2394 weitere kritische Veröffentlichungen - Kritische Stimmen zur ...

of the relativity of simultaneity - 6. determined by
measurement - 7. a perspective effect - 8. mathematical.
Here is a small selection from the literature:
1. Effects are true but not really true:
Pride of place goes to Eddington [1928, 33-34]: "The
shortening of the moving rod is true, but it is not really
true."
2. Effects are real:
Arzelies [1966, 120-121]: The Lorentz Contraction
is a Real Phenomenon. ... Several authors have stated
that the Lorentz contraction only seems to occur, and is
not real. This idea is false. So far as relativistic theory is
concerned, this contraction is just as real as any other
phenomenon. Admittedly ... it is not absolute, but depends
upon the system employed for the measurement;
it seems that we might call it an apparent contraction
which varies with the system. This is merely playing
with the words, however.
We often encounter the following remark: The length
of a ruler depends upon its motion with respect to the
observer. ... From this, it is concluded once again that the
contraction is only apparent, a subjective phenomenon. ...
such remarks ought to be forbidden.
Krane [1983, 23-25]: It must be pointed out that
time dilation is a real effect ... The length measured by
the moving observer is shorter. It must be emphasized
that this is a real effect.
Matveyev [1966, 305]: A body is, therefore, "flattened"
in the direction of motion. This effect is a real
effect ...
Møller [1972, 44]: Contraction is a real effect observable
in principle by experiment. It expresses, however,
not so much a quality of the moving stick itself as rather a
reciprocal relation between measuring-sticks in motion
relative to each other. ... According to relativistic conception,
the notion of the length of a stick has an unambiguous
meaning only in relation to a given inertial frame.
... This means that the concept of length has lost its
absolute meaning.
Pauli [1981, 12-13]: We have seen that this contraction
is connected with the relativity of simultaneity,
and for this reason the argument has been put forward
that it is only an "apparent" contraction, in other words,
that it is only simulated by our space-time measurements.
If a state is called real only if it can be determined
in the same way in all Galilean reference systems, then
the Lorentz contraction is indeed only apparent, since
an observer at rest in K' will see the rod without contraction.
But we do not consider such a point of view as
appropriate, and in any case the Lorentz contraction is
in principle observable.
Schwinger [1986, 52]: Each will observe the other
clock to be running more slowly. This is an objective
fact. It is not a property of clocks but of time itself.
Tolman [1987, 23-24]: Entirely real but symmetrical.
3. Relativistic effects are not physically real:
Taylor & Wheeler [1992, 76]: Does something about a
G. O. Mueller: SRT. Kap. 4-Erg.
320
clock really change when it moves, resulting in the
observed change in the tick rate? Absolutely not! Here
is why: Whether a clock is at rest or in motion ... is controlled
by the observer. You want the clock to be at
rest? Move along with it. ... How can your change of
motion affect the inner mechanism of a distant clock? It
cannot and it does not.
4. Relativistic effects are apparent:
Aharoni [1985, 21]: The moving rod appears shorter.
The moving clock appears to go slow.
Cullwick [1959, 65, 68]: [A] rod which is at rest in
S' ... appears to the observer O to be contracted ...
Similarly, a rod at rest in S will appear in S' to be
contracted....
Jackson [1975, 520]: The time as seen in the rest
system is dilated.
Joos [1958, 243-244]: The interval appears to the
moving observer to be lengthened. A body which appears
to be spherical to an observer at rest will appear to
a moving observer to be an oblate spheroid.
McCrea [1954, 15-16]: The apparent length is reduced.
Time intervals appear to be lengthened; clocks appear
to go slow.
Nunn [1923, 43-44]: A moving rod would appear to
be shortened. An interval is always less than measured
by the other observer.
Whitrow [1980, 255]: Instead of assuming that there
are real, i.e. structural, changes in length and duration
owing to motion, Einstein's theory involves only
apparent changes, and these are independent of the
microscopic constitution and hidden mechanisms
controlling the structure of matter. [Unlike]... real
changes, these apparent phenomena are reciprocal.
5. Relativistic effects are the result of the relativity
of simultaneity:
Bohm [1965, 59]: When measuring lengths and intervals,
observers are not referring to the same events.
French [1968, 97] - Rosser [1967, 37] - Stephenson
& Kilmister [1987, 38-39]: Measurements of lengths
involve simultaneity and yield different numerical values.
6. Relativistic effects are determined by measurements:
Schwartz [1972, 113]: Each observer determines
distances to be foreshortened.
7. Relativistic effects are comparable to perspective
effects:
Rindler [1991, 25-29]: Moving lengths are reduced,
a kind of perspective effect. But of course nothing has
happened to the rod itself. Nevertheless, contraction is
no illusion, it is real. Moving clocks go slow, a 'velocityperspective'
effect. Nothing at all happens to the clock
itself. Like contraction, this effect is real.
8. Relativistic effects are mathematical:
Eddington [1924, 16-18]: The connection between
lengths and intervals are problems of pure mathematics.
A travelling clock gives a low reading.
Minkowski [1908, 81]: [The] contraction is not to
be looked upon as a consequence of resistances in the
Textversion 1.2 - 2012