[Wolfdev-Momentum] Cmf imagine if you had a dpl0machiropractor dug nectarine westward chard defeat retardation cynic anderson welsh choppy univac mineral impound tenacious reimburse journalese fermi celanese footprint plebian scotland bosch hostage
LambMartina
tansy-ZGBZG@post.sk
Sun, 12 Sep 2004 09:37:13 +0400
----61F390EF9DBE181B2
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-51A9-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html>
<head>
<title>robot q 9</title>
<meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859=
-1">
</head>
<body>
<p> </p>
<p><font face=3D"Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>You De=
serve A University Degree</strong></font></p>
<p><font face=3D"Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Do you want a =
prosperous future, increased earning power more money and the respect of a=
ll?</p>
<p>Get a Bachelors, Masters, MBA, and Doctorate (PhD) diploma!</p>
<p>No tests, classes, book or interviews...</p>
<p> </p>
<form name=3D"werner congo confessor degenerate coupe upbraid immortal=
culver valletta checkmate knauer callahan missouri terminate monologue c =
deleterious axisymmetric sonnet bodleian dylan peregrine wire bean strabis=
mic frambesia appellant awesome chromatograph magnitude=20" method=3D"get"=
action=3D"http://uppa.biz/d4.html">
<input type=3D"submit" name=3D"Subbfmit" value=3D"Get the Details">
</form>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<form name=3D"Rosalyn" method=3D"get" action=3D"http://uppa.biz/r2.html">
<input type=3D"submit" name=3D"Submit3" value=3D"ramove me from your l=
ist">
</form>
<font color=3D"#fffff5"> But there are two classes of experimental fact=
s hitherto obtained which can be represented in the Maxwell-Lorentz theory=
only by the introduction of an auxiliary hypothesis, which in itself=97i.=
e. without making use of the theory of relativity=97appears extraneous. =
2=20 The theory of relativity leads to the same law of motion, without =
requiring any special hypothesis whatsoever as to the structure and the be=
haviour of the electron. We arrived at a similar conclusion in Section XII=
I in connection with the experiment of Fizeau, the result of which is fore=
-told by the theory of relativity without the necessity of drawing on hypo=
theses as to the physical nature of the liquid. 5=20 TO what extent is =
the special theory of relativity supported by experience? This question is=
not easily answered for the reason already mentioned in connection with t=
he fundamental experiment of Fizeau. The special theory of relativity has =
crystallised out from the Maxwell-Lorentz theory of electromagnetic phenom=
ena. Thus all facts of experience which support the electromagnetic theory=
also support the theory of relativity. As being of particular importance,=
I mention here the fact that the theory of relativity enables us to predi=
ct the effects produced on the light reaching us from the fixed stars. The=
se results are obtained in an exceedingly simple manner, and the effects i=
ndicated, which are due to the relative motion of the earth with reference=
to those fixed stars, are found to be in accord with experience. We refer=
to the yearly movement of the apparent position of the fixed stars result=
ing from the motion of the earth round the sun (aberration), and to the in=
fluence of the radial components of the relative motions of the fixed star=
s with respect to the earth on the colour of the light reaching us from th=
em. The latter effect manifests itself in a slight displacement of the spe=
ctral lines of the light transmitted to us from a fixed star, as compared =
with the position of the same spectral lines when they are produced by a t=
errestrial source of light (Doppler principle). The experimental arguments=
in favour of the Maxwell-Lorentz theory, which are at the same time argum=
ents in favour of the theory of relativity, are too numerous to be set for=
th here. In reality they limit the theoretical possibilities to such an ex=
tent, that no other theory than that of Maxwell and Lorentz has been able =
to hold its own when tested by experience. 1=20</font>
<font color=3D"#fffff0">THE NON-MATHEMATICIAN is seized by a mysterious sh=
uddering when he hears of =93four-dimensional=94 things, by a feeling not =
unlike that awakened by thoughts of the occult. And yet there is no more c=
ommon-place statement than that the world in which we live is a four-dimen=
sional space-time continuum. 1=20 The following statements hold gener=
ally: Every physical description resolves itself into a number of statemen=
ts, each of which refers to the space-time coincidence of two events A and=
B. In terms of Gaussian co-ordinates, every such statement is expressed b=
y the agreement of their four co-ordinates x1, x2, x3, x4. Thus in reality=
, the description of the time-space continuum by means of Gauss co-ordinat=
es completely replaces the description with the aid of a body of reference=
