Special Relativity

A Wikibook http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Special_relativity

Part 1: Introd ctory te!t

Cover picture: Albert Einstein and Hendrik Lorentz photographed by Ehrenfest (188 !1"##$ in front of his ho%e in Leiden in 1"&1' (ource: )useu% *oerhaave+ Leiden

Table of Contents
,ntroduction'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' ,ntended Audience''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 8 .hat/s so special0'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 8 Co%%on 1itfalls in 2elativity''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' " A .ord about .iki''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''" 3he principle of relativity''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 1 4ra%es of reference+ events and transfor%ations'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 1 (pecial relativity'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 1& 3he postulates of special relativity'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 1# 3he spaceti%e interpretation of special relativity'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 1(paceti%e'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''&1 3he lightcone''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' && 3he Lorentz transfor%ation e5uations''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''&)ore about the relativity of si%ultaneity and the Andro%eda parado6'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''&7 3he nature of length contraction'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' &8 Evidence for length contraction+ the field of an infinite straight current'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''# 8e *roglie 9aves'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''#& )ore about ti%e dilation''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''## 3he t9in parado6''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' #:i% and *ill/s vie9 of the ;ourney''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' #< 3he 1ole!barn parado6'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''Addition of velocities''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' -& 2elativistic 8yna%ics'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''-= )o%entu%'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''-= 4orce'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' = Energy'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' = >uclear Energy''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' =& Light propagation and the aether'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' == 3he aether drag hypothesis'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' == 3he )ichelson!)orley e6peri%ent''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' =" )easuring aether'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''7 3he e6peri%ents'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 71 3he %ost fa%ous failed e6peri%ent''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''7& 4allout''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 7)athe%atical analysis of the )ichelson )orley E6peri%ent''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 7= Coherence length''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 7" Lorentz!4itzgerald Contraction Hypothesis'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''< E6ternal links''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' < Appendi6 1''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' <1 )athe%atics of the Lorentz 3ransfor%ation E5uations''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' <1

Introduction
3he (pecial 3heory of 2elativity is a physical theory that 9as developed at the end of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the t9entieth century' ,t replaced older theories such as >e9tonian 1hysics and led to early ?uantu% 3heory and @eneral 2elativity' (pecial 2elativity begins by re!e6a%ining the basis of >e9tonian 1hysics' ,n (pecial 2elativity it is sho9n that the >e9tonian treat%ent of relative %otion is incorrect and that the 9hole of physics %ust be rebuilt to account for this proble%' 3he follo9ing e6a%ple serves to introduce the i%portance of relative %otion 9hen observing the 9orld' :i% is standing on the street corner looking at a nearby stationary dog' *ob rides by on a bus' :i% and *ob both use various pieces scientific e5uip%ent to %easure the apparent velocity of the dog' 4ro% everyday e6perience you should already be able to deter%ine the results' *ob+ seeing the dog on the street %ove by+ deter%ines that the dog is %oving at the sa%e speed as the bus' :i% on the other hand+ deter%ines that the dog is not %oving at all' 3he results obtained by :i% and *ob are different+ but they %ake perfect sense' :i% and *ob are in different fra%es of reference' ,t see%s that velocity %easure%ents depend greatly on the fra%e of reference fro% 9hich one takes the %easure%ents' As 9e shall see+ %easure%ents of things 9e often take for granted+ like ti%e and space+ also depend on the fra%e of reference' 3he 5uestion 9e no9 ask is+ A.hich fra%e of reference is better+ :i%/s or *ob/s0A (o%e 9ould i%%ediately say that perfor%ing %easure%ents of distant ob;ects fro% a %oving bus is i%practical+ and anything so serious %ust be done 9hile standing still' Bnfortunately it is often the case that 9e don/t have such a stationary fra%e of reference at our disposal' .hen %easuring the %otion of distant planets the %easure%ents %ust be perfor%ed on Earth+ a %oving planet in itself' ,n fact the Earth is behaving %uch 9orse than a busC it is rotating and falling through space in an elliptical pathD ,n such a case one %ay insist that all recorded data is transfor%ed to the (un/s fra%e of reference+ thereby defining the (un as stationary' 3hen it is easier to conceptualize the nature of our solar syste%' *ut isn/t the (un also %oving 9ith respect to the other stars and the universe in general0 ,ndeed one %ay consider %any 9ays to orient a fra%e of reference in the universe' *ut the 5uestion still re%ains+ A.hich is better0A 3his 5uestion bothered %any scientists in the late

Jim, dog and bus

&

Maxwell

1"th century 9hen )a69ell/s ne9 theory of electro%agnetis% produced a nu%ber for the speed of electro%agnetic 9ave propagation in vacuu% (speed of light$ but 9ith no indication of the fra%e of reference' (o%e postulated that the speed 9ould be %easured 9ith respect to Athe one true fra%e'A 3hat is+ that fra%e 9here the cos%ic aether (the %ysterious %aterial per%eating all space through 9hich light 9aves %ove$ is at rest'

After )ichelson and )orley/s fa%ous e6peri%ent sho9ed no indication that such a thing e6isted+ and that the speed of light see%ed to be the sa%e in all available fra%es of reference+ it 9as suggested that there is no true frame' 3hat is+ all reference fra%es are e5ually true and valid fro% the perspective of physics' ,n other 9ords neither :i%/s nor *ob/s fra%e is closer to the natural fra%e than the other+ because such a fra%e doesn/t e6ist'

Albert Abraham Michelson

(pecial 2elativity built on this pre%ise' As a result+ the universe suddenly beca%e %uch %ore bizarre than previously suspected' Clocks slo9ed do9n+ t9ins 9ere no longer the sa%e age+ trains shrunk as they 9ent by+ and t9o people/s perceptions of Aright no9A no longer see%ed to correlate' 4or %any people these develop%ents 9ere stranger facts than fictionD

3his book 9ill sho9 you ho9 the si%ple assu%ptions of (pecial 2elativity i%ply these strange effects e6ist+ and ho9 to calculate the %agnitude of such effects so as to prepare for the% in the real 9orld' ,t also atte%pts to e6plain the huge conceptual breakthrough that occurred in scientific thought a century ago'

Historical Development
,n the nineteenth century the idea that light 9as propagated in a %ediu% called the AaetherA 9as prevalent' :a%es Clerk )a69ell in 187= produced a theory of electro%agnetic 9aves that initially see%ed to be based on this aether concept' 3he theory 9as highly successful but it predicted that the velocity of electro%agnetic 9aves 9ould depend on t9o constant factors+ the per%ittivity and per%eability constants' ,nitially these constants 9ere interpreted as properties of the aether' 3hey 9ould be the sa%e for all observers so even in )a69ell/s paper there 9as an i%plicit idea of a universal+ stationary aether' Ebservers 9ould %easure the velocity of light to be the su% of their velocity and the velocity of light in the aether' ,n 188< )ichelson and )orley perfor%ed an e6peri%ent that sho9ed that the speed of light 9as independent of the speed of the destination or source of the light in the proposed aether' ,t see%ed that )a69ell/s theory

9as correct but the theory about the 9ay that velocities add together (kno9n as @alilean 2elativity$ 9as 9rong' Farious physicists atte%pted to e6plain the )ichelson and )orley e6peri%ent' @eorge 4itzgerald in 188" and Hendrik Lorentz in 18"= suggested that ob;ects tend to contract along the direction of %otion relative to the aether' ,n 18"< :oseph Lar%or and in 18"" Hendrik Lorentz proposed that %oving ob;ects are contracted and that %oving clocks run slo9' 4itzgerald+ Lar%or and Lorentz/s contributions to the analysis of light propagation are of huge i%portance because they produced the Lorentz 3ransfor%ation 9hich is the %athe%atical e5uation re5uired to e6plain ho9 )a69ell/s E5uations %ight take precedence over the addition of velocities specified by @alilean 2elativity' ,f the aether caused lengths to contract and clocks to run slo9 then+ because velocity is ;ust a ratio of length to ti%e+ velocities 9ould no longer need to add up in a si%ple fashion and the speed of light could be constant for all observers' *y the late nineteenth century it 9as beco%ing clear that aether theories of light propagation 9ere proble%atical' Any aether 9ould have properties such as being %assless+ inco%pressible+ entirely transparent+ continuous+ devoid of viscosity and nearly infinitely rigid' ,n 1" = Albert Einstein realised that )a69ell/s e5uations did not re5uire an aether' He proposed that the la9s of physics are the sa%e for all inertial fra%es of reference and that )a69ell/s E5uations 9ere correct so that the Aspeed of lightA is a constant for all observers' Einstein En the basis of these si%ple assu%ptions he 9as able to derive the Lorentz 3ransfor%ation' He sho9ed that the Lorentz 3ransfor%ation itself 9as sufficient to e6plain ho9 length contraction occurs and clocks appear to go slo9' Einstein/s re%arkable achieve%ent 9as to be the first physicist to sho9 so%e understanding of the geo%etrical i%plications of the Lorentz 3ransfor%ation' ,n 1" = Einstein 9as on the edge of the idea that %ade relativity special' ,t re%ained for the %athe%atician Her%ann )inko9ski to provide the full e6planation of 9hy an aether 9as entirely superfluous' He announced the %odern for% of (pecial 2elativity theory in an address delivered at the 8 th Asse%bly of @er%an >atural (cientists and 1hysicians on (epte%ber &1+ 1" 8' 3he conse5uences of the ne9 theory 9ere radical+ as )inko9ski put it: have spr ng $ro% the soil o$

Hermann Minkowski

"#he views o$ space and ti%e which I wish to lay be$ore yo

e!peri%ental physics& and therein lies their strength. #hey are radical. 'ence$orth space by itsel$& and ti%e by itsel$& are doo%ed to $ade away into %ere shadows& and only a kind o$ nion o$ the two will preserve an independent reality." .hat )inko9ski had spotted 9as that Einstein/s theory 9as actually related to the theories in differential geo%etry that had been developed by %athe%aticians during the nineteenth century' ,nitially )inko9ski/s discovery 9as unpopular 9ith %any physicists including 1oincare+ Lorentz and even Einstein' 1hysicists had beco%e used to a thoroughly %aterialist approach to nature in 9hich lu%ps of %atter 9ere thought to bounce

off each other and the only events of any i%portance 9ere those occurring at the universal instantaneous present %o%ent' 3he idea that the geo%etry of the 9orld %ight include ti%e as 9ell as space 9as an alien idea' 3he possibility that pheno%ena such as length contraction could be due to the physical effects of spaceti%e geo%etry rather than the increase or decrease of forces bet9een ob;ects 9as as une6pected for physicists in 1" 8 as it is for the %odern high school student' Einstein rapidly assi%ilated the ne9 Aphysicalis%A and 9ent on to develop @eneral 2elativity as a theory based on differential geo%etry but %any of the earlier generation of physicists 9ere unable to accept the ne9 9ay of looking at the 9orld' 3he adoption of differential geo%etry as one of the foundations of relativity theory has been traced by .alker (1"""$ and by the 1"& /s it had beco%e the principle theoretical approach to relativity' ,t has beco%e popular to credit Henri 1oincarG 9ith the discovery of the theory of (pecial 2elativity+ sadly 1oincarG got %any of the right ans9ers for all the 9rong reasons' He even ca%e up 9ith a version of E H mc&D ,n 1" - 1oincarG had gone as far as to enunciate the Aprinciple of relativityA in 9hich A3he la9s of physical pheno%ena %ust be the sa%e+ 9hether for a fi6ed observer+ as also for one dragged in a %otion of unifor% translation+ so that 9e do not and cannot have any %eans to discern 9hether or not 9e are dragged in a such %otion'A ,n 1" = 1oincarG coined the ter% ALorentz 3ransfor%ationA for the e5uation that

Henri Poincare

e6plained the null result of the )ichelson )orley e6peri%ent' Although 1oincarG derived e5uations to e6plain the null result of the )ichelson )orley e6peri%ent his assu%ptions 9ere still based upon an aether' ,t re%ained for Einstein to sho9 that that an aether 9as unnecessary+ a conceptual leap that th9arts %any students even today' ,t is also popular to clai% that (pecial 2elativity and aether theories such as those due to 1oincarG and Lorentz are e5uivalent and only separated by Ecca%/s 2azor' 3his is not strictly true' Ecca%/s 2azor is used to separate a co%ple6 theory fro% a si%ple theory+ the t9o theories being different' ,n the case of 1oincare/s and Lorentz/s aether theories both contain the Lorentz 3ransfor%ation 9hich is already sufficient to e6plain the )ichelson and )orley E6peri%ent+ length contraction+ ti%e dilation etc' 3he aether theorists si%ply fail to notice that this is a possibility because they re;ect spaceti%e as a concept for reasons of philosophy or pre;udice' ,n 1oincarG/s case he re;ected spaceti%e because of philosophical ob;ections to the idea of spatial or te%poral e6tension' ,t is curious that Einstein actually returned to thinking based on an aether for si%ilar philosophical reasons to those that haunted 1oincarG ((ee @ranek & 1$' 3he geo%etrical for% of (pecial 2elativity as for%alised by )inko9ski does not forbid action at a distance and this 9as considered to be dubious philosophically' 3his led Einstein+ in 1"& + to reintroduce so%e of 1oincarG/s ideas into the theory of @eneral 2elativity' .hether an aether of the type proposed by Einstein is truly re5uired for physical theory is still an active 5uestion in physics' Ho9ever+ such an aether leaves the spaceti%e of (pecial 2elativity al%ost intact and is a co%ple6

