Gomori, Marton and Szabo, Laszlo E. (2010) Is the relativity principle consistent with classical electrodynamics? Towards a logico-empiricist reconstruction of a physical theory. [Preprint]
 | There is a more recent version of this item available. |
![[img]](https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/style/images/fileicons/application_pdf.png)
|
PDF
MG-LESz-rp-preprintv4.pdf Download (316kB) |
Abstract
Abstract It is common in the literature on classical electrodynamics (ED) and relativity theory that the transformation rules for the basic electrodynamical quantities are derived from the hypothesis that the relativity principle (RP) applies to Maxwell's electrodynamics. As it will turn out from our analysis, these derivations raise several problems, and certain steps are logically questionable. This is, however, not our main concern in this paper. Even if these derivations were completely correct, they leave open the following questions: (1) Is the RP a true law of nature for electrodynamical phenomena? (2) Are, at least, the transformation rules of the fundamental electrodynamical quantities, derived from the RP, true? (3) Is the RP consistent with the laws of ED in a single inertial frame of reference? (4) Are, at least, the derived transformation rules consistent with the laws of ED in a single frame of reference? Obviously, (1) and (2) are empirical questions. In this paper, we will investigate problems (3) and (4).
Abstract First we will give a general mathematical formulation of the RP. In the second part, we will deal with the operational definitions of the fundamental electrodynamical quantities. As we will see, these semantic issues are not as trivial as one might think. In the third part of the paper, applying what J. S. Bell calls “Lorentzian pedagogy”---according to which the laws of physics in any one reference frame account for all physical phenomena---we will show that the transformation rules of the electrodynamical quantities are identical with the ones obtained by presuming the covariance of the equations of ED, and that the covariance is indeed satisfied.
Abstract As to problem (3), the situation is much more complex. As we will see, the RP is actually not a matter of the covariance of the physical equations, but it is a matter of the details of the solutions of the equations, which describe the behavior of moving objects. This raises conceptual problems concerning the meaning of the notion “the same system in a collective motion”. In case of ED, there seems no satisfactory solution to this conceptual problem; thus, contrary to the widespread views, the question we asked in the title has no obvious answer.
| Export/Citation: | EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII/Text Citation (Chicago) | HTML Citation | OpenURL |
| Social Networking: |
Available Versions of this Item
-
Is the relativity principle consistent with electrodynamics? Towards a logico-empiricist reconstruction of a physical theory. (deposited 22 Dec 2009)
-
Is the relativity principle consistent with electrodynamics? Towards a logico-empiricist reconstruction of a physical theory. (deposited 15 Feb 2010)
-
Is the relativity principle consistent with electrodynamics? Towards a logico-empiricist reconstruction of a physical theory. (deposited 22 Jun 2010)
- Is the relativity principle consistent with classical electrodynamics? Towards a logico-empiricist reconstruction of a physical theory. (deposited 12 Oct 2010 10:59) [Currently Displayed]
-
Is the relativity principle consistent with electrodynamics? Towards a logico-empiricist reconstruction of a physical theory. (deposited 22 Jun 2010)
-
Is the relativity principle consistent with electrodynamics? Towards a logico-empiricist reconstruction of a physical theory. (deposited 15 Feb 2010)
Monthly Views for the past 3 years
Monthly Downloads for the past 3 years
Plum Analytics
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
![[feed]](http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/style/images/feed-icon-32x32.png){kind=icon}