Some comments on the paper "On the Effects of External Sensory Input on Time Dilation" by Albert Einstein

Z.K. Silagadze

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1203.6773

2012-03-30

Abstract:Einstein's famous 1938 experiment to test relativity of time is plagued by too many ambiguities and does not prove anything. Nevertheless, it is a landmark experiment at the foundation of the modern theory of time perception.

Popular Physics,Classical Physics

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Albert Einstein and the Fizeau 1851 Water Tube Experiment

Galina Weinstein

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1204.3390

2012-04-16

History and Philosophy of Physics

Abstract:In 1895 Hendrik Antoon Lorentz derived the Fresnel dragging coefficient in his theory of immobile ether and electrons. This derivation did not explicitly involve electromagnetic theory at all. According to the 1922 Kyoto lecture notes, before 1905 Einstein tried to discuss Fizeau's experiment "as originally discussed by Lorentz" (in 1895). At this time he was still under the impression that the ordinary Newtonian law of addition of velocities was unproblematic. In 1907 Max Laue showed that the Fresnel dragging coefficient would follow from a straightforward application of the relativistic addition theorem of velocities. This derivation is mathematically equivalent to Lorentz's derivation of 1895. From 1907 onwards Einstein adopted Laue's derivation. When Robert Shankland asked Einstein how he had learned of the Michelson-Morley experiment, Einstein told him that he had become aware of it through the writings of Lorentz, but only after 1905 had it come to his attention. "Otherwise", he said, "I would have mentioned it in my paper". He continued to say that the experimental results which had influenced him most were stellar aberration and Fizeau's water tube experiment. "They were enough". Indeed the famous Michelson-Morley experiment is not mentioned in the 1905 relativity paper; but curiously Einstein did not mention Fizeau's experimental result either, and this is puzzling in light of the importance of the experiment in Einstein's pathway to his theory. In this paper I try to discuss this question.
Historical and Philosophical Aspects of the Einstein World

Cormac O'Raifeartaigh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1906.08678

2019-06-20

Abstract:This article presents a brief review of some historical and philosophical aspects of Einstein's 1917 paper 'Cosmological Considerations in the General Theory of Relativity', a landmark work that denoted the starting point of modern theoretical cosmology. Our presentation includes a discussion of Einstein's early views of issues such as the relativity of inertia, the curvature of space and the cosmological constant. Particular attention is paid to lesser-known aspects of Einstein's paper such as his failure to test his model against observation, his failure to consider the stability of the model and a slight mathematical confusion concerning the introduction of the cosmological constant term. Taken in conjunction with his later cosmological works, we find that Einstein's approach to cosmology was characterized by a pragmatic search for the simplest model of the universe that was consistent with the principles of relativity and with contemporaneous astronomical observation.

History and Philosophy of Physics,General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology
Local versus Global Time in Early Relativity Theory

Dennis Dieks

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/e26070608

IF: 2.738

2024-07-19

Entropy

Abstract:In his groundbreaking 1905 paper on special relativity, Einstein distinguished between local and global time in inertial systems, introducing his famous definition of distant simultaneity to give physical content to the notion of global time. Over the following decade, Einstein attempted to generalize this analysis of relativistic time to include accelerated frames of reference, which, according to the principle of equivalence, should also account for time in the presence of gravity. Characteristically, Einstein's methodology during this period focused on simple, intuitively accessible physical situations, exhibiting a high degree of symmetry. However, in the final general theory of relativity, the a priori existence of such global symmetries cannot be assumed. Despite this, Einstein repeated some of his early reasoning patterns even in his 1916 review paper on general relativity and in later writings. Modern commentators have criticized these arguments as confused, invalid, and inconsistent. Here, we defend Einstein in the specific context of his use of global time and his derivations of the gravitational redshift formula. We argue that a detailed examination of Einstein's early work clarifies his later reasoning and demonstrates its consistency and validity.

physics, multidisciplinary
The interpretations by experimenters of experiments on 'time dilation': 1940-1970 circa

Ilaria Bonizzoni,Giuseppe Giuliani

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.physics/0008012

2013-11-08

Abstract:Experimental tests on `time dilation' began in 1938 with Ives and Stilwell's work of the transverse Doppler effect due to atoms in inertial flight. Rossi and Hall (1941) inaugurated the era of fast moving elementary particles that dominated the scene until the discovery of the Mossbauer effect (1957). This discovery suggested the use of photons emitted without recoil in crystalline solids for testing both time dilation and gravitational red shift. Finally, around 1970, Hafele and Keating dealt again with time dilation by sending macroscopic atomic clocks around the Earth. The interpretations of these experiments by experimenters have been characterized by the use of additional hypotheses not necessary for the formal development of the theories under test (the idea that all clocks measure proper time) or hypotheses completely extraneous to the theories themselves (the idea that atoms are clocks). If these assumptions are dropped, it turns out that the only experiments concerning time dilation are those performed with elementary particles in inertial flight. The historical and epistemological implications are discussed.

History and Philosophy of Physics
Componentwise Least Squares Support Vector Machines

Kristiaan Pelckmans,Ivan Goethals,Jos De Brabanter,Johan A.K. Suykens,Bart De Moor

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.cs/0504086

2005-04-19

Abstract:This chapter describes componentwise Least Squares Support Vector Machines (LS-SVMs) for the estimation of additive models consisting of a sum of nonlinear components. The primal-dual derivations characterizing LS-SVMs for the estimation of the additive model result in a single set of linear equations with size growing in the number of data-points. The derivation is elaborated for the classification as well as the regression case. Furthermore, different techniques are proposed to discover structure in the data by looking for sparse components in the model based on dedicated regularization schemes on the one hand and fusion of the componentwise LS-SVMs training with a validation criterion on the other hand. (keywords: LS-SVMs, additive models, regularization, structure detection)

Machine Learning,Artificial Intelligence
Einstein's Clocks and Langevin's Twins

Galina Weinstein

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1205.0922

2012-05-04

Abstract:In 1905 Einstein presented the Clock Paradox and in 1911 Paul Langevin expanded Einstein's result to human observers, the "Twin Paradox." I will explain the crucial difference between Einstein and Langevin. Einstein did not present the so-called "Twin Paradox." Later Einstein continued to speak about the clock paradox. Einstein might not have been interested in the question: what happens to the observers themselves. The reason for this could be the following; Einstein dealt with measurement procedures, clocks and measuring rods. Einstein's observers were measuring time with these clocks and measuring rods. Einstein might not have been interested in so-called biology of the observers, whether these observers were getting older, younger, or whether they have gone any other changes; these changes appeared to be out of the scope of his "Principle of relativity" or kinematics. The processes and changes occurring within observers seemed to be good for philosophical discussions. Later writers criticized Einstein's clock paradox. Einstein quickly replied with witty, smart and clever retorts.

History and Philosophy of Physics
On the role of the Michelson-Morley experiment: Einstein in Chicago

Jeroen van Dongen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00407-009-0050-5

2009-08-12

Abstract:This article discusses new material, published in Volume 12 of the Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, that addresses Einstein's knowledge of the Michelson-Morley experiment prior to 1905: in a lecture in Chicago in 1921, Einstein referred to the experiment, mentioned when he came upon it, and hinted at its influence. Arguments are presented to explain the contrast with Einstein's later pronouncements on the role of the experiment.

History and Philosophy of Physics
Primary and reciprocal space-time experiments, relativistic reciprocity relations and Einstein's train-embankment thought experiment

J. H. Field

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.0807.0158

2011-11-11

Abstract:The concepts of primary and reciprocal experiments and base and travelling frames in special relativity are concisely described and applied to several different space-time experiments. These include Einstein's train/embankment thought experiment and a related thought experiment, due to Sartori, involving two trains in parallel motion with different speeds. Spatially separated clocks which are synchronised in their common proper frame are shown to be so in all inertial frames and their spatial separation to be Lorentz invariant. The interpretions given by Einstein and Sartori of their experiments, as well as those given by the present author in previous papers, are shown to be erroneous.

General Physics
Do moving clocks slow down?