%erger of the %aterial and geo%etrical that 9ould be unrecognised by 1"th century theorists'

Einstein+ A' (1" =$' Iur Elektrodyna%ik be9egter JKrper+ in Annalen der 1hysik' 1<:8"1!"&1' http:LL999'four%ilab'chLete6tsLeinsteinLspecrelL999L

@ranek+ @ (&

1$' Einstein/s ether: 9hy did Einstein co%e back to the ether0 Apeiron+ Fol 8+ #'

http:LLciteseer'ist'psu'eduLcacheLpapersLcsL#&"-8Lhttp:z(zz(zredshift'vif'co%z(z:ournal4ilesz(zF 8 >E#184z(zF 8>#@24'184Lgranek 1einsteins'pdf

(' .alter' 3he non!Euclidean style of )inko9skian relativity' 1ublished in :' @ray (ed'$+ 3he (y%bolic Bniverse+ E6ford Bniversity 1ress+ 1"""+ "1M1&<' http:LL999'univ! nancy&'frL8ep1hiloL9alterLpapersLnes'pdf

Intended Audience
3his book presents special relativity ((2$ fro% first principles and logically arrives at the conclusions' 3here 9ill be si%ple diagra%s and so%e thought e6peri%ents' 1roble%s at the end of each section challenge the reader to apply 9hat he or she has learned' Although the final for% of the theory ca%e to use )inko9ski spaces and %etric tensors+ it is possible to discuss (2 using nothing %ore than high school algebra' 3hat is the %ethod used here in the first half of the book 9hich is intended for senior high school science students and ;unior undergraduates' 3hat being said+ the sub;ect is open to a 9ide range of readers' All that is really re5uired is a genuine interest' 4or a %ore %athe%atically sophisticated treat%ent of the sub;ect+ please refer to (pecial 2elativity' 1art ,,: Advanced 3e6t'

What's so special?
3he special theory 9as suggested in 1" = in Einstein/s article AEn the Electrodyna%ics of )oving *odiesA+ and is so called because they only apply in a special case: fra%es of reference that are not accelerating+ or inertial $ra%es' 3his is the sa%e restriction that applies to >e9ton/s La9s of )otion' .e also don/t consider the effect of gravitational fields in special relativity' ,n search of a %ore co%plete theory+ Einstein developed the general theory of relativity published in 1"1=' @eneral relativity (@2$+ a %ore %athe%atically de%anding sub;ect+ describes all fra%es' 3his includes accelerating fra%es and gravitational fields' 3he conceptual difference bet9een the t9o is the %odel of spaceti%e used' (pecial relativity %akes use of a Euclidean!like (flat$ spaceti%e' @2 lives in a spaceti%e that is generally not flat but curved+ and it is this

curvature 9hich represents gravity' 3he do%ain of applicability for (2 is not so li%ited+ ho9ever' (paceti%e can often be appro6i%ated as flat+ and there are techni5ues to deal 9ith accelerating special relativistic ob;ects'

Common Pitfalls in Relativity

Here is a collection of co%%on %isunderstandings and %isconceptions about (2' ,f you are unfa%iliar 9ith (2 then you can safely skip this section and co%e back to it later' ,f you are an instructor+ perhaps this can help you divert so%e proble%s before they start by bringing up these points during your presentation 9hen appropriate' *eginners often believe that special relativity is only about ob;ects that are %oving at high velocities' 3his is a %istake' (pecial relativity applies at all velocities but at lo9 velocity the predictions of special relativity are al%ost identical to those of the >e9tonian e%pirical for%ulae' As an ob;ect increases its velocity the predictions of relativity gradually diverge fro% >e9tonian )echanics' 3here is so%eti%es a proble% differentiating bet9een the t9o different concepts Arelativity of si%ultaneityA and Asignal latencyLdelay'A .hen si%ultaneous events in one fra%e are vie9ed as not si%ultaneous in another it is either because: 1' 3hey truly aren't si%ultaneous in the second fra%e due to relativistic effects+ or+ &' 3hey ;ust appear that 9ay due to delay of light+ or both' 3hey can occur together but the t9o effects are not the sa%e thing' Ene can al9ays factor out the light delay by calculating 9hen the signal 9as trans%itted using the speed of light and the distance to the ob;ect' 2elativity isn/t based solely on the finite speed of light+ crazy stuff is really happening'

A Word about Wiki

3his is a .ikibook' 3hat %eans it has great potential for i%prove%ent and enhance%ent' 3he i%prove%ent can be in the for% of refined language+ clear %ath+ si%ple diagra%s+ and better practice proble%s and ans9ers' 3he enhance%ent can be in the for% of art9ork+ historical conte6t of (2+ anything' 4eel free to i%prove and enhance (pecial 2elativity and other .ikibooks as you see necessary' And yes+ it/s necessaryD

<

The principle of relativity

1rinciples of relativity address the proble% of ho9 events that occur in one place are observed fro% another place' 3his proble% has been a difficult theoretical challenge since the earliest ti%es' Aristotle argued in his A1hysicsA that things %ust either be %oved or be at rest' According to Aristotle+ on the basis of co%ple6 and interesting argu%ents about the possibility of a /void/+ things cannot re%ain in a state of %otion 9ithout so%ething %oving the%' As a result Aristotle proposed that ob;ects 9ould stop entirely in e%pty space' @alileo challenged this idea of %ove%ent being due to a continuous action of so%ething that causes the %ove%ent' ,n his A8ialogue Concerning the 39o Chief .orld (yste%sA he considers observations of %otion %ade by people inside a ship 9ho could not see the outside: Ahave the ship proceed 9ith any speed you like+ so long as the %otion is unifor% and not fluctuating this 9ay and that' Nou 9ill discover not the least change in all the effects na%ed+ nor could you tell fro% any of the% 9hether the ship 9as %oving or standing still'A According to @alileo+ if the ship %oves s%oothly so%eone inside it 9ould be unable to deter%ine 9hether they are %oving' 3his concept leads to (alilean Relativity in 9hich it is held that things continue in a state of %otion unless acted upon' @alilean 2elativity contains t9o i%portant principles: firstly it is i%possible to deter%ine 9ho is actually at rest and secondly things continue in unifor% %otion unless acted upon' 3he second principle is kno9n as @alileoOs La9 of ,nertia or >e9ton/s 4irst La9 of )otion' 2eference:

@alileo @alilei (17#&$' 8ialogues Concerning the 39o Chief .orld (yste%s' Aristotle (#= *C$' 1hysics' http:LLclassics'%it'eduLAristotleLphysics'ht%l

Frames of reference events and transformations

1hysical observers are considered to be surrounded by a re$erence $ra%e 9hich is a set of coordinate a6es in ter%s of 9hich position or %ove%ent %ay be specified or 9ith reference to 9hich physical la9s %ay be %athe%atically stated' An inertial re$erence $ra%e is a collection of ob;ects that have no net %otion relative to each other' ,t is a coordinate syste% defined by the non!accelerated %otion of ob;ects 9ith a co%%on direction and speed' An event is so%ething that happens independently of the reference fra%e that %ight be used to describe it' 3urning on a light or the collision of t9o ob;ects 9ould constitute an event'

(uppose there is a s%all event+ such as a light being turned on+ that is at coordinates x+y+z+t in one reference fra%e' .hat coordinates 9ould another observer+ in another reference fra%e %oving relative to the first at velocity along the x a6is assign to the event0 3his proble% is illustrated belo9:

.hat 9e are seeking is the relationship bet9een the second observer/s coordinates x/+y/+z/+t/ and the first observer/s coordinates x+y+z+t' According to @alilean 2elativity: x/ H x P t y/ H y z/ H z t/ H t 3his set of e5uations is kno9n as a (alilean coordinate trans$or%ation or (alilean trans$or%ation' 3hese e5uations sho9 ho9 the position of an event in one reference fra%e is related to the position of an event in another reference fra%e' *ut 9hat happens if the event is so%ething that is %oving0 Ho9 do velocities transfor% fro% one fra%e to another0 3he calculation of velocities depends on >e9ton/s for%ula: H dx L dt' 3he use of >e9tonian physics to

calculate velocities and other physical variables has led to @alilean 2elativity being called )ewtonian Relativity in the case 9here conclusions are dra9n beyond si%ple changes in coordinates' 3he velocity transfor%ations for the velocities in the three directions in space are+ according to @alilean relativity:

"

3his result is kno9n as the classical velocity addition theore% and su%%arises the transfor%ation of velocities bet9een t9o @alilean fra%es of reference' ,t %eans that the velocities of pro;ectiles %ust be deter%ined relative to the velocity of the source and destination of the pro;ectile' 4or e6a%ple+ if a sailor thro9s a stone at 1 k%Lhr fro% @alileo/s ship 9hich is %oving to9ards shore at = k%Lhr then the stone 9ill be %oving at 1= k%Lhr 9hen it hits the shore' ,n >e9tonian 2elativity the geo%etry of space is assu%ed to be Euclidean and the %easure%ent of ti%e is assu%ed to be the sa%e for all observers' 3he derivation of the classical velocity addition theore% is as follo9s: ,f the @alilean transfor%ations are differentiated 9ith respect to ti%e: x/ H x P t (o: dx/ L dt H dx L dt P *ut in @alilean relativity t/ H t and so dx/ L dt/ H dx/ L dt therefore: dx/ L dt/ H dx L dt P dy/ L dt/ H dy L dt dz/ L dt/ H dy L dt ,f 9e 9rite etc' then:

!pecial relativity
,n the nineteenth century :a%es Clerk )a69ell discovered the e5uations that describe the propagation of electro%agnetic 9aves such as light' 4or e6a%ple+ one of his e5uations deter%ines the velocity of light based on the per%ittivity and per%eability of the %ediu% through 9hich it travels' ,f one assu%es that both the )a69ell e5uations are valid+ and that the @alilean transfor%ation is the appropriate transfor%ation+ then it

should be possible to %easure velocity absolutely and there should be a pre$erred re$erence $ra%e' 3he preferred reference fra%e could be considered the true zero point to 9hich all velocity %easure%ents could be referred' (pecial relativity restored a principle of relativity in physics by %aintaining that although )a69ell/s e5uations are correct @alilean relativity is 9rong: there is no preferred reference fra%e' (pecial relativity brought back the interpretation that in all inertial reference fra%es the sa%e physics is going on and there is no pheno%enon that 9ould allo9 an observer to pinpoint a zero point of velocity' Einstein e6tended the principle of relativity by proposing that the la9s of physics are the sa%e regardless of inertial fra%e of reference' According to Einstein+ 9hether you are in the hold of @alileo/s ship or in the cargo bay of a space ship going at a large fraction of the speed of light the la9s of physics 9ill be the sa%e'

The postulates of special relativity

1' 4irst postulate: the principle of relativity Ebservation of physical pheno%ena by %ore than one inertial observer %ust result in agree%ent bet9een the observers as to the nature of reality' Er+ the nature of the universe %ust not change for an observer if their inertial state changes' Every physical theory should look the sa%e %athe%atically to every inertial observer' 4or%ally: the laws o$ physics are the sa%e regardless o$ inertial $ra%e o$ re$erence' &' (econd postulate: invariance of the speed of light 3he speed of light in vacuu%+ co%%only denoted c+ is the sa%e to all inertial observers+ is the sa%e in all directions+ and does not depend on the velocity of the ob;ect e%itting the light' 4or%ally: the speed o$ light in $ree space is a constant in all inertial $ra%es o$ re$erence. Bsing these postulates Einstein 9as able to calculate ho9 the observation of events depends upon the relative velocity of observers' He 9as then able to construct a theory of physics that led to predictions such as the e5uivalence of %ass and energy and early 5uantu% theory'

11

The spacetime interpretation of special relativity

Although the special theory of relativity 9as first proposed by Einstein in 1" =+ the %odern approach to the theory depends upon the concept of a four!di%ensional universe+ that 9as first proposed by Her%ann )inko9ski in 1" 8+ and further developed as a result of the contributions of E%%y >oether' 3his approach uses the concept of invariance to e6plore the types of coordinate syste%s that are re5uired to provide a full physical description of the location and e6tent of things' 3he %odern theory of special relativity begins 9ith the concept of AlengthA' ,n everyday e6perience+ it see%s that the length of ob;ects re%ains the sa%e no %atter ho9 they are rotated or %oved fro% place to place' .e think that the si%ple length of a thing is AinvariantA' Ho9ever+ as is sho9n in the illustrations belo9+ 9hat 9e are actually suggesting is that length see%s to be invariant in a three!di%ensional coordinate syste%'

3he length of a thing in a t9o!di%ensional coordinate syste% is given by 1ythagoras/ theore%: h& H x& Q y& 3his t9o!di%ensional length is not invariant if the thing is tilted out of the t9o!di%ensional plane' ,n everyday life+ a three!di%ensional coordinate syste% see%s to describe the length fully' 3he length is given by the three!di%ensional version of 1ythagoras/ theore%: h& H x& Q y& Q z& 3he derivation of this for%ula is sho9n in the illustration belo9'

1&

,t see%s that+ provided all the directions in 9hich a thing can be tilted or arranged are represented 9ithin a coordinate syste%+ then the coordinate syste% can fully represent the length of a thing' Ho9ever+ it is clear that things %ay also be changed over a period of ti%e' .e %ust think of ti%e as another direction in 9hich things can be arranged' 3his is sho9n in the follo9ing diagra%:

