What Einstein meant when he termed something a 'mollusc'

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bradenbraden
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Einstein
Bradenbraden
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
I have been reading over the two theories, and cannot figure out what Einstein meant when he termed something a 'mollusc'. Can someone please explain?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


I think you're talking about this:
For this reason non-rigid reference-bodies are used which are as a whole not only moving in any way whatsoever, but which also suffer alterations in form ad lib. during their motion. Clocks, for which the law of motion is any kind, however irregular, serve for the definition of time. We have to imagine each of these clocks fixed at a point on the non-rigid reference-body. These clocks satisfy only the one condition, that the “readings” which are observed simultaneously on adjacent clocks (in space) differ from each other by an indefinitely small amount. This non-rigid reference-body, which might appropriately be termed a “reference-mollusk,” is in the main equivalent to a Gaussian four-dimensional co-ordinate system chosen arbitrarily.
He's just talking about arbitrary noninertial coordinate systems, maybe he used the word "mollusk" to suggest a curvy shape like the body of an octopus or a slug. Take a look at http://www.aei.mpg.de/einsteinOnline/en/spotlights/background_independence/index.html , particularly the part where they talk about "diffeomorphism invariance", for more on the idea that the equations of GR work in arbitrary coordinate systems...the last animated diagram on the page shows some rather "mollusk-like" curvilinear coordinate systems.
 
Last edited by a moderator:


thanks for the help :)
 
I asked a question here, probably over 15 years ago on entanglement and I appreciated the thoughtful answers I received back then. The intervening years haven't made me any more knowledgeable in physics, so forgive my naïveté ! If a have a piece of paper in an area of high gravity, lets say near a black hole, and I draw a triangle on this paper and 'measure' the angles of the triangle, will they add to 180 degrees? How about if I'm looking at this paper outside of the (reasonable)...
Thread 'Relativity of simultaneity in actuality'
I’m attaching two figures from the book, Basic concepts in relativity and QT, by Resnick and Halliday. They are describing the relativity of simultaneity from a theoretical pov, which I understand. Basically, the lightning strikes at AA’ and BB’ can be deemed simultaneous either in frame S, in which case they will not be simultaneous in frame S’, and vice versa. Only in one of the frames are the two events simultaneous, but not in both, and this claim of simultaneity can be done by either of...
Back
Top