Jump to content

A Seductive Fallacy: Difference between revisions

From Natural Philosophy Wiki
Imported from text file
 
Imported from text file
Line 12: Line 12:
==Abstract==
==Abstract==


It has been claimed since at least 1910 that the Lorentz Transformation and Einstein's Theory of Relativity are derivable without using the constancy of the velocity of light as a postulate. The proof makes three (in some versions, more) very basic and natural assumptions, and derives the Lorentz transformation with a constant velocity of light as the only possible transformation between moving inertial frames that satisfies experimental observations. It is shown that the proof is flawed by illegitimately interpreting a constant that has the dimensions of a velocity as the velocity of light, and by claiming that this is the only choice confirmed by experiment.[[Category:Scientific Paper]]
It has been claimed since at least 1910 that the Lorentz Transformation and Einstein's Theory of Relativity are derivable without using the constancy of the velocity of light as a postulate. The proof makes three (in some versions, more) very basic and natural assumptions, and derives the Lorentz transformation with a constant velocity of light as the only possible transformation between moving inertial frames that satisfies experimental observations. It is shown that the proof is flawed by illegitimately interpreting a constant that has the dimensions of a velocity as the velocity of light, and by claiming that this is the only choice confirmed by experiment.
 
[[Category:Scientific Paper|seductive fallacy]]


[[Category:Relativity]]
[[Category:Relativity]]

Revision as of 13:03, 1 January 2017

Scientific Paper
TitleA Seductive Fallacy
Author(s)Petr Beckmann
KeywordsLorentz Transformation, Einsteins Theory of Relativity, velocity of light, experiment
Published1991
JournalGalilean Electrodynamics
Volume2
Number2
Pages36-42

Abstract

It has been claimed since at least 1910 that the Lorentz Transformation and Einstein's Theory of Relativity are derivable without using the constancy of the velocity of light as a postulate. The proof makes three (in some versions, more) very basic and natural assumptions, and derives the Lorentz transformation with a constant velocity of light as the only possible transformation between moving inertial frames that satisfies experimental observations. It is shown that the proof is flawed by illegitimately interpreting a constant that has the dimensions of a velocity as the velocity of light, and by claiming that this is the only choice confirmed by experiment.