Abdaljalel Alizzi,Abhijit Sen,Zurab K. Silagadze

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6404/ac93ca

2022-09-22

Abstract:The special theory of relativity has fundamentally changed our views of space and time. The relativity of simultaneity in particular, and the theory of relativity as a whole, still presents significant difficulty for beginners in the theory. The difficulty stems from the fact that the usual presentation of special relativity is based on Newtonian concepts, which are relativized and change their meaning in the course of the presentation. A better pedagogical practice, in our opinion, would be to base the presentation from the very beginning on the four-dimensional formulation of Minkowski and thus remove from the theory all the paradoxical connotations that invariably accompany the usual presentation of special relativity.

Classical Physics,General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology
The Confrontation between General Relativity and Experiment

Clifford M. Will

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12942/lrr-2006-3

2006-04-04

Abstract:The status of experimental tests of general relativity and of theoretical frameworks for analysing them is reviewed. Einstein's equivalence principle (EEP) is well supported by experiments such as the Eotvos experiment, tests of special relativity, and the gravitational redshift experiment. Future tests of EEP and of the inverse square law are searching for new interactions arising from unification or quantum gravity. Tests of general relativity at the post-Newtonian level have reached high precision, including the light deflection, the Shapiro time delay, the perihelion advance of Mercury, and the Nordtvedt effect in lunar motion. Gravitational-wave damping has been detected in an amount that agrees with general relativity to better than half a percent using the Hulse-Taylor binary pulsar, and other binary pulsar systems have yielded other tests, especially of strong-field effects. When direct observation of gravitational radiation from astrophysical sources begins, new tests of general relativity will be possible.

General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology
Einstein's Happiest Moment: The Equivalence Principle

Paul Worden,James Overduin

2024-10-17

Abstract:Einstein's happiest thought was his leap from the observation that a falling person feels no gravity to the realization that gravity might be equivalent to acceleration. It affects all bodies in the same way because it is a property of spacetime -- its curvature -- not a force propagating through spacetime (like electromagnetic or nuclear forces). When expressed in a way that is manifestly independent of the choice of coordinates, this idea became General Relativity. But the ground for what is now known as the "equivalence principle" was laid long before Einstein, affording a fascinating example of the growth of a scientific idea through the continuous interplay between theory and experiment. That story continues through the present era, with improved techniques and measurements, and in the new environment of space. Theoretically, equivalence is now understood to rank with Lorentz invariance as one of nature's most fundamental principles. Violations of equivalence are generically predicted by attempts to unify gravity with "non-geometrical" fundamental interactions, but there is no consensus on the form that these violations will take. Experimental tests of equivalence thus face the challenge of striving simultaneously for the highest possible sensitivity and diversity in test materials.

History and Philosophy of Physics,General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology
On the nature of discrete space-time: The atomic theory of space-time and its effects on Pythagoras's theorem, time versus duration, inertial anomalies of astronomical bodies, and special relativity at the Planck scale

David T Crouse

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1608.08506

2018-10-10

Abstract:In this work, resolutions will be given for commonly stated problems associated with a model that assumes that space and time are discretized (i.e., atomized). This model is in contrast to the continuous space-time model that is used in all common physical theories and equations -- a model that assumes that spatial coordinates and time are continuous variables. The resolutions to the problems are arrived at, not by proposing any new theories or postulates, but by strictly adhering to: Ernst Mach's principle of non-absolute space, the tenets of logical positivism, quantum mechanics and general relativity. The problems associated with discrete space-time addressed in this paper include: Lorentz contraction (time dilation) of the ostensibly smallest spatial (temporal) interval, maintaining isotropy, violations of causality, and conservation of energy and momentum. Importantly, this work yields modifications to the standard formulae for time dilation and length contraction, with these modifications preserving the quantums of space and time and allowing for temporary travel at the speed of light. Also given are: a resolution to Weyl's tile argument, a modification of the 2500 year old Pythagoras's theorem, a reassessment of Henri Bergson's theory advocating a distinction between the time durations measured by scientists and an immutable "Time", and a discussion of whether Einstein's light-clocks are as ideal as most scientist believe. Also included is a demonstration of how discrete space imposes order upon John Wheeler's quantum foam such that the foam becomes a gravity crystal permeating all space and producing measurable inertial anomalies of astronomical bodies.

