Defining Special Relativity & General Relativity

[Mattara]

Yes ,I'm more than satisfied. It has been interesting to follow your discussion.

 

[rczmiller]

An amateur’s contribution

For what its worth, this is how I try to explain it to my friends when they mistakenly ask:

Special Relativity presents the theory that the laws of physics are the same for all non-accelerating objects. Thus, no matter how fast something is traveling, space/time will be perceived so that light is traveling at one speed. It also presents the famous E=MC2 equation (actually written shortly following the SR paper, but the basics were there so I don’t confuse people with this detail unless they ask).

General Relativity is a much more complex interpretation of relativity that uses intense mathematical equations to explain how space/time bends and warps to create the perception of gravity.

I throw in at the end: “interestingly enough, many experiments have been conducted to test these theories, and even though they may seem impossible, the experiments support Einstein’s theories”.

Good luck!

 

[rczmiller]

If they ask about E=MC2, all that equation tells us is that energy and matter are the same thing, of course!

 

[pmb_phy]

For what its worth, this is how I try to explain it to my friends when they mistakenly ask:

Special Relativity presents the theory that the laws of physics are the same for all non-accelerating objects.

That is an incorrect statement since SR applies to accelerating objects as observed from an inertial frame. If they make the claim you said her then tell them they're wrong.
[/quote]
General Relativity is a much more complex interpretation of relativity that uses intense mathematical equations to explain how space/time bends and warps to create the perception of gravity.[/quote]Just because the spacetime is flat it doesn't mean that the frame is non-inertial.

If they ask about E=MC2, all that equation tells us is that energy and matter are the same thing, of course!

The inertial energy E of a body is not always proportional its mass m. That holds in certain cases, i.e. when the body is isolated. It does not hold in general. See counter example at

http://www.geocities.com/physics_world/sr/inertial_energy_vs_mass.htm

Pete

 

[rczmiller]

It's relative

Pete,

Thanks for your comments. I guess it all depends on where you are standing. If you are on the object (railcar, spaceship, Earth), then as far as the object is concerned it does not matter how fast it is moving, the laws of physics should be consistant as long as the object does not accelerate. Is this correct?

I read Einstein's 1935 book on SR & GR a few years ago. It was intended to provide the novice reader a good introduction into SR & GR. If I remember correctly, it took Einstein 32 chapters to summerize SR & GR. In 5 sentences, something is going to be left out that someone feels is important. However, on the GR side, Einstein used equal length rod to describe how matter warps space/time to cause the effect of gravity. I always liked the way he initially presented GR in that manner.

Oh well, just my personal preference!

 

[aishwary gautam]

pleasezz give the name of the 1935 Einstein bokk you mentioned:zzz: