View Full Version : Trials of Einstein


MacM
03-10-03, 09:24 PM
II Early Scientific Publications
print section

In 1905 Einstein received his doctorate from the University of Z¨¹rich for a theoretical dissertation on the dimensions of molecules, and he also published three theoretical papers of central importance to the development of 20th-century physics. In the first of these papers, on Brownian motion, he made significant predictions about the motion of particles that are randomly distributed in a fluid. These predictions were later confirmed by experiment.

The second paper, on the photoelectric effect, contained a revolutionary hypothesis concerning the nature of light. Einstein not only proposed that under certain circumstances light can be considered as consisting of particles, but he also hypothesized that the energy carried by any light particle, called a photon, is proportional to the frequency of the radiation. The formula for this is E = h¦Í, where E is the energy of the radiation, h is a universal constant known as Planck¡¯s constant, and ¦Í is the frequency of the radiation. This proposal¡ªthat the energy contained within a light beam is transferred in individual units, or quanta¡ªcontradicted a hundred-year-old tradition of considering light energy a manifestation of continuous processes. Virtually no one accepted Einstein¡¯s proposal. In fact, when the American physicist Robert Andrews Millikan experimentally confirmed the theory almost a decade later, he was surprised and somewhat disquieted by the outcome.

Einstein, whose prime concern was to understand the nature of electromagnetic radiation, subsequently urged the development of a theory that would be a fusion of the wave and particle models for light. Again, very few physicists understood or were sympathetic to these ideas.

III Einstein¡¯s Special Theory of Relativity
print section

Einstein¡¯s third major paper in 1905, ¡°On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies,¡± contained what became known as the special theory of relativity. Since the time of the English mathematician and physicist Sir Isaac Newton, natural philosophers (as physicists and chemists were known) had been trying to understand the nature of matter and radiation, and how they interacted in some unified world picture. The position that mechanical laws are fundamental has become known as the mechanical world view, and the position that electrical laws are fundamental has become known as the electromagnetic world view. Neither approach, however, is capable of providing a consistent explanation for the way radiation (light, for example) and matter interact when viewed from different inertial frames of reference, that is, an interaction viewed simultaneously by an observer at rest and an observer moving at uniform speed.

In the spring of 1905, after considering these problems for ten years, Einstein realized that the crux of the problem lay not in a theory of matter but in a theory of measurement. At the heart of his special theory of relativity was the realization that all measurements of time and space depend on judgments as to whether two distant events occur simultaneously. This led him to develop a theory based on two postulates: the principle of relativity, that physical laws are the same in all inertial reference systems, and the principle of the invariance of the speed of light, that the speed of light in a vacuum is a universal constant. He was thus able to provide a consistent and correct description of physical events in different inertial frames of reference without making special assumptions about the nature of matter or radiation, or how they interact. Virtually no one understood Einstein¡¯s argument.

IV Early Reactions to Einstein
print section

The difficulty that others had with Einstein¡¯s work was not because it was too mathematically complex or technically obscure; the problem resulted, rather, from Einstein¡¯s beliefs about the nature of good theories and the relationship between experiment and theory. Although he maintained that the only source of knowledge is experience, he also believed that scientific theories are the free creations of a finely tuned physical intuition and that the premises on which theories are based cannot be connected logically to experiment. A good theory, therefore, is one in which a minimum number of postulates is required to account for the physical evidence. This sparseness of postulates, a feature of all Einstein¡¯s work, was what made his work so difficult for colleagues to comprehend, let alone support.

Einstein did have important supporters, however. His chief early patron was the German physicist Max Planck. Einstein remained at the patent office for four years after his star began to rise within the physics community. He then moved rapidly upward in the German-speaking academic world; his first academic appointment was in 1909 at the University of Z¨¹rich. In 1911 he moved to the German-speaking university at Prague, and in 1912 he returned to the Swiss National Polytechnic in Z¨¹rich. Finally, in 1914, he was appointed director of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Physics in Berlin.

V The General Theory of Relativity
print section

Even before he left the patent office in 1907, Einstein began work on extending and generalizing the theory of relativity to all coordinate systems. He began by enunciating the principle of equivalence, a postulate that gravitational fields are equivalent to accelerations of the frame of reference. For example, people in a moving elevator cannot, in principle, decide whether the force that acts on them is caused by gravitation or by a constant acceleration of the elevator. The full general theory of relativity was not published until 1916. In this theory the interactions of bodies, which heretofore had been ascribed to gravitational forces, are explained as the influence of bodies on the geometry of space-time (four-dimensional space, a mathematical abstraction, having the three dimensions from Euclidean space and time as the fourth dimension).

On the basis of the general theory of relativity, Einstein accounted for the previously unexplained variations in the orbital motion of the planets and predicted the bending of starlight in the vicinity of a massive body such as the sun. The confirmation of this latter phenomenon during an eclipse of the sun in 1919 became a media event, and Einstein¡¯s fame spread worldwide.

For the rest of his life Einstein devoted considerable time to generalizing his theory even more. His last effort, the unified field theory, which was not entirely successful, was an attempt to understand all physical interactions¡ªincluding electromagnetic interactions and weak and strong interactions¡ªin terms of the modification of the geometry of space-time between interacting entities.

Most of Einstein¡¯s colleagues felt that these efforts were misguided. Between 1915 and 1930 the mainstream of physics was in developing a new conception of the fundamental character of matter, known as quantum theory. This theory contained the feature of wave-particle duality (light exhibits the properties of a particle, as well as of a wave) that Einstein had earlier urged as necessary, as well as the uncertainty principle, which states that precision in measuring processes is limited. Additionally, it contained a novel rejection, at a fundamental level, of the notion of strict causality. Einstein, however, would not accept such notions and remained a critic of these developments until the end of his life. ¡°God,¡± Einstein once said, ¡°does not play dice with the world.¡±

VI World Citizen
print section

After 1919, Einstein became internationally renowned. He accrued honors and awards, including the Nobel Prize in physics in 1921, from various world scientific societies. His visit to any part of the world became a national event; photographers and reporters followed him everywhere. While regretting his loss of privacy, Einstein capitalized on his fame to further his own political and social views.

The two social movements that received his full support were pacifism and Zionism. During World War I he was one of a handful of German academics willing to publicly decry Germany¡¯s involvement in the war. After the war his continued public support of pacifist and Zionist goals made him the target of vicious attacks by anti-Semitic and right-wing elements in Germany. Even his scientific theories were publicly ridiculed, especially the theory of relativity.

When Hitler came to power, Einstein immediately decided to leave Germany for the United States. He took a position at the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton, New Jersey. While continuing his efforts on behalf of world Zionism, Einstein renounced his former pacifist stand in the face of the awesome threat to humankind posed by the Nazi regime in Germany.

In 1939 Einstein collaborated with several other physicists in writing a letter to President Franklin D. Roosevelt, pointing out the possibility of making an atomic bomb and the likelihood that the German government was embarking on such a course. The letter, which bore only Einstein¡¯s signature, helped lend urgency to efforts in the U.S. to build the atomic bomb, but Einstein himself played no role in the work and knew nothing about it at the time.

After the war, Einstein was active in the cause of international disarmament and world government. He continued his active support of Zionism but declined the offer made by leaders of the state of Israel to become president of that country. In the U.S. during the late 1940s and early ¡®50s he spoke out on the need for the nation¡¯s intellectuals to make any sacrifice necessary to preserve political freedom. Einstein died in Princeton on April 18, 1955.

Einstein¡¯s efforts in behalf of social causes have sometimes been viewed as unrealistic. In fact, his proposals were always carefully thought out. Like his scientific theories, they were motivated by sound intuition based on a shrewd and careful assessment of evidence and observation. Although Einstein gave much of himself to political and social causes, science always came first, because, he often said, only the discovery of the nature of the universe would have lasting meaning. His writings include Relativity: The Special and General Theory (1916); About Zionism (1931); Builders of the Universe (1932); Why War? (1933), with Sigmund Freud; The World as I See It (1934); The Evolution of Physics (1938), with the Polish physicist Leopold Infeld; and Out of My Later Years (1950). Einstein¡¯s collected papers are being published in a multivolume work, beginning in 1987.

