russ_watters
Mentor
- 23,746
- 11,192
Google yields quite a bit: http://www.mu6.com/einstein.htmlOriginally posted by Mr. Robin Parsons
Do you have any references that point out the difference?
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4934
The second link provides a full text of a lecture by Einstien. Excerpts:
Its also been discussed here.The next position which it was possible to take up in face of this state of things appeared to be the following. The ether does not exist at all. The electromagnetic fields are not states of a medium, and are not bound down to any bearer, but they are independent realities which are not reducible to anything else, exactly like the atoms of ponderable matter.
Thus we may also say, I think, that the ether of the general theory of relativity is the outcome of the Lorentzian ether, through relativation.
Recapitulating, we may say that according to the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an ether. According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only wonld be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense. But this ether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts which may be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it.
Last edited by a moderator: