Difference between revisions of "The Concept of Simultaneity"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Imported from text file) |
(Imported from text file) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
==Abstract== | ==Abstract== | ||
| − | It has generally been accepted among physicists of this century that simultaneity is relative to the observer, only. There are two concepts used of the word, however, both used in explication of the special theroy of relativity and both stemming from versions of operationalism. In this paper I should like to examine them and demonstrate that neither is tenable in a strict sense.[[Category:Scientific Paper]] | + | It has generally been accepted among physicists of this century that simultaneity is relative to the observer, only. There are two concepts used of the word, however, both used in explication of the special theroy of relativity and both stemming from versions of operationalism. In this paper I should like to examine them and demonstrate that neither is tenable in a strict sense. |
| + | |||
| + | [[Category:Scientific Paper|concept simultaneity]] | ||
[[Category:Relativity]] | [[Category:Relativity]] | ||
Revision as of 11:11, 1 January 2017
| Scientific Paper | |
|---|---|
| Title | The Concept of Simultaneity |
| Author(s) | Harry E Mongold |
| Keywords | Simultaneity |
| Published | 1978 |
| Journal | Pursuit |
| Volume | 11 |
| Number | 2 |
| Pages | 60-65 |
Abstract
It has generally been accepted among physicists of this century that simultaneity is relative to the observer, only. There are two concepts used of the word, however, both used in explication of the special theroy of relativity and both stemming from versions of operationalism. In this paper I should like to examine them and demonstrate that neither is tenable in a strict sense.