James R
03-10-03, 11:14 PM
It is polite to acknowledge your sources. Where di you get this from?

MacM
03-11-03, 01:40 AM
James R.,


http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/refpages/RefArticle.aspx?refid=761562147&pn=4#s4

It was the first entry by typing "Einstein" into MSN Search.

It has (5) articles. This one was about his initial reception after publishing in 1905.

MacM
03-11-03, 02:01 AM
chroot,

In the event you missed these entries; which are typical of all historical discussions I have ever read on the subject:


1 - Virtually no one accepted Einstein¡¯s proposal. In fact, when the American physicist Robert Andrews Millikan experimentally confirmed the theory almost a decade later, he was surprised and somewhat disquieted by the outcome.

2 - Again, very few physicists understood or were sympathetic to these ideas.

3 - Virtually no one understood Einstein¡¯s argument.

4 - This sparseness of postulates, a feature of all Einstein¡¯s work, was what made his work so difficult for colleagues to comprehend, let alone support.

5 - The confirmation of this latter phenomenon during an eclipse of the sun in 1919 became a media event, and Einstein¡¯s fame spread worldwide.

6 - After the war his continued public support of pacifist and Zionist goals made him the target of vicious attacks by anti-Semitic and right-wing elements in Germany. Even his scientific theories were publicly ridiculed, especially the theory of relativity.

********** After WWII ********* While highly political, not the scientifc community he was not well liked by many - including a number of scientist.


Maybe this is where I got the incorrect idea about his delayed acceptance. Seems it was 14 years before he became widely accepted.

I think you stand corrected.

chroot
03-11-03, 03:09 AM
Looks like it was written by a very unskilled journalist.

- Warren

thed
03-11-03, 06:33 AM
Obviously there is a spat going on here.

I'd go with Chroot on this one, the article writer has misrepresented a few things. After the paper on 'The Electrodynamics of moving Bodies' was published Einsteins old tutor, Ermst Minkowski, realised it had deeper significance. This led to the concepts of Minkowskian spacetime. Can't remember the details but I thought SR was not confirmed by Millikan but rather another group looking at half-lives of Muons. They realised time dilation was being experienced by these particles.

Before publishing General Relativity Einstein done a lot of work with Hilbert working out the mathematical details of a 4D Minkowskian spacetime. Basically he had to learn Reimannian Geometries to get GR to work. These alone says to me that SR was well known by the scientific community before GR was published. Just because some one disagrees with a theory does not invalidate its general acceptance. It's a well accepted scientific principle to try and find flaws in a theory.

Also bear in mind that the results of SR are used in the proofs of Quantum Physics. Though Einstein famously disliked QM many of the working postulates of QM bear his name or he had a major input on them.

I may be off base here but the article published above makes out that Einstein discovered wave-particle dualty. The originator of the H=hf equation was, oddly, Max Planck. Hence Planck's constant and not Einsteins constant.

But what do I know?

MacM
03-11-03, 09:42 AM
Thed,

Thanks for your input. It seems that you know plenty reference:

But what do I know?

And I don't even debate that there may be differing opinions on this issue but it arose because there was a post made which challenged the issue incorrectly.

The fact seems to be that there is substantial material holding different views on about any subject and to assume one is correct on every issue and that others are wrong on every issue has become the issue.

My point in posting was to show that there is indeed alternatie views on this and other subjects.

This is not an isolated case. It happens to be the first in a couple hundred that pop up if you search "Einstein".

So the post is intended to reflect the improper challenging by certain individuals and not as proof of anything other than some things should not be taken as absolute.

I personally believe this article is fairly written. It is overwhelmingly favorable of Einstien, as it should be. I almost find the challenge to an "Encylopedia Article" laughable.

But this post will surely extend one more time the same form of challenge for which I do not intend to respond.