1#

3he path taken by a thing in both space and ti%e is kno9n as the space!ti%e interval' Her%ann )inko9ski realised in 1" 8 that if things could be rearranged in ti%e+ then the universe %ight be four!di%ensional' He boldly suggested that Einstein/s recently!discovered theory of (pecial 2elativity 9as a conse5uence of this four!di%ensional universe' He proposed that the space!ti%e interval %ight be related to space and ti%e by 1ythagoras/ theore% in four di%ensions: s& H x& Q y& Q z& Q (ict$&

.here i is the i%aginary unit (so%eti%es i%precisely called

$+ c is a constant+ and t is the ti%e

interval spanned by the space!ti%e interval+ s' 3he sy%bols x+ y and z represent displace%ents in space along the corresponding a6es' ,n this e5uation+ the /second/ beco%es ;ust another unit of length' ,n the sa%e 9ay as centi%etres and inches are both units of length related by centi%etres H /conversion constant/ ti%es inches+ %etres and seconds are related by %etres H /conversion constant/ ti%es seconds' 3he conversion constant+ c has a value of about # + is given by: s& H x& Q y& Q z& P (ct$& )inko9ski/s use of the i%aginary unit has been superseded by the use of advanced geo%etry+ that uses a tool kno9n as the A%etric tensorA+ but his original e5uation survives+ and the space!ti%e interval is still given by: s& H x& Q y& Q z& P (ct$& (pace!ti%e intervals are difficult to i%agineC they e6tend bet9een one place and ti%e and another place and ti%e+ so the velocity of the thing that travels along the interval is already deter%ined for a given observer' ,f the universe is four!di%ensional+ then the space!ti%e interval 9ill be invariant+ rather than spatial length' .hoever %easures a particular space!ti%e interval 9ill get the sa%e value+ no %atter ho9 fast they are travelling' 3he invariance of the space!ti%e interval has so%e dra%atic conse5uences' 3he first conse5uence is the prediction that if a thing is travelling at a velocity of c %etres per second+ then all observers+ no %atter ho9 fast they are travelling+ 9ill %easure the sa%e velocity for the thing' 3he velocity c 9ill be a universal constant' 3his is e6plained belo9' .hen an ob;ect is travelling at c+ the space ti%e interval is *ero+ this is sho9n belo9: 3he space!ti%e interval is s& H x& Q y& Q z& P (ct$& 3he distance travelled by an ob;ect %oving at velocity in the x direction for t seconds is: xH t + %eters per second' >o9 i& is e5ual to %inus one+ so the space!ti%e interval

1-

,f there is no %otion in the y or z directions the space!ti%e interval is s& H x& Q (o: s& H ( t$& P (ct$& *ut 9hen the velocity e5uals c: s& H (ct$& P (ct$& And hence the space ti%e interval s& H (ct$& P (ct$& H

P (ct$&

A space!ti%e interval of zero only occurs 9hen the velocity is c' .hen observers observe so%ething 9ith a space!ti%e interval of zero+ they all observe it to have a velocity of c+ no %atter ho9 fast they are %oving the%selves' 3he universal constant+ c+ is kno9n for historical reasons as the Aspeed of lightA' ,n the first decade or t9o after the for%ulation of )inko9ski/s approach %any physicists+ although supporting (pecial 2elativity+ e6pected that light %ight not travel at e6actly c+ but %ight travel at very nearly c' 3here are no9 fe9 physicists 9ho believe that light does not propagate at c' 3he second conse5uence of the invariance of the space!ti%e interval is that clocks 9ill appear to go slo9er on ob;ects that are %oving relative to you' (uppose there are t9o people+ *ill and :ohn+ on separate planets that are %oving a9ay fro% each other' :ohn dra9s a graph of *ill/s %otion through space and ti%e' 3his is sho9n in the illustration belo9:

*eing on planets+ both *ill and :ohn think they are stationary+ and ;ust %oving through ti%e' :ohn spots that *ill is %oving through 9hat :ohn calls space+ as 9ell as ti%e+ 9hen *ill thinks he is %oving through ti%e

1=

alone' *ill 9ould also dra9 the sa%e conclusion about :ohn/s %otion' 3o :ohn+ it is as if *ill/s ti%e a6is is leaning over in the direction of travel and to *ill+ it is as if :ohn/s ti%e a6is leans over' :ohn calculates the length of *ill/s space!ti%e interval as: s& H ( t$& P (ct$& 9hereas *ill doesn/t think he has travelled in space+ so 9rites: s& H ( $& P (c!$& 3he space!ti%e interval+ s&+ is invariant' ,t has the sa%e value for all observers+ no %atter 9ho %easures it or ho9 they are %oving in a straight line' *ill/s s& e5uals :ohn/s s& so: ( $& P (c!$& H ( t$& P (ct$& and P (c!$& H ( t$& P (ct$& hence

' (o+ if :ohn sees *ill %easure a ti%e interval of 1 second ( ! H 1$ bet9een t9o ticks of a clock that is at rest in *ill/s fra%e+ :ohn 9ill find that his o9n clock %easures bet9een these sa%e ticks an interval t+ called coordinate ti%e+ 9hich is greater than one second' ,t is said that clocks in %otion slo9 do9n+ relative to those on observers at rest' 3his is kno9n as Arelativistic ti%e dilation of a %oving clockA' 3he ti%e that is %easured in the rest fra%e of the clock (in *ill/s fra%e$ is called the proper ti%e of the clock' :ohn 9ill also observe %easuring rods at rest on *ill/s planet to be shorter than his o9n %easuring rods+ in the direction of %otion' 3his is a prediction kno9n as Arelativistic length contraction of a %oving rodA' ,f the length of a rod at rest on *ill/s planet is "+ then 9e call this 5uantity the proper length of the rod' 3he length x of that sa%e rod as %easured on :ohn/s planet+ is called coordinate length+ and given by ' (ee section on the Lorentz transfor%ation belo9' 3he last conse5uence is that clocks 9ill appear to be out of phase 9ith each other along the length of a

17

%oving ob;ect' 3his %eans that if one observer sets up a line of clocks that are all synchronised so they all read the sa%e ti%e+ then another observer 9ho is %oving along the line at high speed 9ill see the clocks all reading different ti%es' ,n other 9ords observers 9ho are %oving relative to each other see different events as si% ltaneo s' 3his effect is kno9n as Relativistic Phase or the Relativity o$ Si% ltaneity' 2elativistic phase is often overlooked by students of (pecial 2elativity+ but if it is understood then pheno%ena such as the t9in parado6 are easier to understand' 3he 9ay that clocks go out of phase along the line of travel can be calculated fro% the concepts of the invariance of the space!ti%e interval and length contraction'

3he relationship for co%paring lengths in the direction of travel is given by: ' (o distances bet9een t9o points according to *ill are si%ple lengths in space (R$ 9hereas :ohn sees *ill/s %easure%ent of distance as a co%bination of a distance (6$ and a ti%e interval: x& H "& P (c!$&

*ut fro% : x& H "& P ( & L c&$"& (o: (c!$& H ( & L c&$"& And c! H ( L c$" (o: T + ,v / c-.X

'

1<

Clocks that are synchronised for one observer go out of phase along the line of travel for another observer %oving at %etres per second by :( L c&$ seconds for every %etre' 3his is one of the %ost i%portant results

of (pecial 2elativity and is often neglected by students' 3he net effect of the four!di%ensional universe is that observers 9ho are in %otion relative to you see% to have ti%e coordinates that lean over in the direction of %otion+ and consider things to be si%ultaneous+ that are not si%ultaneous for you' (patial lengths in the direction of travel are shortened+ because they tip up9ards and do9n9ards+ relative to the ti%e a6is in the direction of travel+ akin to a rotation out of three! di%ensional space'

@reat care is needed 9hen interpreting space!ti%e diagra%s' 8iagra%s present data in t9o di%ensions+ and cannot sho9 faithfully ho9+ for instance+ a zero length space!ti%e interval appears'

18

!pacetime

(paceti%e diagra% sho9ing an e ent+ a world line+ and a line of simultaneity' ,n order to gain an understanding of both @alilean and (pecial 2elativity it is i%portant to begin thinking of space and ti%e as being different di%ensions of a four!di%ensional vector space called spaceti%e' Actually+ since 9e can/t visualize four di%ensions very 9ell+ it is easiest to start 9ith only one space di%ension and the ti%e di%ension' 3he figure sho9s a graph 9ith ti%e plotted on the vertical a6is and the one space di%ension plotted on the horizontal a6is' An e ent is so%ething that occurs at a particular ti%e and a particular point in space' (A:ulius R' 9recks his car in Le%itar+ >) on &1 :une at 7:1< 1)'A$ A world line is a plot of the position of so%e ob;ect as a function of ti%e (%ore properly+ the ti%e of the ob;ect as a function of position$ on a spaceti%e diagra%' 3hus+ a 9orld line is really a line in spaceti%e+ 9hile an event is a point in spaceti%e' A horizontal line parallel to the position a6is (6!a6is$ is a line of simultaneityC in @alilean 2elativity all events on this line occur si%ultaneously for all observers' ,t 9ill be seen that the line of si%ultaneity differs bet9een @alilean and (pecial 2elativityC in (pecial 2elativity the line of si%ultaneity

1"

depends on the state of %otion of the observer' ,n a spaceti%e diagra% the slope of a 9orld line has a special %eaning' >otice that a vertical 9orld line %eans that the ob;ect it represents does not %ove !! the velocity is zero' ,f the ob;ect %oves to the right+ then the 9orld line tilts to the right+ and the faster it %oves+ the %ore the 9orld line tilts' ?uantitatively+ 9e say that

(='1$ >otice that this 9orks for negative slopes and velocities as 9ell as positive ones' ,f the ob;ect changes its velocity 9ith ti%e+ then the 9orld line is curved+ and the instantaneous velocity at any ti%e is the inverse of the slope of the tangent to the 9orld line at that ti%e' 3he hardest thing to realize about spaceti%e diagra%s is that they represent the past+ present+ and future all in one diagra%' 3hus+ spaceti%e diagra%s don/t change 9ith ti%e !! the evolution of physical syste%s is represented by looking at successive horizontal slices in the diagra% at successive ti%es' (paceti%e diagra%s represent the evolution of events+ but they don/t evolve the%selves'

The li"htcone
3hings that %ove at the speed of light in our four di%ensional universe have surprising properties' ,f so%ething travels at the speed of light along the 6!a6is and covers 6 %eters fro% the origin in t seconds the space!ti%e interval of its path is zero' s& H x& P (ct$& but x H ct so: s& H (ct$& P (ct$& H E6tending this result to the general case+ if so%ething travels at the speed of light in any direction into or out fro% the origin it has a space!ti%e interval of : H x& Q y& Q z& P (ct$& 3his e5uation is kno9n as the )inko9ski Light Cone E5uation' ,f light 9ere travelling to9ards the origin then the Light Cone E5uation 9ould describe the position and ti%e of e%ission of all those photons that could be at the origin at a particular instant' ,f light 9ere travelling a9ay fro% the origin the e5uation 9ould describe the position of the photons e%itted at a particular instant at any future ti%e /t/'

&

At the superficial level the light cone is easy to interpret' ,t/s back9ard surface represents the path of light rays that strike a point observer at an instant and it/s for9ard surface represents the possible paths of rays e%itted fro% the point observer at an instant (assu%ing the conditions appropriate to a special relativistic treat%ent prevail$' 3hings that travel along the surface of the light cone are said to be light/ like and the path taken by such things is kno9n as a n ll geodesic' Events that lie outside the cones are said to be space/like or+ better still space separated because their space ti%e interval fro% the observer has the sa%e sign as space (positive according to the convention used here$' Events that lie 9ithin the cones are said to be ti%e/like or ti%e separated because their space!ti%e interval has the sa%e sign as ti%e' Ho9ever+ there is %ore to the light cone than the propagation of light' ,f the added assu%ption is %ade that the speed of light is the %a6i%u% possible velocity then events that are space separated cannot affect the observer directly' Events 9ithin the back9ard cone can have affected the observer so the back9ard cone is kno9n as the Aaffective pastA and the observer can affect events in the for9ard cone hence the for9ard cone is kno9n as the Aaffective futureA' 3he assu%ption that the speed of light is the %a6i%u% velocity for all co%%unications is neither inherent in nor re5uired by four di%ensional geo%etry although the speed of light is indeed the %a6i%u% velocity for ob;ects if the principle of ca sality is to be preserved by physical theories (ie: that causes precede effects$'

&1

The #orent$ transformation e%uations

3he discussion so far has involved the co%parison of interval %easure%ents (ti%e intervals and space intervals$ bet9een t9o observers' 3he observers %ight also 9ant to co%pare %ore general sorts of %easure%ent such as the ti%e and position of a single event that is recorded by both of the%' 3he e5uations that describe ho9 each observer describes the other/s recordings in this circu%stance are kno9n as the Lorentz 3ransfor%ation E5uations' (>ote that the sy%bols belo9 signify coordinates'$

3he table belo9 sho9s the Lorentz 3ransfor%ation E5uations'

y/ H y z/ H z

y H y/ z H z/

(ee appendi6 1 for the derivation of these e5uations'

&&

>otice ho9 the phase ( (vLc&$6 $ is i%portant and ho9 these for%ulae for absolute ti%e and position of a ;oint event differ fro% the for%ulae for intervals'

&#

&ore about the relativity of simultaneity and the Andromeda parado'

,f t9o observers 9ho are %oving relative to each other synchronise their clocks in their o9n fra%es of reference they discover that the clocks do not agree bet9een the reference fra%es' 3his is illustrated belo9:

3he effect of the relativity of si%ultaneity+ or AphaseA+ is for each observer to consider that a different set of events is si%ultaneous' 1hase %eans that observers 9ho are %oving relative to each other have different sets of things that are si%ultaneous+ or in their Spresent %o%entT'

3he a%ount by 9hich the clocks differ bet9een t9o observers depends upon the distance of the &-

clock fro% the observer (t H x L c&$' >otice that if both observers are part of inertial fra%es of reference 9ith clocks that are synchronised at every point in space then the phase difference can be obtained by si%ply reading the difference bet9een the clocks at the distant point and clocks at the origin' 3his difference 9ill have the sa%e value for both observers' 2elativistic phase differences have the startling conse5uence that at distances as large as our separation fro% nearby gala6ies an observer 9ho is driving on the earth can have a radically different set of events in her Apresent %o%entA fro% another person 9ho is standing on the earth' 3he classic e6a%ple of this effect of phase is the AAndro%eda 1arado6A+ also kno9n as the A 2ietdi;k!1utna%!1enroseA argu%ent' 1enrose described the argu%ent: A39o people pass each other on the streetC and according to one of the t9o people+ an Andro%edean space fleet has already set off on its ;ourney+ 9hile to the other+ the decision as to 9hether or not the ;ourney 9ill actually take place has not yet been %ade' Ho9 can there still be so%e uncertainty as to the outco%e of that decision0 ,f to either person the decision has already been %ade+ then surely there cannot be any uncertainty' 3he launching of the space fleet is an inevitability'A (1enrose 1"8"$' 3he argu%ent is illustrated belo9:

3his Aparado6A has generated considerable philosophical debate on the nature of ti%e and free!9ill' &=

A result of the relativity of si%ultaneity is that if the car driver launches a space rocket to9ards the Andro%eda gala6y it %ight have a several days head start co%pared 9ith a space rocket launched fro% the ground' 3his is because the Apresent %o%entA for the %oving car driver is progressively advanced 9ith distance co%pared 9ith the present %o%ent on the ground' 3he present %o%ent for the car driver is sho9n in the illustration belo9:

3he result of the Andro%eda parado6 is that 9hen so%eone is %oving to9ards a distant point there are later events at that point than for so%eone 9ho is not %oving to9ards the distant point' 3here is a ti%e gap bet9een the events in the present %o%ent of the t9o people'

The nature of len"th contraction

According to special relativity ite%s such as %easuring rods consist of events distributed in space and ti%e' 3his %eans that t9o observers %oving relative to each other 9ill usually be observing %easuring rods that are co%posed of di$$erent sets of events' ,f the 9ord ArodA %eans the three di%ensional for% of the ob;ect called a rod then these t9o observers in relative %otion observe di$$erent rods' Each observer has a different rod in their present %o%ent' 3he 9ay that observers observe different sets of events is sho9n in the illustration belo9:

&7

Each three di%ensional section of the 9orld is those events that are at an observer/s present instant or present %o%ent' 3he area of a )inko9ski diagra% that corresponds to all of the events that co%pose an ob;ect over a period of ti%e is kno9n as the worldt be of the ob;ect' ,t can be seen in the i%age belo9 that length contraction is the result of observer/s having different sections of an ob;ect/s 9orldtube in their present instant'

(,t should be recalled that the longest lengths on space!ti%e diagra%s are often the shortest in reality$'

&<

,t is so%eti%es said that length contraction occurs because ob;ects rotate into the ti%e a6is' 3his is partly true but there is no actual rotation of a three di%ensional rod+ instead the observed three di%ensional slice of a four di%ensional rod is changed 9hich %akes it appear as if the rod has rotated into the ti%e a6is' 3here can be no doubt that the three di%ensional slice of the 9orldtube of a rod does indeed have different lengths for relatively %oving observers so that the relativistic contraction of the rod is a real+ physical pheno%enon' 3he issue of 9hether or not the events that co%pose the 9orldtube of the rod are al9ays e6istent is a %atter for philosophical speculation' 4urther reading: Fesselin 1etkov' (& =$ ,s 3here an Alternative to the *lock Bniverse Fie90

(vidence for len"th contraction the field of an infinite strai"ht current

Length contraction can be directly observed in the field of an infinitely straight current' 3his is sho9n in the illustration belo9'

&8

,t can be seen that once the idea of space!ti%e is understood the unification of the t9o fields is straightfor9ard' :i% is %oving relative to the 9ire at the sa%e speed as the negatively charged current carriers so :i% only e6periences an electric field' *ill is stationary relative to the 9ire and observes the electrostatic attraction bet9een :i% and the current carriers as a %agnetic field' *ill observes that the charges in the 9ire are balanced 9hereas :i% observes an i%balance of charge' ,t is i%portant to notice that+ in co%%on 9ith the e6planation of length contraction given above+ the events that constitute the strea% of negative charges for :i% are not the sa%e events as constitute the strea% of negative charges for *ill' *ill and :i%/s negative charges occupy different %o%ents in ti%e' &"

,ncidently+ the drift velocity of electrons in a 9ire is about a %illi%etre per second but the electrons %ove at about a %illion %etres a second bet9een collisions ((ee link belo9$' Bseful links: http:LLhyperphysics'phy!astr'gsu'eduLhbaseLelectricLoh%%ic'ht%l http:LLhyperphysics'phy!astr'gsu'eduLhbaseLrelativLreleng'ht%l

)e *ro"lie +aves
8e *roglie noticed that the differing three di%ensional sections of the universe 9ould cause oscillations in the rest fra%e of an observer to appear as 9ave trains in the rest fra%e of observers 9ho are %oving'

He co%bined this insight 9ith Einstein/s ideas on the 5uantisation of energy to create the foundations of 5uantu% theory' 8e *roglie/s insight is also a round!about proof of the description of length contraction given above ! observers in relative %otion have differing three di%ensional slices of a four di%ensional universe' 3he e6istence of %atter 9aves is direct e6peri%ental evidence of the relativity of si%ultaneity'

4urther reading: de *roglie+ L' (1"&=$ En the theory of 5uanta' A translation of : 2ECHE2CHE( (B2 LA 3HEE2,E 8E( ?BA>3A (Ann' de 1hys'+ 1 e sUerie+ t' ,,, (:anvier!4 Uevrier 1"&=$'by: A' 4' Jracklauer' http:LL999'ens%p'frLaflbLL8*!oeuvresL8eV*roglieVJracklauer'pdf

&ore about time dilation

3he ter% Ati%e dilationA is applied to the 9ay that observers 9ho are %oving relative to you record fe9er clock ticks bet9een events than you' ,n special relativity this is not due to properties of the clocks+ it is due to shorter distances bet9een events along an observer/s path through spaceti%e' 3his can be seen %ost clearly by re!e6a%ining the Andro%eda 1arado6' (uppose *ill passes :i% at high velocity on the 9ay to )ars' :i% has previously synchronised the clocks on )ars 9ith his Earth clocks but for *ill the )artian clocks read ti%es 9ell in advance of :i%/s' 3his %eans that *ill has a head start because his present instant contains 9hat :i% considers to be the )artian future' :i% observes that 0ill travels thro gh both space and ti%e' Ho9ever+ *ill achieves this strange ti%e travel by having 9hat :i% considers to be the future of distant ob;ects in his present %o%ent' *ill is literally travelling into future parts of :i%/s fra%e of reference' #1

,n special relativity ti%e dilation and length contraction are not %aterial effects+ they are physical effects due to travel 9ithin a four di%ensional spaceti%e' ,t is i%portant for advanced students to be a9are that special relativity and @eneral 2elativity differ about the nature of spaceti%e' @eneral 2elativity+ in the for% cha%pioned by Einstein+ abolishes the idea of e6tended space and ti%e and is 9hat is kno9n as a ArelationalistA theory of physics' (pecial relativity+ on the other hand+ is a theory 9here e6tended spaceti%e is pre!e%inent' 3he brilliant flo9ering of physical theory in the early t9entieth century has tended to obscure this difference because+ 9ithin a decade+ special relativity had been subsu%ed 9ithin @eneral 2elativity' 3he interpretation of special relativity that is presented here should be learnt before advancing to %ore advanced interpretations'

The t+in parado'

3he effects of the relativity of si%ultaneity such as are seen in the AAndro%eda parado6A are+ in part+ the origin of the At9in parado6A' ,n the t9in parado6 there are t9ins+ *ill and :i%' :i% is on Earth' *ill flies past :i% in a spaceship+ goes to a distant point+ turns round and flies back again' ,t is found that *ill records fe9er clock ticks over the 9hole ;ourney than :i% records on earth' .hy0 (uppose :i% has synchronised clocks on Earth and on the distant point' As *ill flies past :i% he synchronises his clock 9ith :i%/s clock' .hen he does this he observes the clocks on the distant point and i%%ediately detects that they are not synchronised 9ith his or :i%/s clocks' 3o *ill it appears that :i% has synchronised his clocks incorrectly' 3here is a ti%e difference+ or AgapA+ bet9een his clocks and those at the distant point even 9hen he passes :i%' 3his difference is e5ual to the relativistic phase at the distant point' *ill flies to the distant point and discovers that the clock there is reading a later ti%e than his o9n clock' He turns round to fly back to Earth and observes that the clocks on Earth see% to have ;u%ped for9ard+ yet another Ati%e gapA appears' .hen *ill gets back to Earth the ti%e gaps and ti%e dilations %ean that people on Earth have recorded %ore clock ticks that he did' 4or ease of calculation suppose that *ill is %oving at a truly astonishing velocity of '8c in the direction of a distant point that is 1 light seconds a9ay (about # %illion kilo%etres$' 3he illustration belo9 sho9s :i% and *ill/s observations:

#&

4ro% *ill/s vie9point there is both a ti%e dilation and a phase effect' ,t is the added factor of AphaseA that e6plains 9hy+ although the ti%e dilation occurs for both observers+ *ill observes the sa%e readings on :i%/s clocks over the 9hole ;ourney as does :i%' 3o su%%arise the %athe%atics of the t9in parado6 using the e6a%ple: :i% observes the distance as 1 light seconds and the distant point is in his fra%e of reference' ##

According to :i% it takes *ill the follo9ing ti%e to %ake the ;ourney: 3i%e taken H distance L velocity therefore according to :i%: t H 1 L '8 H 1&'= seconds Again according to :i%+ ti%e dilation should affect the observed ti%e on *ill/s clocks:

so: seconds (o for :i% the round trip takes &= secs and *ill/s clock reads 1= secs' *ill %easures the distance as: light seconds' 4or *ill it takes " L H 7 L '8 H <'= seconds' *ill observes :i%/s clocks to appear to run slo9 as a result of ti%e dilation: so: seconds *ut there is also a ti%e gap of x L c& H 8 seconds' (o for *ill+ :i%/s clocks register 1&'= secs have passed fro% the start to the distant point' 3his is co%posed of -'= secs elapsing on :i%/s clocks plus an 8 sec ti%e gap fro% the start of the ;ourney' *ill sees &= secs total ti%e recorded on :i%/s clocks over the 9hole ;ourney+ this is the sa%e ti%e as :i% observes on his o9n clocks' ,t is so%eti%es dubiously asserted that the t9in parado6 is about the clocks on the t9in that leaves earth being slo9er than those on the t9in that stays at ho%e+ it is then argued that biological processes contain clocks therefore the t9in that travelled a9ay ages less' 3his is not really true because the relativistic phase plays a %a;or role in the t9in parado6 and leads to *ill travelling to a re%ote place that+ for *ill+ is at a later ti%e than :i% 9hen *ill and :i% pass each other' A %ore #-

accurate e6planation is that 9hen 9e travel 9e travel in ti%e as 9ell as space' 3he turn around is not re5uired to de%onstrate the t9in Aparado6A' (uppose there 9ere t9o travellers+ *ill(1$ 9ho %oves a9ay fro% earth and *ill(&$ 9ho travels to9ards earth' ,f *ill(&$ synchronises his clocks 9ith the clocks on *ill(1$ 9hen they pass then the sa%e difference in elapsed ti%e bet9een the clocks on :i% and *ill(&$ 9ill be observed as bet9een :i% and *ill in the original e6a%ple' (tudents have difficulty 9ith the t9in parado6 because they believe that the observations of the t9ins are sy%%etrical' 3his is not the case' As can be seen fro% the illustration belo9 either t9in could deter%ine 9hether they had %ade the turn or the other t9in had %ade the turn'

,im and *ill's vie+ of the -ourney

(pecial relativity does not postulate that all %otion is /relative/C the postulates are that the la9s of physics are the sa%e in all inertial fra%es and there is a constant velocity called the Aspeed of lightA' Contrary to popular %yth the t9ins do not observe events that are a %irror i%age of each other' *ill observes hi%self leave :i% then return+ :i% sees *ill leave hi% then return' *ill does not observe :i% turn round+ he observes hi%self %aking the turn' 3he follo9ing illustrations cover various vie9s of the ;ourney' 3he %ost i%portant %o%ent in the ;ourney is the point 9here *ill turns round' >otice ho9 *ill/s surface of si%ultaneity+ that includes #=

the events that he considers to be in the present %o%ent+ s9ings across :i%/s 9orldline during the turn'

As *ill travels a9ay fro% :i% he considers events that are already in :i%/s past to be in his o9n present'

After the turn *ill considers events that are in :i%/s future to be in his present (although the finite speed of light prevents *ill fro% observing :i%/s future$'

#7

3he s9ing in *ill/s surface of si%ultaneity at the turn!round point leads to a /ti%e gap/' ,n our e6a%ple *ill %ight sur%ise that :i%/s clocks ;u%p by 17 seconds on the turn'

>otice that the ter% A:i%/s apparent pathA is used in the illustration ! as 9as seen earlier+ *ill kno9s that he hi%self has left :i% and returned so he kno9s that :i%/s apparent path is an artefact of his o9n %otion' ,f 9e i%agine that the t9in parado6 is sy%%etrical then the illustration above sho9s ho9 9e %ight i%agine *ill 9ould vie9 the ;ourney' *ut 9hat happens+ in our e6a%ple+ to the 17 seconds in the ti%e gap+ does it ;ust disappear0 3he t9in parado6 is not sy%%etrical and :i% does not %ake a sudden turn after -'= seconds' *ill/s actual observation and the fate of the infor%ation in the ti%e gap can be probed by supposing that :i% e%its a pulse of light several ti%es a second' 3he result is sho9n in the illustration belo9'

#<

:i% has clearly but one inertial fra%e but does *ill represent a single inertial fra%e0 (uppose *ill 9as on a planet as he passed :i% and fle9 back to :i% in a rocket fro% the turn!round point: ho9 %any inertial fra%es 9ould be involved0 ,s *ill/s vie9 a vie9 fro% a single inertial fra%e0 1!ercise: it is interesting to calculate the observations %ade by an observer 9ho continues in the direction of the out9ard leg of *ill/s ;ourney ! note that a velocity transfor%ation 9ill be needed to esti%ate *ill/s inbound velocity as %easured by this third observer'

The Pole.barn parado'

#8

(>ote that )inko9ski/s %etric involves the subtraction of displace%ents in ti%e+ so 9hat appear to be the longest lengths on a &8 sheet of paper are often the shortest lengths in a (#Q1$8 reality$' 3he sy%%etry of length contraction leads to t9o 5uestions' 4irstly+ ho9 can a succession of events be observed as si%ultaneous events by another observer0 3his 5uestion led to the concept of de *roglie 9aves and 5uantu% theory' (econdly+ if a rod is si%ultaneously bet9een t9o points in one fra%e ho9 can it be observed as being successively bet9een those points in another fra%e0 4or instance+ if a pole enters a building at high speed ho9 can one observer find it is fully 9ithin the building and another find that the t9o ends of the rod are opposed to the t9o ends of the building at successive ti%es0 .hat happens if the rod hits the end of the building0 3he second 5uestion is kno9n as the Apole!barn parado6A or Aladder parado6A'

3he pole!barn parado6 states the follo9ing: suppose a superhero running at '<=c and carrying a horizontal pole 1= % long to9ards a barn 1 % long+ 9ith front and rear doors' .hen the runner and the pole are inside the barn+ a ground observer closes and then opens both doors (by re%ote control$ so that the runner and pole are %o%entarily captured inside the barn and then proceed to e6it the barn fro% the back door' Ene %ay be surprised to see a 1=!% pole fit inside a 1 !% barn' *ut the pole is in %otion 9ith respect to the ground observer+ 9ho %easures the pole to be contracted to a length of "'" % (check using e5uations$' 3he Sparado6T arises 9hen 9e consider the runnerOs point of vie9' 3he runner sees the barn contracted to 7'7 %' *ecause the pole is in the rest fra%e of the runner+ the runner %easures it to #"

have its proper length of 1= %' >o9+ ho9 can our superhero %ake it safely through the barn0 3he resolution of the Sparado6T lies in the relativity of si%ultaneity' 3he closing of the t9o doors is %easured to be si%ultaneous by the ground observer' Ho9ever+ since the doors are at different positions+ the runner says that they do not close si%ultaneously' 3he rear door closes and then opens first+ allo9ing the leading edge of the pole to e6it' 3he front door of the barn does not close until the trailing edge of the pole passes by' ,f the rear door is kept closed and %ade out of so%e i%penetrable %aterial then in the fra%e of the runner a shock 9ave 9ill travel at the speed of light fro% the rear door that co%presses the rod so that it fits 9ithin the barn' 3his shock 9ave 9ill appear like an instantaneous e6plosion in the fra%e of the barn and a progressive 9ave in the fra%e of the runner'

Addition of velocities
Ho9 can t9o observers+ %oving at v k%Lsec relative to each other+ co%pare their observations of the velocity of a third ob;ect0

(uppose one of the observers %easures the velocity of the ob;ect as u/ 9here:

3he coordinates x/ and t/ are given by the Lorentz transfor%ations:

and

but x/ H u/t/ so:

and hence: x P t H u/(t P x L c&$ >otice the role of the phase ter% x L c&' 3he e5uation can be rearranged as:

given that x H ut:

3his is kno9n as the relativistic velocity addition theore%+ it applies to velocities parallel to the direction of %utual %otion' 3he e6istence of ti%e dilation %eans that even 9hen ob;ects are %oving perpendicular to the direction of %otion there is a discrepancy bet9een the velocities reported for an ob;ect by observers 9ho are %oving relative to each other' ,f there is any co%ponent of velocity in the 6 direction (ux+ $ then the phase affects ti%e %easure%ent and hence the velocities perpendicular to the 6!a6is' 3he table belo9 su%%arises the relativistic addition of velocities in the various directions in space' -1

>otice that for an observer in another reference fra%e the su% of t9o velocities (u and v$ can never e6ceed the speed of light' 3his %eans that the speed of light is the %a6i%u% velocity in any fra%e of reference'

-&

Relativistic )ynamics
3he 9ay that the velocity of a particle can differ bet9een observers 9ho are %oving relative to each other %eans that %o%entu% needs to be redefined as a result of relativity theory' 3he illustration belo9 sho9s a typical collision of t9o particles' ,n the right hand fra%e the collision is observed fro% the vie9point of so%eone %oving at the sa%e velocity as one of the particles+ in the left hand fra%e it is observed by so%eone %oving at a velocity that is inter%ediate bet9een those of the particles'

,f %o%entu% is redefined then all the variables such as force (rate of change of %o%entu%$+ energy etc' 9ill beco%e redefined and relativity 9ill lead to an entirely ne9 physics' 3he ne9 physics has an effect at the ordinary level of e6perience through the relation E H mc& 9hereby it is the tiny changes in relativistic %ass that are e6pressed as everyday kinetic energy so that the 9hole of physics is related to ArelativisticA reasoning rather than >e9ton/s e%pirical ideas'

&omentum
,n physics %o%entu% is conserved 9ithin a closed syste%+ the law o$ conservation o$ %o%ent % applies' Consider the special case of identical particles colliding sy%%etrically as illustrated belo9:

-#

3he %o%entu% change by the red ball is:

3he %o%entu% change by the blue ball is:

3he situation is sy%%etrical so the )ewtonian conservation of %o%entu% la9 is de%onstrated:

>otice that this result depends upon the y co%ponents of the velocities being e5ual ie:

'

3he relativistic case is rather different' 3he collision is illustrated belo9+ the left hand fra%e sho9s the collision as it appears for one observer and the right hand fra%e sho9s e!actly the sa%e collision as it appears for another observer %oving at the sa%e velocity as the blue ball:

--

3he configuration sho9n above has been si%plified because one fra%e contains a stationary blue ball (ie: ux# H $ and the velocities are chosen so that the vertical velocity of the red ball is e6actly reversed after the collision ie: ' *oth fra%es sho9 e6actly the sa%e event+ it is only the observers 9ho differ

bet9een fra%es' 3he relativistic velocity transfor%ations bet9een fra%es is:

given that ux# H ' (uppose that the y co%ponents are e5ual in one fra%e+ in >e9tonian physics they 9ill also be e5ual in the other fra%e' Ho9ever+ in relativity+ if the y co%ponents are e5ual in one fra%e they are not necessarily e5ual in the other fra%e' 4or instance if then:

(o if

then in this case

' it

,f the %ass 9ere constant bet9een collisions and bet9een fra%es then although is found that:

(o %o%entu% defined as %ass ti%es velocity is not conserved in a collision 9hen the collision is described in fra%es %oving relative to each other' >otice that the discrepancy is very s%all if ux$ and are s%all' 3o preserve the principle of %o%entu% conservation in all inertial reference fra%es+ the definition of %o%entu% has to be changed' 3he ne9 definition %ust reduce to the >e9tonian e6pression 9hen ob;ects %ove at speeds %uch s%aller than the speed of light+ so as to recover the >e9tonian for%ulas' 3he velocities in the y direction are related by the follo9ing e5uation 9hen the observer is travelling at the sa%e velocity as the blue ball ie: 9hen ux# H :

,f 9e 9rite m# for the %ass of the blue ball$ and m$ for the %ass of the red ball as observed fro% the fra%e

-=

of the blue ball then+ if the principle of relativity applies: &m$uy$ H &m#uy# (o:

*ut:

3herefore:

3his %eans that+ if the principle of relativity is to apply then the %ass %ust change by the a%ount sho9n in the e5uation above for the conservation of %o%entu% la9 to be true' 3he reference fra%e 9as chosen so that deter%ined in ter%s of ux$: and hence ' 3his allo9s to be

and hence:

(o substituting for in

3he blue ball is at rest so its %ass is so%eti%es kno9n as its rest %ass+ and is given the sy%bol m ' As the balls 9ere identical at the start of the boost the %ass of the red ball is the %ass that a blue ball 9ould have if it 9ere in %otion relative to an observerC this %ass is so%eti%es kno9n as the relativistic %ass sy%bolised by m' 3hese ter%s are no9 infre5uently used in %odern physics+ as 9ill be e6plained at the end of this section' 3he discussion given above 9as related to the relative %otions of the blue and red balls+ as a result ux$ corresponds to the speed of the %oving ball relative to an observer 9ho is stationary 9ith respect to the

-7

blue ball' 3hese considerations %ean that the relativistic %ass is given by:

3he relativistic %o%entu% is given by the product of the relativistic %ass and the velocity 3he overall e6pression for %o%entu% in ter%s of rest %ass is:

'

and the co%ponents of the %o%entu% are:

(o the co%ponents of the %o%entu% depend upon the appropriate velocity co%ponent and the speed' (ince the factor 9ith the s5uare root is cu%berso%e to 9rite+ the follo9ing abbreviation is often used+ called the Lorentz ga%%a factor:

3he e6pression for the %o%entu% then reads

'

,t can be seen fro% the discussion above that 9e can 9rite the %o%entu% of an ob;ect %oving 9ith velocity as the product of a function m(u$ of the speed u and the velocity :

3he function m(u$ %ust reduce to the ob;ect/s %ass m at s%all speeds+ in particular 9hen the ob;ect is at rest m( $ H m' 3he function m(u$ used to be called /relativistic %ass/+ and its value in the fra%e of the particle 9as referred to as the /rest %ass/ or /invariant %ass/' *oth ter%s are no9 obsolete: the /rest %ass/ is today si%ply called the %ass+ and the /relativistic %ass/ is no longer used since+ as 9ill be seen in the discussion of energy belo9+ it is identical to the energy but for the units'

-<

Force
>e9ton/s second la9 states that the total force acting on a particle e5uals the rate of change of its %o%entu%' 3he sa%e for% of >e9ton/s second la9 holds in relativistic %echanics' 3he relativistic % force is given by:

,f the relativistic %o%entu% is used:

*y Leibniz/s la9 9here d(xy$ H xdy Q ydx:

3his e5uation for force 9ill be used belo9 to derive relativistic e6pressions for the energy of a particle'

(ner"y
Energy is defined as the 9ork done in %oving a body fro% one place to another' Energy is given fro%:

so+ over the 9hole path:

Jinetic energy (J$ is the energy used to %ove a body fro% a velocity of %otion to one di%ension:

to a velocity

' 2estricting the

Bsing the relativistic % force:

(o:

substituting for d(Wu$ and using dx L dt H u:

-8

.hich gives:

3he Lorentz factor W is given by:

9hich can be e6panded as: W&c& P W&u& H c& 8ifferentiating: &Wc&dW P W&&udu P u&&WdW H (o+ rearranging: Wudu Q u&dW H c&dW ,n 9hich case:

is si%plified to:

As u goes fro% to u+ the Lorentz factor W goes fro% 1 to W+ so:

and hence: & H Wmc& P mc& 3he a%ount Wmc& is kno9n as the total energy of the particle' 3he a%ount mc& is kno9n as the rest energy of the particle' ,f the total energy of the particle is given the sy%bol E: E H Wmc& H mc& Q &

-"

(o it can be seen that mc& is the energy of a %ass that is stationary' 3his energy is kno9n as %ass energy and is the origin of the fa%ous for%ula E H mc& that is iconic of the nuclear age' 3he >e9tonian appro6i%ation for kinetic energy can be derived by using the bino%ial theore% to e6pand ' 3he bino%ial theore% is:

(o e6panding

(o if u is %uch less than c:

9hich is the >e9tonian appro6i%ation for lo9 velocities'