Classical Physics,General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology,History and Philosophy of Physics
Einstein's quantum clocks and Poincare's classical clocks in special relativity

Y. G. A Pierseaux,Y.G.A Pierseaux

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.quant-ph/0101146

2001-01-31

Quantum Physics

Abstract:Einstein's reply to Weyl about the importance in General Relativity of the identity of the sources of spectral lines is well know. We show that, already in Special Relavitity, Einstein's definition of the unit of time from the frequency of atomic emission is deeply incompatible with Poincare's classical conception of time in his special relativity based on the duality "true time-local time". By using Weisskopf's analysis of quantum nature of the identity of atoms, we show that the concept of identity is implicit in Einstein's principle of relativity. On the contrary, in Poincare's relativistic logic, the use of the Lorentz transformations compensates the differences (contraction of lengths and dilation of durations) that are real by principle. The borderline "quantum-classical" passes therefore clearly between the two conceptions of the clocks in special relativity.
Albert Einstein and the Doubling of the Deflection of Light

Jean-Marc Ginoux

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-021-09783-4

2021-02-26

Foundations of Science

Abstract:One of the three consequences of Einstein's theory of general relativity was the curvature of light passing near a massive body. In 1911, he published a first value of the angle of deflection of light, then a second value in 1915, equal twice the first. In the early 1920s, when he received the Nobel Prize in Physics, a violent controversy broke out over this result. It was then disclosed that the first value he had obtained in 1911 had been calculated more than a century before by a German astronomer named Johann von Soldner. The aim of this article is therefore to compare the methods used by Soldner and then by Einstein leading to this first value and to explain the importance of the doubling of this value in the framework of Einstein's theory of general relativity. Such a consequence of this theory lies at the intersection of several scientific fields such as Mathematics, Physics, Astronomy and Philosophy.

history & philosophy of science
Time, Topology and the Twin Paradox

J.-P. Luminet

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.0910.5847

2009-10-30

Abstract:The twin paradox is the best known thought experiment associated with Einstein's theory of relativity. An astronaut who makes a journey into space in a high-speed rocket will return home to find he has aged less than a twin who stayed on Earth. This result appears puzzling, since the situation seems symmetrical, as the homebody twin can be considered to have done the travelling with respect to the traveller. Hence it is called a "paradox". In fact, there is no contradiction and the apparent paradox has a simple resolution in Special Relativity with infinite flat space. In General Relativity (dealing with gravitational fields and curved space-time), or in a compact space such as the hypersphere or a multiply connected finite space, the paradox is more complicated, but its resolution provides new insights about the structure of spacetime and the limitations of the equivalence between inertial reference frames.

General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology,Classical Physics
Experimental Refutation of Einstein’s Symmetry Principle

Robert J. Buenker

DOI: https://doi.org/10.36349/easjecs.2023.v06i01.001

2023-02-02

East African Scholars Journal of Engineering and Computer Sciences

Abstract:A well-known prediction of the Lorentz transformation (LT) of Einstein’s theory of Special Relativity (SR) is that when two observers exchange light signals, they will both measure a red shift (lowering in frequency). An experiment with gamma rays was reported by Hay et al., in 1960 in which an absorber is mounted at the rim of a high- speed centrifuge while the source is located near the rotor axis. There is general agreement that because of its acceleration, the clock attached to the absorber must be retarded relative to the gamma ray source. Despite the claim that this result is a confirmation of the Symmetry Principle, the fact remains that the slowing down of the absorber clock means that the frequency of the signals it receives from the source will be greater than the standard value, i.e. a blue shift will be observed because more waves are counted per second by virtue of the absorber clock’s reduced rate. This experience therefore stands in direct contradiction of the Symmetry Principle. In addition, it is pointed out that the three space-time predictions of the LT (equal speeds of light, time dilation and FitzGerald length contraction) are incompatible with one another. An alternate theory is presented (Uniform Scaling method) which is in full agreement with the results of the ultra-centrifuge experiment and also avoids any incompatibility with regard to it space-time predictions.
Some Unrecorded Science History. My Brush with Einstein's Relativistic Length Contraction