One final comment:

These alone says to me that SR was well known by the scientific community before GR was published. Just because some one disagrees with a theory does not invalidate its general acceptance. It's a well accepted scientific principle to try and find flaws in a theory.

1 - Yes. Infact I have seen publications that virtually accuse Einstein of plagerisim, in that most of what Relativty is about was indeed circulating the scientific community as bits and pieces. He added some "Glue" if you will to bring them together into one overall view.



It's a well accepted scientific principle to try and find flaws in a theory.


2 - Except when it comes to Relativity. There are those that will not accept challenges of it regardless of the basis for the arguement. I don't mean here that such arguement can or will be upheld in the long term but the mere attempt to question Relativity is met with the harshest of attacks. Which challenging the challenge is healthy but challenging the challenger is inappropriate and shows weakness in the defender of a theory.

James R
03-11-03, 07:04 PM
So, MacM, are you saying that people should be able to freely attack relativity without fear of any inconvenient counter-arguments in favour of relativity being put in rebuttal?

Why?

MacM
03-11-03, 07:52 PM
James R.,

Not at all. Most contributed useful information or legitimate points but there was far to much supurflous personal attacks that didn't address the issues.

It is the issues that need to be addressed. Not personal ego's.

Persol
03-11-03, 07:53 PM
Are we still debating this?

MacM
03-11-03, 09:28 PM
Persol,

I hope not. This does seem a little more like a discussion but who knows.:bugeye:

thed
03-12-03, 06:30 AM
Originally posted by MacM
Thed,
2 - Except when it comes to Relativity. ::snips:: but the mere attempt to question Relativity is met with the harshest of attacks. ::snips:: challenging the challenger is inappropriate and shows weakness in the defender of a theory.

Going for the Ad Hominen attack is generally held as a weak form of argument and generally a clue you've already lost the point. But anyway I would not say that attacks on Relativity are met with the harshest of attacks becuase it's sacrosanct. I would go as far as to say that disproving Relativity is the dream of all Physicists and improving it is the current goal of theoreticians. It's more usually because the poor sap replying has seen the same arguments for disproving Relativity before and looses their cool.

For some reason people always go out of their way to attack relativity so it tends to trigger a response in all physcists. It is bad enough that it led one luminary to concoct The Crackpot Index (http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html).

MacM
03-12-03, 09:16 AM
thed,

Thanks for your input.

I know and accept responsibility for my poor approach, but the fact is I do not have a goal to overturn Relativity. It is and has always been more in line with your "improving" desire.

That is I see what appear to be improper interpretations of some observed data. Things that can have alternative explanations that signifigantly change the final outcome of our understanding of physics.

I agree with much of the conclusions of Relativity but not all. I tend to see Relativity more as a mathematical algorithum defining reality but then being extended to predict reality. Where different fundelmental basis are substituted for the math the same observations can be produced but result in radically different end results.

My own work results in Relavistic type relationships but the basis are derived from a physical view not merely a mathematical one.

But I have learned that attacking Relativity is not the way to get persons to look at the alternatives.

Regardless of the ultimate conclusions regrding Relativity it was a tremendous advance in macroscopic physical views. But failure to explore alternatives by first screening them against relativity it does seem to me that we are closing the door on discovery.

MacM
03-12-03, 09:35 AM
James R.,

And finally I just want to make the point that I have exercised such challenges in at least 8 forums. There has only been one other that took the low road experienced here.

(4) others have been very good dialogs on the issue with points and counter points ending with mutual respect for different views all around without once branching off into slander and superflous issues but remained on point.

(2) Have actually resulted in some comprimise both in my views as well as those of the defenders. One ultimately conceeded that Relativity was not absolute and had some limitations in its applications.

So I have to take sciforums experience in light of more useful discussions of the finite details of the subject.

In all but these two forums there remained a mutual respect at all times. Those have been enjoyable and educational.

I would hope that you do institute the "Alternative or Development" forum for I do believe it could result in a better tone where those willing and interested could conduct respectful discussion of such subjects and allow those that don't want such disussions to stay out of the mix.

Those that would come over and do the same there would clearly have their own agenda.

Thanks for listening.