/uclear (ner"y
.hen protons and neutrons (nucleons$ co%bine to for% ele%ents the co%bination of particles tends to be in a lo9er energy state than the free neutrons and protons' ,ron has the lo9est energy and ele%ents above and belo9 iron in the scale of ato%ic %asses tend to have higher energies' 3his decrease in energy as neutrons and protons bind together is kno9n as the binding energy' 3he ato%ic %asses of ele%ents are slightly different fro% that calculated fro% their constituent particles and this difference in %ass energy+ calculated fro% E H mc&+ is al%ost e6actly e5ual to the binding energy' 3he binding energy can be released by converting ele%ents 9ith higher %asses per nucleon to those 9ith lo9er %asses per nucleon' 3his can be done by either splitting heavy ele%ents such as uraniu% into lighter ele%ents such as bariu% and krypton or by ;oining together light ele%ents such as hydrogen into heavier ele%ents such as deuteriu%' ,f ato%s are split the process is kno9n as n clear $ission and if ato%s are ;oined the process is kno9n as n clear $ sion' Ato%s that are lighter than iron can be fused to release energy and those heavier than iron can be split to release energy' =

.hen hydrogen and a neutron are co%bined to %ake deuteriu% the energy released can be calculated as follo9s: 3he %ass of a proton is 1' co%ponents is ' <#1 a%u+ the %ass of a neutron is 1' 87< a%u and the %ass of a

deuteriu% nucleus is &' 1#7 a%u' 3he difference in %ass bet9een a deuteriu% nucleus and its &#8 a%u' 3he energy of this %ass difference is:

(o the energy released is (ionised hydrogen$' (Assu%ing 1 a%u H %etres per second$

;oules or about

;oules per gra% of protons

Jg+ Avogadro/s nu%ber H

and the speed of light is

1resent day nuclear reactors use a process called n clear $ission in 9hich rods of uraniu% e%it neutrons 9hich co%bine 9ith the uraniu% in the rod to produce uraniu% isotopes such as
&#7B &#7B

9hich rapidly decay into s%aller nuclei such as *ariu% and Jrypton plus three neutrons 9hich can cause further generation of and further decay' 3he fact that each neutron can cause the

generation of three %ore neutrons %eans that a self sustaining or chain reaction can occur' 3he generation of energy results fro% the e5uivalence of %ass and energyC the decay products+ bariu% and krypton have a lo9er %ass than the original &#7B+ the %issing %ass being released as 1<< )eF of radiation' 3he nuclear e5uation for the decay of &#7B is 9ritten as follo9s:

>uclear e6plosion ,f a large a%ount of the uraniu% isotope &#=B (the critical %ass$ is confined the chain reaction can get out of control and al%ost instantly release a large a%ount of energy' A device that confines a

=1

critical %ass of uraniu% is kno9n as an ato%ic bo%b or A/bo%b' A bo%b based on the fusion of deuteriu% ato%s is kno9n as a ther%on clear bo%b+ hydrogen bo%b or '/bo%b'

=&

#i"ht propa"ation and the aether

)any students confuse 2elativity 3heory 9ith a theory about the propagation of light' According to %odern 2elativity 3heory the constancy of the speed of light is a conse5uence of the geo%etry of spaceti%e rather than so%ething specifically due to the properties of photonsC but the state%ent Athe speed of light is constantA often distracts the student into a consideration of light propagation' 3his confusion is a%plified by the i%portance assigned to interfero%etry e6peri%ents+ such as the )ichelson!)orley e6peri%ent+ in %ost te6tbooks on 2elativity 3heory' 3he history of theories of the propagation of light is an interesting topic in physics and 9as indeed i%portant in the early days of 2elativity 3heory' ,n the seventeenth century t9o co%peting theories of light propagation 9ere developed' Christiaan Huygens published a wave theory o$ light 9hich 9as based on ' ygen2s principle 9hereby every point in a 9avelike disturbance can give rise to further disturbances that spread out spherically' ,n contrast >e9ton considered that the propagation of light 9as due to the passage of s%all particles or AcorpusclesA fro% the source to the illu%inated ob;ect' His theory is kno9n as the corp sc lar theory o$ light' >e9ton/s theory 9as 9idely accepted until the nineteenth century' ,n the early nineteenth century 3ho%as Noung perfor%ed his 3o ng2s slits e6peri%ent and the interference pattern that occurred 9as e6plained in ter%s of diffraction due to the 9ave nature of light' 3he 9ave theory 9as accepted generally until the t9entieth century 9hen 5uantu% theory confir%ed that light had a corpuscular nature and that Huygen/s principle could not be applied' 3he idea of light as a disturbance of so%e %ediu%+ or aether+ that per%eates the universe 9as proble%atical fro% its inception (B( spelling: AetherA$' 3he first proble% that arose 9as that the speed of light did not change 9ith the velocity of the observer' ,f light 9ere indeed a disturbance of so%e stationary %ediu% then as the earth %oves through the %ediu% to9ards a light source the speed of light should appear to increase' ,t 9as found ho9ever that the speed of light did not change as e6pected' Each e6peri%ent on the velocity of light re5uired corrections to e6isting theory and led to a variety of subsidiary theories such as the Aaether drag hypothesisA' Blti%ately it 9as e6peri%ents that 9ere designed to investigate the properties of the aether that provided the first e6peri%ental evidence for 2elativity 3heory'

The aether dra" hypothesis

3he aether drag hypothesis 9as an early atte%pt to e6plain the 9ay e6peri%ents such as Arago/s e6peri%ent sho9ed that the speed of light is constant' 3he aether drag hypothesis is no9 considered to be incorrect by %ainstrea% science' According to the aether drag hypothesis light propagates in a special %ediu%+ the aether+ that re%ains attached to things as they %ove' ,f this is the case then+ no %atter ho9 fast the earth %oves around the sun or

=#

rotates on its a6is+ light on the surface of the earth 9ould travel at a constant velocity' 3he pri%ary reason the aether drag hypothesis is considered invalid is because of the occurrence of stellar aberration' ,n stellar aberration the position of a star 9hen vie9ed 9ith a telescope s9ings each side of a central position by about & '= seconds of arc every si6 %onths' 3his a%ount of s9ing is the a%ount e6pected 9hen considering the speed of earth/s travel in its orbit' ,n 18<1 @eorge *iddell Airy de%onstrated that stellar aberration occurs even 9hen a telescope is filled 9ith 9ater' ,t see%s that if the aether drag hypothesis 9ere true then stellar aberration 9ould not occur because the light 9ould be travelling in the aether 9hich 9ould be %oving along 9ith the telescope'

,f you visualize a bucket on a train about to enter a tunnel and a drop of 9ater drips fro% the tunnel entrance into the bucket at the very centre+ the drop 9ill not hit the centre at the botto% of the bucket' 3he bucket is the tube of a telescope+ the drop is a photon and the train is the earth' ,f aether is dragged then the droplet 9ould be travelling 9ith the train 9hen it is dropped and 9ould hit the centre of bucket at the botto%' 3he a%ount of stellar aberration+ X is given by: tan(X$ H Yt L cYt (o: tan(X$ H L c 3he speed at 9hich the earth goes round the sun+ v H # k%Ls+ and the speed of light is c H # contradicts the aether drag hypothesis' + + %Ls

9hich gives X H & '= seconds of arc every si6 %onths' 3his a%ount of aberration is observed and this

=-

,n 1818 4resnel introduced a %odification to the aether drag hypothesis that only applies to the interface bet9een %edia' 3his 9as accepted during %uch of the nineteenth century but has no9 been replaced by special theory of relativity (see belo9$' 3he aether drag hypothesis is historically i%portant because it 9as one of the reasons 9hy >e9ton/s corpuscular theory of light 9as replaced by the 9ave theory and it is used in early e6planations of light propagation 9ithout relativity theory' ,t originated as a result of early atte%pts to %easure the speed of light' ,n 181 4ranZois Arago realised that variations in the refractive inde6 of a substance predicted by the corpuscular theory 9ould provide a useful %ethod for %easuring the velocity of light' 3hese predictions arose because the refractive inde6 of a substance such as glass depends on the ratio of the velocities of light in air and in the glass' Arago atte%pted to %easure the e6tent to 9hich corpuscles of light 9ould be refracted by a glass pris% at the front of a telescope' He e6pected that there 9ould be a range of different angles of refraction due to the variety of different velocities of the stars and the %otion of the earth at different ti%es of the day and year' Contrary to this e6pectation he found that that there 9as no difference in refraction bet9een stars+ bet9een ti%es of day or bet9een seasons' All Arago observed 9as ordinary stellar aberration' ,n 1818 Augustin :ean 4resnel e6a%ined Arago/s results using a 9ave theory of light' He realised that even if light 9ere trans%itted as 9aves the refractive inde6 of the glass!air interface should have varied as the glass %oved through the aether to strike the inco%ing 9aves at different velocities 9hen the earth rotated and the seasons changed' 4resnel proposed that the glass pris% 9ould carry so%e of the aether along 9ith it so that A''the aether is in e6cess inside the pris%A' He realised that the velocity of propagation of 9aves depends on the density of the %ediu% so proposed that the velocity of light in the pris% 9ould need to be ad;usted by an a%ount of /drag/' 3he velocity of light n in the glass 9ithout any ad;ust%ent is given by:
n

HcLn

3he drag ad;ust%ent d is given by:

.here [e is the aether density in the environ%ent+ [g is the aether density in the glass and is the velocity of the pris% 9ith respect to the aether'

3he factor

can be 9ritten as

because the refractive inde6+ n+ 9ould be dependent

on the density of the aether' 3his is kno9n as the 4resnel drag coe$$icient' 3he velocity of light in the glass is then given by:

==

3his correction 9as successful in e6plaining the null result of Arago/s e6peri%ent' ,t introduces the concept of a largely stationary aether that is dragged by substances such as glass but not by air' ,ts success favoured the 9ave theory of light over the previous corpuscular theory' 3he 4resnel drag coefficient 9as confir%ed by an interfero%eter e6peri%ent perfor%ed by 4izeau' .ater 9as passed at high speed along t9o glass tubes that for%ed the optical paths of the interfero%eter and it 9as found that the fringe shifts 9ere as predicted by the drag coefficient'

3he special theory of relativity predicts the result of the 4izeau e6peri%ent fro% the velocity addition theore% 9ithout any need for an aether' ,f ' is the velocity of light relative to the 4izeau apparatus and ( is the velocity of light relative to the 9ater and is the velocity of the 9ater:

9hich+ if vLc is s%all can be e6panded using the bino%ial e6pansion to beco%e:

=7

3his is identical to 4resnel/s e5uation' ,t %ay appear as if 4resnel/s analysis can be substituted for the relativistic approach+ ho9ever+ %ore recent 9ork has sho9n that 4resnel/s assu%ptions should lead to different a%ounts of aether drag for different fre5uencies of light and violate (nell/s la9 (see 4erraro and (forza (& =$$'

3he aether drag hypothesis 9as one of the argu%ents used in an atte%pt to e6plain the )ichelson!)orley e6peri%ent before the 9idespread acceptance of the special theory of relativity' 3he 4izeau e6peri%ent is consistent 9ith relativity and appro6i%ately consistent 9ith each individual body+ such as pris%s+ lenses etc' dragging its o9n aether 9ith it' 3his contradicts so%e %odified versions of the aether drag hypothesis that argue that aether drag %ay happen on a global (or larger$ scale and stellar aberration is %erely transferred into the entrained AbubbleA around the earth 9hich then faithfully carries the %odified angle of incidence directly to the observer' Re$erences

2afael 4erraro and 8aniel ) (forza & ether Eur' :' 1hys' &7 1"=!& -

=' Arago (181 $: the first e6peri%ental result against the

The &ichelson.&orley e'periment

3he 5ichelson/5orley e!peri%ent+ one of the %ost i%portant and fa%ous e6peri%ents in the history of physics+ 9as perfor%ed in 188< by Albert )ichelson and Ed9ard )orley at 9hat is no9 Case .estern 2eserve Bniversity+ and is considered to be the first strong evidence against the theory of a lu%iniferous aether' 1hysics theories of the late 1"th century postulated that+ ;ust as 9ater 9aves %ust have a %ediu% to %ove across (9ater$+ and audible sound 9aves re5uire a %ediu% to %ove through (air$+ so also light 9aves re5uire a %ediu%+ the Alu%iniferous aetherA' 3he speed of light being so great+ designing an e6peri%ent to detect the presence and properties of this aether took considerable thought'