James G. Gilson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.physics/0703134

2007-03-13

General Physics

Abstract:This paper is a short historical note about the origin of the Pole-Barn and the Fat Man Paradoxes
Quantum time dilation: A new test of relativistic quantum theory

Alexander R. H. Smith

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2004.10810

2020-04-28

Abstract:A novel quantum time dilation effect is shown to arise when a clock moves in a quantum superposition of two relativistic velocities. This effect is argued to be measurable using existing atomic interferometry techniques, potentially offering a new test of relativistic quantum theory.

Quantum Physics,General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology
Study of Einstein Equivalence Principle with Sagnac Effect in Lorentz and Galilean Frame

Shouvik Sadhukhan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4397496

2023-04-04

Abstract:Sagnac effect has been studied in terms of Gyroscopic system in both Lorentz frame as well as flat Einstein frame. The Einstein equivalence principle has been used to determine the phase shift due to pseudo force in the transformation from rotating earth frame to stationary frame. A polychromatic broadband source has been considered for the discussion. The Langevin-Landau-Lifschitz metric has been used during the incorporation of General theory of relativity. The square type sagnac interferometer has been used in theory establishment.

General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology,Optics
The 1919 eclipse results which verified General Relativity and their later detractors: a story re-told

Gerard Gilmore,Gudrun Tausch-Pebody

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2020.0040

2020-10-27

Abstract:Einstein became world-famous on 7 November 1919, following press publication of a meeting held in London on 6 November 1919 where the results were announced of two British expeditions led by Eddington, Dyson and Davidson to measure how much background starlight is bent as it passes the Sun. Three data sets were obtained: two showed the measured deflection matched the theoretical prediction of Einstein's 1915 Theory of General Relativity, and became the official result; the third was discarded as defective. At the time, the experimental result was accepted by the expert astronomical community. However, in 1980 a study by philosophers of science Earman and Glymour claimed that the data selection in the 1919 analysis was flawed and that the discarded data set was fully valid and was not consistent with the Einstein prediction, and that, therefore, the overall result did not verify General Relativity. This claim, and the resulting accusation of Eddington's bias, was repeated with exaggeration in later literature, and has become ubiquitous. The 1919 and 1980 analyses of the same data provide two discordant conclusions. We reanalyse the 1919 data, and identify the error that undermines the conclusions of Earman and Glymour.

History and Philosophy of Physics,High Energy Astrophysical Phenomena,General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology

Some comments on the paper "On the Effects of External Sensory Input on Time Dilation" by Albert Einstein

Albert Einstein and the Fizeau 1851 Water Tube Experiment

Historical and Philosophical Aspects of the Einstein World

Local versus Global Time in Early Relativity Theory

The interpretations by experimenters of experiments on 'time dilation': 1940-1970 circa

Componentwise Least Squares Support Vector Machines

Einstein's Clocks and Langevin's Twins

On the role of the Michelson-Morley experiment: Einstein in Chicago

Primary and reciprocal space-time experiments, relativistic reciprocity relations and Einstein's train-embankment thought experiment

Do moving clocks slow down?

The Confrontation between General Relativity and Experiment

Einstein's Happiest Moment: The Equivalence Principle

On the nature of discrete space-time: The atomic theory of space-time and its effects on Pythagoras's theorem, time versus duration, inertial anomalies of astronomical bodies, and special relativity at the Planck scale

Einstein's quantum clocks and Poincare's classical clocks in special relativity

Albert Einstein and the Doubling of the Deflection of Light

Time, Topology and the Twin Paradox

Experimental Refutation of Einstein’s Symmetry Principle

Some Unrecorded Science History. My Brush with Einstein's Relativistic Length Contraction

Quantum time dilation: A new test of relativistic quantum theory

Study of Einstein Equivalence Principle with Sagnac Effect in Lorentz and Galilean Frame

The 1919 eclipse results which verified General Relativity and their later detractors: a story re-told