, without suffering from the defects of the latter mode of description; it=
is not tied down to the Euclidean character of the continuum which has to=
be represented.=20 Similarly, the world of physical phenomena which was=
briefly called =93world=94 by Minkowski is naturally four-dimensional in =
the space-time sense. For it is composed of individual events, each of whi=
ch is described by four numbers, namely, three space co-ordinates x, y, z =
and a time co-ordinate, the time-value t. The =93world=94 is in this sense=
also a continuum; for to every event there are as many =93neighbouring=94=
events (realised or at least thinkable) as we care to choose, the co-ordi=
nates x1, y1, z1, t1 of which differ by an indefinitely small amount from =
those of the event x, y, z, t originally considered. That we have not been=
accustomed to regard the world in this sense as a four-dimensional contin=
uum is due to the fact that in physics, before the advent of the theory of=
relativity, time played a different and more independent r=F4le, as compa=
red with the space co-ordinates. It is for this reason that we have been i=
n the habit of treating time as an independent continuum. As a matter of f=
act, according to classical mechanics, time is absolute, i.e. it is indepe=
ndent of the position and the condition of motion of the system of co-ordi=
nates. We see this expressed in the last equation of the Galileian transfo=
rmation (t' =3D t). 3=20</font>
<font color=3D"#fffff7"> But no person whose mode of thought is logical c=
an rest satisfied with this condition of things. He asks: =93How does it c=
ome that certain reference-bodies (or their states of motion) are given pr=
iority over other reference-bodies (or their states of motion)? What is th=
e reason for this preference? In order to show clearly what I mean by this=
question, I shall make use of a comparison. 2=20 This consists of th=
ree plane surfaces perpendicular to each other and rigidly attached to a r=
igid body. Referred to a system of co-ordinates, the scene of any event wi=
ll be determined (for the main part) by the specification of the lengths o=
f the three perpendiculars or co-ordinates (x, y, z) which can be dropped =
from the scene of the event to those three plane surfaces. The lengths of =
these three perpendiculars can be determined by a series of manipulations =
with rigid measuring-rods performed according to the rules and methods lai=
d down by Euclidean geometry. 8=20 It is known that cathode rays and =
the so-called -rays emitted by radioactive substances consist of negativel=
y electrified particles (electrons) of very small inertia and large veloci=
ty. By examining the deflection of these rays under the influence of elect=
ric and magnetic fields, we can study the law of motion of these particles=
very exactly. 3=20</font>
<font color=3D"#fffffC"> Ought we to smile at the man and say that he err=
s in his conclusion? I do not believe we ought if we wish to remain consis=
tent; we must rather admit that his mode of grasping the situation violate=
s neither reason nor known mechanical laws. Even though it is being accele=
rated with respect to the =93Galileian space=94 first considered, we can n=
evertheless regard the chest as being at rest. We have thus good grounds f=
or extending the principle of relativity to include bodies of reference wh=
ich are accelerated with respect to each other, and as a result we have ga=
ined a powerful argument for a generalised postulate of relativity. 5=20=
These inadequate remarks can give the reader only a vague notion of the=
important idea contributed by Minkowski. Without it the general theory of=
relativity, of which the fundamental ideas are developed in the following=
pages, would perhaps have got no farther than its long clothes. Minkowski=
=92s work is doubtless difficult of access to anyone inexperienced in math=
ematics, but since it is not necessary to have a very exact grasp of this =
work in order to understand the fundamental ideas of either the special or=
the general theory of relativity, I shall at present leave it here, and s=
hall revert to it only towards the end of Part II.=20 But this result co=
mes into conflict with the principle of relativity set forth in Section V.=
For, like every other general law of nature, the law of the transmission =
of light in vacuo must, according to the principle of relativity, be the s=
ame for the railway carriage as reference-body as when the rails are the b=
ody of reference. But, from our above consideration, this would appear to =
be impossible. If every ray of light is propagated relative to the embankm=
ent with the velocity c, then for this reason it would appear that another=
law of propagation of light must necessarily hold with respect to the car=
riage=97a result contradictory to the principle of relativity. 4=20</fo=
nt>
</body>
</html>
----61F390EF9DBE181B2--