=<

5eas ring aether

A depiction of the concept of the Aaether 9indA' Each year+ the Earth travels a tre%endous distance in its orbit around the sun+ at a speed of around # k%Lsecond+ over 1 + k% per hour' ,t 9as reasoned that the Earth 9ould at all ti%es be %oving through the aether and producing a detectable Aaether 9indA' At any given point on the Earth/s surface+ the %agnitude and direction of the 9ind 9ould vary 9ith ti%e of day and season' *y analysing the effective 9ind at various different ti%es+ it should be possible to separate out co%ponents due to %otion of the Earth relative to the (olar (yste% fro% any due to the overall %otion of that syste%' 3he effect of the aether 9ind on light 9aves 9ould be like the effect of 9ind on sound 9aves' (ound 9aves travel at a constant speed relative to the %ediu% that they are travelling through (this varies depending on the pressure+ te%perature etc (see sound$+ but is typically around #- %Ls$' (o+ if the speed of sound in our conditions is #- %Ls+ 9hen there is a 1 %Ls 9ind relative to the ground+ into the 9ind it 9ill appear that sound is travelling at ## %Ls (#- ! 1 $' 8o9n9ind+ it 9ill appear that sound is travelling at #= %Ls (#- Q 1 $' )easuring the speed of sound co%pared to the ground in different directions 9ill therefore enable us to calculate the speed of the air relative to the ground' ,f the speed of the sound cannot be directly %easured+ an alternative %ethod is to %easure the ti%e that the sound takes to bounce off of a reflector and return to the origin' 3his is done parallel to the 9ind and perpendicular (since the direction of the 9ind is unkno9n before hand+ ;ust deter%ine the ti%e for several different directions$' 3he cu%ulative round trip effects of the 9ind in the t9o orientations slightly favors the sound travelling at right angles to it' (i%ilarly+ the effect of an aether 9ind on a bea% of light 9ould be for the bea% to take slightly longer to travel round!trip in the direction parallel to the A9indA than to travel the sa%e round!trip distance at right angles to it' A(lightlyA is key+ in that+ over a distance such as a fe9 %eters+ the difference in ti%e for the t9o round trips 9ould be only about a %illionth of a %illionth of a second' At this point the only truly accurate %easure%ents of the speed of light 9ere those carried out by Albert Abraha% )ichelson+ 9hich had resulted in %easure%ents accurate to a fe9 %eters per second' .hile a stunning achieve%ent in its o9n right+ this

=8

9as certainly not nearly enough accuracy to be able to detect the aether' #he e!peri%ents )ichelson+ though+ had already seen a solution to this proble%' His design+ later kno9n as an interfero%eter+ sent a single source of 9hite light through a half!silvered %irror that 9as used to split it into t9o bea%s travelling at right angles to one another' After leaving the splitter+ the bea%s travelled out to the ends of long ar%s 9here they 9ere reflected back into the %iddle on s%all %irrors' 3hey then reco%bined on the far side of the splitter in an eyepiece+ producing a pattern of constructive and destructive interference based on the length of the ar%s' Any slight change in the a%ount of ti%e the bea%s spent in transit 9ould then be observed as a shift in the positions of the interference fringes' ,f the aether 9ere stationary relative to the sun+ then the Earth/s %otion 9ould produce a shift of about ' - fringes' )ichelson had %ade several %easure%ents 9ith an e6peri%ental device in 1881+ in 9hich he noticed that the e6pected shift of ' - 9as not seen+ and a s%aller shift of about ' & 9as' Ho9ever his apparatus 9as a prototype+ and had e6peri%ental errors far too large to say anything about the aether 9ind' 4or a %easure%ent of the aether 9ind+ a %uch %ore accurate and tightly controlled e6peri%ent 9ould have to be carried out' 3he prototype 9as+ ho9ever+ successful in de%onstrating that the basic %ethod 9as feasible'

A )ichelson interfero%eter He then co%bined forces 9ith Ed9ard )orley and spent a considerable a%ount of ti%e and %oney creating an i%proved version 9ith %ore than enough accuracy to detect the drift' ,n their e6peri%ent the light 9as repeatedly reflected back and forth along the ar%s+ increasing the path length to 11%' At this length the drift 9ould be about '- fringes' 3o %ake that easily detectable the apparatus 9as located in a closed roo% in the base%ent of a stone building+ eli%inating %ost ther%al and vibrational effects' Fibrations 9ere further reduced by building the apparatus on top of a huge block of %arble+ 9hich 9as then floated in a pool of %ercury' 3hey calculated that effects of about 1L1 th of a fringe 9ould be detectable'

="

3he %ercury pool allo9ed the device to be turned+ so that it could be rotated through the entire range of possible angles to the Aaether 9indA' Even over a short period of ti%e so%e sort of effect 9ould be noticed si%ply by rotating the device+ such that one ar% rotated into the direction of the 9ind and the other a9ay' Ever longer periods dayLnight cycles or yearly cycles 9ould also be easily %easurable' 8uring each full rotation of the device+ each ar% 9ould be parallel to the 9ind t9ice (facing into and a9ay fro% the 9ind$ and perpendicular to the 9ind t9ice' 3his effect 9ould sho9 readings in a sine 9ave for%ation 9ith t9o peaks and t9o troughs' Additionally if the 9ind 9as only fro% the earth/s orbit around the sun+ the 9ind 9ould fully change directions eastL9est during a 1& hour period' ,n this ideal conceptualization+ the sine 9ave of dayLnight readings 9ould be in opposite phase' *ecause it 9as assu%ed that the %otion of the solar syste% 9ould cause an additional co%ponent to the 9ind+ the yearly cycles 9ould be detectable as an alteration of the %aginitude of the 9ind' An e6a%ple of this effect is a helicopter flying for9ard' .hile on the ground+ a helicopter/s blades 9ould be %easured as travelling around at = )1H at the tips' Ho9ever+ if the helicopter is travelling for9ard at = )1H+ there are points at 9hich the tips of the blades are travelling )1H and 1 )1H 9ith respect to the air they are travelling through' 3his increases the %agnitude of the lift on one side and decreases it on the other ;ust as it 9ould increase and decrease the %agnitude of an ether 9ind on a yearly basis' #he %ost $a%o s $ailed e!peri%ent ,ronically+ after all this thought and preparation+ the e6peri%ent beca%e 9hat %ight be called the %ost fa%ous failed e6peri%ent to date' ,nstead of providing insight into the properties of the aether+ )ichelson and )orley/s 188< article in the A%erican :ournal of (cience reported the %easure%ent to be as s%all as one!fortieth of the e6pected displace%ent but Asince the displace%ent is proportional to the s5uare of the velocityA they concluded that the %easured velocity 9as appro6i%ately one!si6th of the e6pected velocity of the Earth/s %otion in orbit and Acertainly less than one!fourthA' Although this s%all AvelocityA 9as %easured+ it 9as considered far too s%all to be used as evidence of aether+ it 9as later said to be 9ithin the range of an e6peri%ental error that 9ould allo9 the speed to actually be zero' Although )ichelson and )orley 9ent on to different e6peri%ents after their first publication in 188<+ both re%ained active in the field' Ether versions of the e6peri%ent 9ere carried out 9ith increasing sophistication' Jennedy and ,llings9orth both %odified the %irrors to include a half!9ave AstepA+ eli%inating the possibility of so%e sort of standing 9ave pattern 9ithin the apparatus' ,llings9orth could detect changes on the order of 1L# th of a fringe+ Jennedy up to 1L1= th' )iller later built a non!%agnetic device to eli%inate %agnetostriction+ 9hile )ichelson built one of non!e6panding invar to eli%inate any re%aining ther%al effects' Ethers fro% around the 9orld increased accuracy+ eli%inated possible side effects+ or both' All of these 9ith the e6ception of 8ayton )iller also returned 9hat is considered a null result' )orley 9as not convinced of his o9n results+ and 9ent on to conduct additional e6peri%ents 9ith 8ayton

)iller' )iller 9orked on increasingly large e6peri%ents+ cul%inating in one 9ith a #&% (effective$ ar% length at an installation at the )ount .ilson observatory' 3o avoid the possibility of the aether 9ind being blocked by solid 9alls+ he used a special shed 9ith thin 9alls+ %ainly of canvas' He consistently %easured a s%all positive effect that varied+ as e6pected+ 9ith each rotation of the device+ the sidereal day and on a yearly basis' 3he lo9 %agnitude of the results he attributed to aether entrain%ent (see belo9$' His %easure%ents a%ounted to only \1 kps instead of the e6pected \# kps e6pected fro% the earth/s orbital %otion alone' He re%ained convinced this 9as due to )artial entrain%ent+ though he did not atte%pt a detailed e6planation' 3hough Jennedy later also carried out an e6peri%ent at )ount .ilson+ finding 1L1 the drift %easured by )iller+ and no seasonal effects+ )iller/s findings 9ere considered i%portant at the ti%e+ and 9ere discussed by )ichelson+ Hendrik Lorentz and others at a %eeting reported in 1"&8 (ref belo9$' 3here 9as general agree%ent that %ore e6peri%entation 9as needed to check )iller/s results' Lorentz recognised that the results+ 9hatever their cause+ did not 5uite tally 9ith either his or Einstein/s versions of special relativity' Einstein 9as not present at the %eeting and felt the results could be dis%issed as e6peri%ental error (see (hankland ref belo9$' Ar% )a%e 3ear length ,%eters. )ichelson )ichelson )orley )orley and )orley )iller )iller )iller ((unlight$ 3o%ascheck ((tarlight$ )iller )t .ilson$ ,lling9orth 1iccard and (tahel (2igi$ )ichelson et al' :oos and 1881 188< 1'& 11' 6pper 4ringe shi$t 4ringe shi$t 1!peri%ental e!pected ' '1'1# 1'1& 1'1& 1'1& '# 1'1& ' < ' < '1# '" '<= %eas red ' & ] ' 1 ' 1= ' 8 ' # ' 1' & ' 88 ' ' ' ' 1 ' & 7 & & ' 7 1 k%Ls 8 k%Ls Resol tion 7i%it 8aether on

1" &M1" - #&'& 1"&1 1"&1"&#&' #&' 8'7 1"&#M1"&- #&'

1"&=M1"&7 #&' 1"&7 1"&< 1"&< 1"&" 1"# &' &' &'8 &='" &1'

,n recent ti%es versions of the )) e6peri%ent have beco%e co%%onplace' Lasers and %asers a%plify light

71

by repeatedly bouncing it back and forth inside a carefully tuned cavity+ thereby inducing high!energy ato%s in the cavity to give off %ore light' 3he result is an effective path length of kilo%eters' *etter yet+ the light e%itted in one cavity can be used to start the sa%e cascade in another set at right angles+ thereby creating an interfero%eter of e6tre%e accuracy' 3he first such e6peri%ent 9as led by Charles H' 3o9nes+ one of the co!creators of the first %aser' 3heir 1"=8 e6peri%ent put an upper li%it on drift+ including any possible e6peri%ental errors+ of only # %Ls' ,n 1"<- a repeat 9ith accurate lasers in the triangular 3ri%%er e6peri%ent reduced this to ' &= %Ls+ and included tests of entrain%ent by placing one leg in glass' ,n 1"<" the *rillet!Hall e6peri%ent put an upper li%it of # %Ls for any one direction+ but reduced this to only ' &61 !1#' 4allo t 3his result 9as rather astounding and not e6plainable by the then!current theory of 9ave propagation in a static aether' (everal e6planations 9ere atte%pted+ a%ong the%+ that the e6peri%ent had a hidden fla9 (apparently )ichelson/s initial belief$+ or that the Earth/s gravitational field so%eho9 AdraggedA the aether around 9ith it in such a 9ay as locally to eli%inate its effect' )iller 9ould have argued that+ in %ost if not all e6peri%ents other than his o9n+ there 9as little possibility of detecting an aether 9ind since it 9as al%ost co%pletely blocked out by the laboratory 9alls or by the apparatus itself' *e this as it %ay+ the idea of a si%ple aether+ 9hat beca%e kno9n as the *irst Postulate+ had been dealt a serious blo9' A nu%ber of e6peri%ents 9ere carried out to investigate the concept of aether dragging+ or entrainment' 3he %ost convincing 9as carried out by Ha%ar+ 9ho placed one ar% of the interfero%eter bet9een t9o huge lead blocks' ,f aether 9ere dragged by %ass+ the blocks 9ould+ it 9as theorised+ have been enough to cause a visible effect' Ence again+ no effect 9as seen' .alter 2itz/s E%ission theory (or ballistic theory$+ 9as also consistent 9ith the results of the e6peri%ent+ not re5uiring aether+ %ore intuitive and parado6!free' 3his beca%e kno9n as the +econd Postulate' Ho9ever it also led to several AobviousA optical effects that 9ere not seen in astrono%ical photographs+ notably in observations of binary stars in 9hich the light fro% the t9o stars could be %easured in an interfero%eter' 3he (agnac e6peri%ent placed the )) apparatus on a constantly rotating turntable' ,n doing so any ballistic theories such as 2itz/s could be tested directly+ as the light going one 9ay around the device 9ould have different length to travel than light going the other 9ay (the eyepiece and %irrors 9ould be %oving to9ardLa9ay fro% the light$' ,n 2itz/s theory there 9ould be no shift+ because the net velocity bet9een the light source and detector 9as zero (they 9ere both %ounted on the turntable$' Ho9ever in this case an effect was seen+ thereby eli%inating any si%ple ballistic theory' 3his fringe!shift effect is used today in laser gyroscopes' 1 %Ls for a t9o!direction case (ie+ still or partially entrained aether$' A year long repeat kno9n as Hils and Hall+ published in 1"" + reduced this to

