Question about Special Relativity

grounded
Messages
85
Reaction score
1
Was not the Special Theory of Relativity and the Lorentz Transformation created simply to explain why the Michelson-Morely experiment did not detect any change in light caused by the ether?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It was an Irish physicisist (what was his name?) who first suggested that the null result of the M-M experiment might be due to a compression of the apparatus along the direction of motion of the ether. THis idea was part of the reluctance to let go of the notion ofth ether which physics had devoted so much time and theory to. Lorentz then came up with his contraction formula. SO it was, initially, used for length contraction as caused by the ether.

Special relativity was produced by Einstein due to completely separate initial assumptions (the postulates) which require there to be no absolute reference frame, and therefore no ether. IT just so happened that SR required there to be length contraction along the direction of relative motion, and the formula for this contraction was exactly the same as the one developed by Lorentz.
 
So to be more concise: yes.
 
Originally posted by Chi Meson
It was an Irish physicisist (what was his name?) who first suggested that the null result of the M-M experiment might be due to a compression of the apparatus along the direction of motion of the ether.
George Francis FitzGerald (1851-1901).
 
Originally posted by grounded
Was not the Special Theory of Relativity and the Lorentz Transformation created simply to explain why the Michelson-Morely experiment did not detect any change in light caused by the ether?

I feel that this is a massive understatement of the problem Einstein addressed. The issue at stake, the reason the M-M experiment was done, was due to Maxwell's prediction. When Maxwell predicted that the speed of electro-Magnetic waves was independent of any other velocities, he threw the tried and true Galilean transforms out the window. This created a schism between Electromagnetism and classical mechanics which disrupted the world of physics for 50yrs. Einsteins derivation tied it all back together. The beauty of it was the simplicity of the derivation, the result was the already known Lorentz transforms, the method gave them a simple clear physical meaning.
 
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
Back
Top