V.5 No 2 |
3 |
Supplement 1 | |
We have selected the question concerned the SR - GR interrelation: one colleague asked to refer him, where Einstein denied the SR postulates in passing to GR. Although we gave much attention to this point in the items 2 and 4 of our study, it is easy to give direct evidences. SR is known to be based on three fundamental principles: 1. The principle of full identity of inertial reference frames. According to this theory, there exists no privileged coordinate system which would give an occasion to introduce the ether conception and, hence, ethereal wind, and for the experiment able to prove its existence. The moving bodies reduction follows here without special hypotheses from both main principles of theory, and this reduction is determined not by the motion itself, which has no sense for us, but by the motion relating to the selected in this case reference body [12, p. 557]. 2. Postulate of constant speed of light in all reference frames. 3. Postulate of void (immaterial) space out of material bodies. With it, it will appear senseless to introduce the luminiferous ether, as in the suggested theory we do not introduce the space being absolutely at rest endowed with special properties, as well as we do not attribute whichever vector of speed to any point of void space in which electromagnetic processes occur [13, p. 8]. We would like to repeat the said in the paper: last years
the relativists especially often state the third postulate of void space to be unnecessary
for SR, but this is incorrect. Let us draw our attention that the main reason to introduce
the postulate of void space was Einsteins striving to escape from the absolute
space, and especially from the luminiferous aether with which the classical physicists
permanently associated the light propagation. They can do it in the only way - to delete
the physical properties of space. And not so much its ability to move - many classical
models of aether, Lorentz theory in that number, premised fully stationary aether - as its
physical properties that determine the propagation velocity of electromagnetic waves. As
is known from Maxwells theory, the propagation velocity of EM waves is determined
namely by the dielectric and diamagnetic permeability |
![]() |
(8) |
With it, as it directly follows from the classical wave
theory, this velocity is constant namely in relation to the medium in which we consider
the wave process. From this automatically follows the potential possibility to refer some
frame to this medium, which is identified by classical physics as the absolute. Just so,
to avoid the absolute reference frame, Einstein needed to delete the physical properties
from space in which the light propagates. It is easy to see
further that we have to refuse the luminous ether. Actually, if each ray in a void
propagated with the speed c in relation with the frame K, then the luminous
ether has to be at rest everywhere with respect to K. But if the laws of light
propagation in the frame K' (moving in relation to K) were the same as in K,
we have to premise with the same right that the ether is at rest also in the frame K'.
Since the premise that the ether is at rest in two frames at the same time is absurd and
since it would be no less absurd to prefer one of them (or of infinitely large number) of
physically equivalent frames, we have to refuse the introduction of the idea of ether
which turned into an useless makeweight to the theory as soon as we refused the
mechanistic treatment of light [14, p. 416]. Einsteins reference to the
mechanistic theory of aether is clearly only a fogged admission that the presence of
material substance responsible for the light waves propagation fully disproves the basic
postulates of SR. Classical wave mechanics long before SR refused the mechanistic model of
light waves and moving aether as well. Apparently, the idea of
stationary aether was first expressed by Fresnel in 1818 in his letter to Aragoe, then
this idea was considerably developed and supplemented by Lorentz in his work Theory
of electrons [15, p. 15]. But in order to put in some agreement the
immaterial space with light propagation, Einstein had to develop additionally the
conception of material energetic particles - photons propagating in immaterial space,
having essentially distorted the initial idea of quantum of light introduced by Planck.
This all occurred before Einstein started working on GR. When he started, he unavoidably
had to start refusing the immateriality of space - and he started. We have a direct
evidence - contradictive interpretations of space in Einsteins works. Apparently, from the view of special theory of relativity the
hypothesis of ether is meaningless. Equations of electromagnetic field contain, above
electric charges, only field strengths. Electromagnetic phenomena in the void are quite
determined by laws which equations contain (?! - Authors),
irrespectively of other physical values (?! - Authors).
Electromagnetic field is a primordial, non-reduced reality, so it is absolutely excessive
to postulate also the homogeneous isotropic ether and to imagine the field as the state of
this ether. On the other hand, we can give some important argument in favour of ether
hypothesis. To refuse the ether - this finally means to admit that void space has no
physical properties. The main facts of mechanics are inconsistent with such view
Machs thought finds its full development in the ether of general theory of
relativity. According to this theory, the metric properties of space-time continuum in the
vicinity of separate space-time points are different and depend on the matter distribution
out of the considered region. The idea of physically void space is finally eliminated by
such space-time variability of scales and clocks; accordingly, the admittance of fact that
void space physically is not homogeneous and isotropic makes us to be writing
its state with the help of ten functions - gravity potentials g |
Contents / 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / 9 / 10 / Paper