{"id":2832,"date":"2010-08-15T08:17:14","date_gmt":"2010-08-15T07:17:14","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ekkehard-friebe.de\/blog\/?p=2832"},"modified":"2023-03-20T12:18:11","modified_gmt":"2023-03-20T11:18:11","slug":"gertrud-walton-on-the-nature-of-relativistic-effects","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ekkehard-friebe.de\/blog\/gertrud-walton-on-the-nature-of-relativistic-effects\/","title":{"rendered":"Gertrud Walton: \u201eOn the nature of relativistic effects“"},"content":{"rendered":"

Schon fr\u00fchzeitig hat die Mathematikerin Frau Gertrud Walton<\/strong> (U.K.) zur Unterst\u00fctzung des Forschungsprojekts G.O. Mueller<\/span><\/a> beigetragen. Inzwischen hat sie ihre Homepage \u201esapere aude\u201c<\/em> wesentlich \u00fcberarbeitet. Hieraus bringe ich nachstehend einen Auszug aus page two.
\nsiehe: https:\/\/www.ekkehard-friebe.de\/sapere-1.htm<\/p>\n

G. Walton gibt hier eine vorz\u00fcgliche Behandlung des Themas „Anschein oder Realit\u00e4t der L\u00e4ngenkontraktion und Zeitdilatation in der Speziellen Relativit\u00e4tstheorie“, <\/em>das derzeit in Internet-Foren anhaltende Diskussionen ausgel\u00f6st hat.<\/p>\n

Zitat:<\/strong><\/p>\n

On the nature of relativistic effects<\/strong><\/p>\n

Note: Checking on a source revealed a discrepancy which, apart from deleting the offending item, I have solved by the wholesale demotion of all quotations to the status of summaries.<\/p>\n

The reciprocal effect of length contraction and time dilation, which appears by logical necessity to emerge from the kinematic part of the special theory of relativity, has been variously explained<\/span> as:<\/p>\n

1. true but not really true (guess who)<\/span><\/p>\n

2. real<\/p>\n

3. not real<\/p>\n

4. apparent<\/p>\n

5. the result of the relativity of simultaneity<\/span><\/p>\n

6. determined by measurement<\/p>\n

7. a perspective effect<\/p>\n

8. mathematical.<\/p>\n

Here is a small selection from the literature; for references<\/span><\/a> see below. Unless placed in quotation marks, authors‘ assessments are summarized.<\/p>\n

1. Effects are true but not really true: <\/strong><\/p>\n

Pride of place goes to Eddington<\/span> [1928, 33-34]:<\/p>\n

„The shortening of the moving rod is true,<\/em> but it is not really true.“ <\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

(Thanks to Prof. I. McCausland, Toronto, for contributing this gem.)<\/p>\n

2. Effects are real: <\/strong><\/p>\n

Arzelies [1966, 120-121]:<\/p>\n

The Lorentz Contraction is a Real Phenomenon. …<\/p>\n

Several authors have stated that the Lorentz contraction only seems to occur, and is not real. This idea is false. So far as relativistic theory is concerned, this contraction is just as real as any other phenomenon. Admittedly … it is not absolute, but depends upon the system employed for the measurement; it seems that we might call it an apparent contraction which varies with the system. This is merely playing with the words, however. We must not confuse the reality of a phenomenon with the independence of this phenomenon of a change of system. … The difficulty arises because we have become accustomed to the geometrical concept of a rigid body with a definite shape, whatever the measuring system. This idea must be abandoned. … We must use the term „real“ for every phenomenon which can be measured … The Lorentz Contraction is an Objective Phenomenon. …<\/p>\n

We often encounter the following remark: The length of a ruler depends upon its motion with respect to the observer. … From this, it is concluded once again that the contraction is only apparent, a subjective phenomenon. … such remarks ought to be forbidden.<\/p>\n

Krane [1983, 23-25]:<\/p>\n

It must be pointed out that time dilation is a real effect that applies not only to clocks based on light beams but to time itself. All clocks will run more slowly as observed from the moving frame of reference. …<\/p>\n

The length measured by the moving observer is shorter. It must be emphasized that this is a real effect.<\/p>\n

Matveyev [1966, 305]:<\/p>\n

The dimensions of bodies suffer contraction in the direction of motion … A body is, therefore, „flattened“ in the direction of motion. This effect is a real effect …<\/p>\n

M\u00f8ller [1972, 44]:<\/p>\n

Contraction is a real effect observable in principle by experiment. It expresses, however, not so much a quality of the moving stick itself as rather a reciprocal relation between measuring-sticks in motion relative to each other. … According to relativistic conception, the notion of the length of a stick has an unambiguous meaning only in relation to a given inertial frame. … This means that the concept of length has lost its absolute meaning.<\/p>\n

Pauli [1981, 12-13]:<\/p>\n

We have seen that this contraction is connected with the relativity of simultaneity, and for this reason the argument has been put forward that it is only an „apparent“ contraction, in other words, that it is only simulated by our space-time measurements. If a state is called real only if it can be determined in the same way in all Galilean reference systems, then the Lorentz contraction is indeed only apparent, since an observer at rest in K‘ will see the rod without contraction. But we do not consider such a point of view as appropriate, and in any case the Lorentz contraction is in principle observable. … It therefore follows that the Lorentz contraction is not a property of a single rod taken by itself, but a reciprocal relation between two such rods moving relatively to each other, and this relation is in principle observable.<\/p>\n

