The Continuing Appeal of Einstein's Relativity: Difference between revisions
Remove stray backslash-escaped quotes (\' and \") left by an old import escaping bug |
Fill in keywords from the wiki's abstract records |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| title = The Continuing Appeal of Einstein's Relativity | | title = The Continuing Appeal of Einstein's Relativity | ||
| author = [[Harry E Mongold]] | | author = [[Harry E Mongold]] | ||
| keywords = Einstein, Special Theory of Relativity, relative motion | |||
| published = 1990 | | published = 1990 | ||
| journal = [[Unpublished]] | | journal = [[Unpublished]] | ||
Latest revision as of 07:27, 21 July 2026
| Scientific Paper | |
|---|---|
| Title | The Continuing Appeal of Einstein's Relativity |
| Author(s) | Harry E Mongold |
| Keywords | Einstein, Special Theory of Relativity, relative motion |
| Published | 1990 |
| Journal | Unpublished |
| No. of pages | 18 |
Abstract
Einstein's special theory of relativity is often attacked on the basis that relative motion cannot provide a standard of rest for the theory's claim that motion slows clocks and shortens in the forward direction. In spite of the plausibility of these complaints, "relativity" is widely held in high regard. The principle reason for this may be the failure to distinguish between the Lorentz formulae and Einstein's theory involving them. Reports of test experiments avoid Einstein's attention to motion as the effective force of change; treatises emphasize his deductions rather than his logic.