unacceptable link deleted>>

It has some discription in English:

"
The Experiments Which is Contradictory of the Special Theory of Relativity

Zhu Yong Qiang

(Department of Physics, Fudan University, Shanghai, 20433) Hao Ji

(Shanghai East electromagnetic wave’s research institute, shanghai, 202150)
Abstract: The paper introduce the successful two experiments in noearch’s inertia system: one is the experiment of used the smashed electro magnetic wave to determine the self-velosity in any vehide on the earth, another is the experiment of the regerence somebody following up the motion of charged body can determine the week magnetic by the motion of charged body.

Key Word: the special theory of relativity, the SEW (smashed electro magnetic wave) , reference somebody following up the motion of charged body.

"

There is nothing contradictory to SR. They detected a force applied to the charged particle. There is no way to say it was an electric or a magnetic force. As I said, the measurement doesn't come with a label "magnetic field". They need to relearn SR.

Steven2007 said:
Thanks for reply.
According to the experiment I have mentioned(unfortunately it was published in Chinese), the charged object and detector moved at the speed of 1m/s, I don't think it's necessory to take the effect of relativity into account.

If a detector shows different results in these two situation(bounded and separated ), it means the detector detects the effect of relativity at such low speed, I don't think it would be real.
Doesn't matter. The ## c\to \infty ## limit of the transformations applies here which again explains the experiment.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #9
Shyan said:
There is nothing contradictory to SR. They detected a force applied to the charged particle. There is no way to say it was an electric or a magnetic force. As I said, the measurement doesn't come with a label "magnetic field". They need to relearn SR.Doesn't matter. The ## c\to \infty ## limit of the transformations applies here which again explains the experiment.

No they didn't detect a force applied to the charged particle, they detected a voltage on a solinoid produced by a changing magnetic field(when accelerating and deaccelerating the charged object), so it must be magnetic field
 
  • #10
Steven2007 said:
The reference is published in Chinese, I have tried to find the English version but failed. The link is here
<<link deleted>>

It has some discription in English:
I am sorry, but this reference does not meet PF's minimum quality standard, which is frankly a very low standard to begin with. This reference is simply not nearly the kind of evidence that would be required to cast even a slightest doubt on SR given the wealth of high quality reproducible data that is available:
http://www.edu-observatory.org/physics-faq/Relativity/SR/experiments.html

The advice that you have received from the other respondents correctly addresses the physics of your question, but we cannot discuss this further here in the context of an unacceptable-quality reference which is claiming a violation of SR.
 
Last edited:

1. Will this experiment completely disprove special relativity?

No, this experiment alone cannot disprove special relativity. Special relativity has been extensively tested and validated through numerous experiments and observations. It would take multiple experiments with consistent results to potentially challenge or disprove the theory.

2. What are the potential implications if this experiment were to disprove special relativity?

If this experiment were to disprove special relativity, it would require a major overhaul of our understanding of the fundamental laws of physics. It could also call into question other related theories, such as general relativity and quantum mechanics.

3. How would you design an experiment to test special relativity?

An experiment to test special relativity would involve measuring the speed of light in different frames of reference and comparing the results. This could be done using advanced technology such as high-precision lasers and atomic clocks.

4. Has any previous experiment challenged or disproved special relativity?

No, to date, no experiment has been able to disprove special relativity. In fact, the theory has been consistently validated by numerous experiments, including the famous Michelson-Morley experiment and the measurements of time dilation in particle accelerators.

5. What are the potential limitations of this experiment in testing special relativity?

One potential limitation of this experiment is that it may only apply to a specific scenario or situation, and cannot be generalized to all of special relativity. Additionally, there may be other factors or variables that could affect the results of the experiment, making it difficult to draw definitive conclusions. Further research and experimentation would be needed to confirm any potential challenges to special relativity.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
148
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
20
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
21
Views
612
Replies
1
Views
249
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
51
Views
3K
Back
Top