Schwinger [1986, 52]:<\/p>\n

Each will observe the other clock to be running more slowly. This is an objective fact. It is not a property of clocks but of time itself.<\/p>\n

Tolman [1987, 23-24]:<\/p>\n

Entirely real but symmetrical.<\/p>\n

3. Relativistic effects are not physically real: <\/strong><\/p>\n

Taylor & Wheeler [1992, 76]:<\/p>\n

Does something about a clock really change when it moves, resulting in the observed change in the tick rate? Absolutely not! Here is why: Whether a clock is at rest or in motion … is controlled by the observer. You want the clock to be at rest? Move along with it. … How can your change of motion affect the inner mechanism of a distant clock? It cannot and it does not.<\/p>\n

4. Relativistic effects are apparent: <\/strong><\/p>\n

Aharoni [1985, 21]:<\/p>\n

The moving rod appears shorter. The moving clock appears to go slow.<\/p>\n

Cullwick [1959, 65, 68]:<\/p>\n

A] rod which is at rest in S‘ … appears to the observer O to be contracted … Similarly, a rod at rest in S will appear in S‘ to be contracted….<\/p>\n

Jackson [1975, 520]:<\/p>\n

The time as seen in the rest system is dilated.<\/p>\n

Joos [1958, 243-244]:<\/p>\n

The interval appears to the moving observer to be lengthened. A body which appears to be spherical to an observer at rest will appear to a moving observer to be an oblate spheroid.<\/p>\n

McCrea [1954, 15-16]:<\/p>\n

The apparent length is reduced. Time intervals appear to be lengthened; clocks appear to go slow.<\/p>\n

Nunn [1923, 43-44]:<\/p>\n

A moving rod would appear to be shortened. An interval is always less than measured by the other observer.<\/p>\n

Whitrow [1980, 255]:<\/p>\n

Instead of assuming that there are real, i.e. structural, changes in length and duration owing to motion, Einstein’s theory involves only apparent changes, and these are independent of the microscopic constitution and hidden mechanisms controlling the structure of matter. [Unlike]… real changes, these apparent phenomena are reciprocal.<\/p>\n

5. Relativistic effects are the result of the relativity of simultaneity: <\/strong><\/p>\n

Bohm [1965, 59]:<\/p>\n

When measuring lengths and intervals, observers are not referring to the same events.<\/p>\n

French [1968, 97], Rosser [1967, 37], Stephenson & Kilmister [1987, 38-39]:<\/p>\n

Measurements of lengths involve simultaneity and yield different numerical values.<\/p>\n

6. Relativistic effects are determined by measurements: <\/strong><\/p>\n

Schwartz [1972, 113]:<\/p>\n

Each observer determines distances to be foreshortened.<\/p>\n

7. Relativistic effects are comparable to perspective effects: <\/strong><\/p>\n

Rindler [1991, 25-29]:<\/p>\n

Moving lengths are reduced, a kind of perspective effect. But of course nothing has happened to the rod itself. Nevertheless, contraction is no illusion, it is real. Moving clocks go slow, a ‚velocity-perspective‘ effect. Nothing at all happens to the clock itself. Like contraction, this effect is real.<\/p>\n

8. Relativistic effects are mathematical: <\/strong><\/p>\n

Eddington [1924, 16-18]:<\/p>\n

The connection between lengths and intervals are problems of pure mathematics. A travelling clock gives a low reading.<\/p>\n

Minkowski [1908, 81]:<\/p>\n

[The] contraction is not to be looked upon as a consequence of resistances in the ether, or anything of that kind, but simply as a gift from above, – as an accompanying circumstance of the circumstance of motion.<\/p>\n

Rogers [1960, 496]:<\/p>\n

Thus we have devised a new geometry, with our clocks and scales conspiring, by their changes, to present us with a universally constant speed of light.<\/p>\n

(Zitatende, <\/strong>Hervorhebungen in ROT<\/span> durch Friebe)<\/p>\n

Beste Gr\u00fc\u00dfe Ekkehard Friebe<\/span><\/a> <\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Schon fr\u00fchzeitig hat die Mathematikerin Frau Gertrud Walton (U.K.) zur Unterst\u00fctzung des Forschungsprojekts G.O. Mueller beigetragen. Inzwischen hat sie ihre Homepage \u201esapere aude\u201c wesentlich \u00fcberarbeitet. Hieraus bringe ich nachstehend einen Auszug aus page two. siehe: https:\/\/www.ekkehard-friebe.de\/sapere-1.htm G. Walton gibt hier eine vorz\u00fcgliche Behandlung des Themas „Anschein oder Realit\u00e4t der L\u00e4ngenkontraktion und Zeitdilatation in der Speziellen […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2832","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-englischsprachige-kritik-der-relativitatstheorie"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ekkehard-friebe.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2832"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ekkehard-friebe.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ekkehard-friebe.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ekkehard-friebe.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ekkehard-friebe.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2832"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/ekkehard-friebe.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2832\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ekkehard-friebe.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2832"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ekkehard-friebe.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2832"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ekkehard-friebe.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2832"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}