7&

Another possible solution 9as found in the Lorentz!4itz@erald contraction hypothesis' ,n this theory all ob;ects physically contract along the line of %otion relative to the aether+ so 9hile the light %ay indeed transit slo9er on that ar%+ it also ends up travelling a shorter distance that e6actly cancels out the drift' ,n 1"#& the Jennedy!3horndike e6peri%ent %odified the )ichelson!)orley e6peri%ent by %aking the path lengths of the split bea% une5ual+ 9ith one ar% being very long' ,n this version the t9o ends of the e6peri%ent 9ere at different velocities due to the rotation of the earth+ so the contraction 9ould not A9ork outA to e6actly cancel the result' Ence again+ no effect 9as seen' Ernst )ach 9as a%ong the first physicists to suggest that the e6peri%ent actually a%ounted to a disproof of the aether theory' 3he develop%ent of 9hat beca%e Einstein/s special theory of relativity had the 4itzgerald! Lorentz contraction derived fro% the invariance postulate+ and 9as also consistent 9ith the apparently null results of %ost e6peri%ents (though not+ as 9as recognised at the 1"&8 %eeting+ 9ith )iller/s observed seasonal effects$' 3oday relativity is generally considered the AsolutionA to the )) null result' 3he 3routon!>oble e6peri%ent is regarded as the electrostatic e5uivalent of the )ichelson!)orley optical e6peri%ent+ though 9hether or not it can ever be done 9ith the necessary sensitivity is debatable' En the other hand+ the 1" 8 3routon!2ankine e6peri%ent that spelled the end of the Lorentz!4itz@erald contraction hypothesis achieved an incredible sensitivity' Re$erences

.' 2itz+ 2echerches Criti5ues sur l/Electrodyna%i5ue @enerale+ Ann, -him,, Phys'+ 1#+ 1-=+ (1" 8$ ! English 3ranslation

.' de (itter+ Ein astrono%ischer *e9is f^r die Jonstanz der Lichgesh9indigkeit+ Physik, .eitschr+ 1-+ -&" (1"1#$

3he )ichelson )orley and the Jennedy 3horndike tests of (32 3he 3routon!2ankine E6peri%ent and the 2efutation of the 4itz@erald Contraction High (peed ,ves!(til9ell E6peri%ent Bsed to 8isprove the E%ission 3heory

&athematical analysis of the &ichelson &orley ('periment

3he )ichelson interfero%eter splits light into rays that travel along t9o paths then reco%bines the%' 3he reco%bined rays interfere 9ith each other' ,f the path length changes in one of the ar%s the interference pattern 9ill shift slightly+ %oving relative to the cross hairs in the telescope' 3he )ichelson interfero%eter is arranged as an optical bench on a concrete block that floats on a large pool of %ercury' 3his allo9s the 9hole apparatus to be rotated s%oothly' ,f the earth 9ere %oving through an aether at the sa%e velocity as it orbits the sun (# k%Lsec$ then )ichelson and )orley calculated that a rotation of the apparatus should cause a shift in the fringe pattern'

7#

3he basis of this calculation is given belo9'

Consider the ti%e taken t1 for light to travel along 1ath 1 in the illustration:

2earranging ter%s:

further rearranging:

hence:

Considering 1ath &+ the light traces out t9o right angled triangles so:

7-

2earranging:

(o:

,t is no9 easy to calculate the difference (_t bet9een the ti%es spent by the light in 1ath 1 and 1ath &:

,f the apparatus is rotated by " degrees the ne9 ti%e difference is:

3he interference fringes due to the ti%e difference bet9een the paths 9ill be different after rotation if _ t and _t/ are different'

3his difference bet9een the t9o ti%es can be calculated if the bino%ial e6pansions of

and

are used:

(o:

7=

,f the period of one vibration of the light is ! then the nu%ber of fringes (n$+ that 9ill %ove past the cross hairs of the telescope 9hen the apparatus is rotated 9ill be:

,nserting the for%ula for _t/ P _t:

*ut c! for a light 9ave is the 9avelength of the light ie: c! H ` so:

,f the 9avelength of the light is

and the total path length is & %etres then:

(o the fringes 9ill shift by '- fringes (ie: - a$ 9hen the apparatus is rotated' Ho9ever+ no fringe shift is observed' 3he null result of the )ichelson!)orley e6peri%ent is no9days e6plained in ter%s of the constancy of the speed of light' 3he assu%ption that the light 9ould have a velocity of c P and c Q depending on the direction relative to the hypothetical Aaether 9indA is false+ the light al9ays travels at c bet9een t9o points in a vacuu% and the speed of light is not affected by any Aaether 9indA' 3his is because+ in bspecial relativityc the Lorentz transfor%s induce a blength contractionc' 8oing over the above calculations 9e obtain:

(taking into consideration the length contraction$

,t is no9 easy to recalculate the difference (_t bet9een the ti%es spent by the light in 1ath 1 and 1ath &:

77

because ,f the apparatus is rotated by " degrees the ne9 ti%e difference is:

3he interference fringes due to the ti%e difference bet9een the paths 9ill be different after rotation if _ t and _t/ are different'

9oherence length
3he coherence length of light rays fro% a source that has 9avelengths that differ by _` is:

,f path lengths differ by %ore than this a%ount then interference fringes 9ill not be observed' .hite light has a 9ide range of 9avelengths and interfero%eters using 9hite light %ust have paths that are e5ual to 9ithin a s%all fraction of a %illi%etre for interference to occur' 3his %eans that the ideal light source for a )ichelson ,nterfero%eter should be %onochro%atic and the ar%s should be as near as possible e5ual in length' 3he calculation of the coherence length is based on the fact that interference fringes beco%e unclear 9hen light rays are about 7 degrees (about 1 radian or one si6th of a 9avelength ( %eans that 9hen t9o bea%s are: $$ out of phase' 3his

%etres out of step they 9ill no longer give a 9ell defined interference pattern' (uppose a light bea% contains t9o 9avelengths of light+ ` and ` Q _`+ then in:

7<

cycles they 9ill be

out of phase'

3he distance re5uired for the t9o different 9avelengths of light to be this %uch out of phase is the coherence length' Coherence length H nu%ber of cycles 6 length of each cycle so:

coherence length H

'

#orent$.Fit$"erald Contraction 0ypothesis

After the first )ichelson!)orley e6peri%ents in 1881 there 9ere several atte%pts to e6plain the null result' 3he %ost obvious point of attack is to propose that the 1ath that is parallel to the direction of %otion is contracted by in 9hich case _t and _t/ 9ould be identical and no fringe shift 9ould occur'

3his possibility 9as proposed in 18"& by 4itzgerald' Lorentz produced an Aelectron theory of %atterA that 9ould account for such a contraction' (tudents so%eti%es %ake the %istake of assu%ing that the Lorentz!4itzgerald contraction is e5uivalent to the Lorentz transfor%ations' Ho9ever+ in absence of any treat%ent of ti%e dilation effect the Lorentz! 4itgerald e6planation 9ould result in a fringe shift if the apparatus is %oved bet9een t9o different velocities' 3he rotation of the earth allo9s this effect to be tested as the earth orbits the sun' Jennedy and 3horndike (1"#&$ perfor%ed the )ichelson!)orley e6peri%ent 9ith a highly sensitive apparatus that could detect any effect due to the rotation of the earthC they found no effect' 3hey concluded that both ti%e dilation and Lorentz!4itzgerald Contraction take place+ thus confir%ing relativity theory' 3he fringe shifts due to velocity changes if only the Lorentz!4itzgerald contraction applied 9ould be: ' >otice ho9 the sensitivity of the e6peri%ent is dependent on the difference in path length /f P /m and hence a long coherence length is re5uired' 1!ternal links

,nterfero%eters Bsed in Aether 8rift E6peri%ents 4ro% 1881!1"#1 Early E6peri%ents )odern )ichelson!)orley E6peri%ent i%proves the best previous result by & orders of %agnitude+ fro% & # 3he )ichelson!)orley and Jennedy!3horndike E6peri%ents

78

Appendi' 1
5athe%atics o$ the 7orent* #rans$or%ation 1: ations

Consider t9o observers 0 and 0/+ %oving at velocity relative to each other+ 9ho observe the sa%e event such as a flash of light' Ho9 9ill the coordinates recorded by the t9o observers be interrelated0 3hese can be derived using linear algebra on the basis of the postulates of relativity and an e6tra ho%ogeneity and isotropy assu%ption' #he ho%ogeneity and isotropy ass %ption: space is unifor% and ho%ogenous in all directions' ,f this 9ere not the case then 9hen co%paring lengths bet9een coordinate syste%s the lengths 9ould depend upon the position of the %easure%ent' 4or instance+ if points 9ould depend upon position' the distance bet9een t9o

3he linear e5uations relating coordinates in the pri%ed and unpri%ed fra%es are:

3here is no relative %otion in the y or z directions so+ according to the /relativity/ postulate:

Hence: and and (o the follo9ing e5uations re%ain to be solved:

,f space is isotropic (the sa%e in all directions$ then the %otion of clocks should be independent of the y and z a6es (other9ise clocks placed sy%%etrically around the 6!a6is 9ould appear to disagree' Hence

so:

7"

Events satisfying

%ust also satisfy

' (o:

and

@iven that the e5uations are linear then

and:

and

3herefore the correct transfor%ation e5uation for

is:

3he analysis to date gives the follo9ing e5uations:

Assu%ing that the speed of light is constant+ the coordinates of a flash of light that e6pands as a sphere 9ill satisfy the follo9ing e5uations in each coordinate syste%:

(ubstituting the coordinate transfor%ation e5uations into the second e5uation gives:

rearranging:

.e de%and that this is e5uivalent 9ith

(o 9e get: <

(olving these # si%ultaneous e5uations gives:

(ubstituting these values into:

gives:

3he inverse transfor%ation is:

<1

<&

Alphabetical Inde'
Addition of velocities''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' -& aether'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' =# aether drag hypothesis'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' =# aether drift'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 7& aether 9ind''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' =8 Andro%eda parado6''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' &8 Arago+ 4ranZois'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' == Aristotle'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 1 ballistic theory'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 7& *rillet!Hall e6peri%ent'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''7& causality'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' &# Coherence length'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 7< coordinate length'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 18 coordinate syste%''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 1 corpuscular theory of light''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''=# 8e *roglie 9aves''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' #& drift velocity''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' #& Einstein+ Albert'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''7 electric field'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' #1 E%ission theory'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 7& Energy'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''= energy+ rest''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' =1 energy+ total'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' =1 entrain%ent''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 71 event '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 1 4irst postulate: the principle of relativity''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 1# 4itzgerald+ @eorge'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' = 4izeau e6peri%ent'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' =7 4orce''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' = four!di%ensional universe'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 17 4resnel'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' == 4resnel drag coefficient'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' == fringe shift'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 77 @alilean 2elativity'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''1 p' @alilean transfor%ation'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 11 @alileo'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 1 @alileoOs La9 of ,nertia''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''1 ga%%a factor'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' -" Hils and Hal'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 7& Huygen/s principle'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' =# Huygens+ Christiaan''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' =# i%aginary unit'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''17 inertial reference fra%e'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''1 interfero%eter''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 7& invariance''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 1invariant %ass''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' -" :a%es Clerk )a69ell''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' = <#

Jennedy!3horndike e6peri%ent'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''7# kinetic energy''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' -=+ =& Lar%or+ :oseph''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' = la9 of conservation of %o%entu%''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' -= length contraction''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 18+ &8 Light propagation''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' =# lightcone''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' && Lorentz factor''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' =1 Lorentz ga%%a factor'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''-" Lorentz transfor%ation''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' &Lorentz 3ransfor%ation E5uations'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''7" Lorentz!4itzgerald Contraction Hypothesis''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 78 Lorentz+ Hendrik'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''= %agnetic field''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' #1 %a6i%u% velocity'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' &# )a69ell+ :a%es Clerk'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' = %etric tensor''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 17 )ichelson interfero%eter''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 7# )ichelson!)orley e6peri%ent''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' =< )ille+ 8ayton''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''7 )inko9ski+ Her%ann''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 7+ 1%o%entu%'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' -= %o%entu% conservation'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' -< %o%entu%+ relativistic''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' -" >e9ton/s 4irst La9 of )otion''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''1 >e9tonian conservation of %o%entu%''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''-7 >e9tonian 2elativity''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''11 >oether+ E%%y'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''1null geodesic''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' &# 1hase+ relativistic'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 1" 1oincarG+ Henri''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' < 1ole!barn parado6'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''postulates of special relativity'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 1# preferred reference fra%e''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 1# present %o%ent'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' &7 principle of relativity'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 1 proper ti%e''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''18 1ythagoras/ theore%''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''1reference fra%e''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 1 reference fra%e+ inertial''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''1 refractive inde6''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' == relativistic # force''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' = 2elativistic 8yna%ics'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''-= relativistic %ass'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' -8 relativistic %o%entu%'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' -" 2elativistic phase''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''1" relativistic velocity addition theore%''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' -# 2elativity of (i%ultaneity'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''1" rest energy'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' =1 rest %ass''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' -8 <-

2ietdi;k!1utna%!1enrose argu%ent''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''&< (econd postulate: invariance of the speed of light''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 1# (i%ultaneity''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''1" space separated''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' &# space!ti%e diagra%s''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' & space!ti%e interval''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''17 spaceti%e'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 1(paceti%e''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' &1 speed of light'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' &# (peed of light''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''17 stellar aberration''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' =ti%e dilation''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''18+ ## ti%e gap'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' &8+ #ti%e separated''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' &# ti%e travel''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' ## total energy''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' =1 3ri%%er e6peri%ent''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 7& 3routon!>oble e6peri%ent '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 7# t9in parado6''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' #unification'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''#1 velocity addition theore%''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 1&+ -# 9ave theory of light''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''=# .ikibook'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' " 9orldtube'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' &" Noung/s slits''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''=#

<=