Re: Einstein's Sep27 1905 paper


valls@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Ken S. Tucker ha escrito:

To Mr. RVHG et al...

Ken S. Tucker wrote:
valls@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Ken S. Tucker ha escrito:

valls@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
...
I our case, the subsequent papers are a huge quantity. For a person
conversant in all of them, I don't see any reason to exclude just the
first one. To suggest changes in the original paper is not the
essential point here, but to state in any way what is considered not
correct in it taking into account the new developments since the
writing of the paper.
Any comments about my first post here are welcomed.
RVHG

That 1905 paper is ok, notation by modern standards is
a bit dated, but it's magnificient in these ways...

(1) unifing mass and energy conservation.
in the last equation.

(2) Providing the foundation for nonorthogonal spacetime,
in the 1st equation.

The (2) provides Minkowski with a basis to formulate
SpaceTime, later to evolve in GR1916, as a theory
free of specific CS's, ie. "Principle of Covariance".

Good Stuff
Ken S. Tucker
We share a similar view about Einstein's 27Sep paper. Can you make some
comment to my first post starting this thread? In my opinion the stuff
is even more good than the one you describe.

RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)

Mr. Potatoe "with an "e"." what part of respect
do you not understand?
I agreed.
Ken

That paper is a bit annoying because there are
no equation numbers, so it's hard to discuss.
(I'm using Dover's "P of R", on pg 69).

IMO, in the 1st equation is an *implicit* assumption
of frequency proportional to energy (like E = h*nu), in
AE's use of " l* " to be proportional to energy, and a
year later, the AE's photon hypothesis explaining the
photo-electric effect was published.
Note in "P of R" pg 56 an identical equation is used
for Doppler and aberration in the original SR, *except*
frequency "nu", was used.
Planck had published his quantum hypothesis prior
to that. I suppose then (>100 years ago) one might
suggest AE found E=mc^2 using E=h*nu.

Regards
Ken S. Tucker
We have a minor disagreement about historical data (the photo-electric
paper was also a 1905's one),

No prob, I'll accept your data.

but I do not think it is important at
all. Yes, by sure M. Plank was the first one establishing de
energy-frequency relationship in 1900 (with Plank's constant h as the
proportional factor) and Einstein used it in his 1905 work.
You have no comments about what I consider the more important point in
my first post, the handling of potential energies by Einstein in his
Sep27 paper and the resulting rest mass measuring potential energies,
what does not seem to agree with today accepted Physics knowledge
(including Einstein's own work developed later!). I beg you to put your
attention in that fact.
RVHG.

Ok fair enough. That obsolete paper you're refering to
was excellent, but quite superseded by applying
SpaceTime, specifically the Lorentz transform invariance
to conservation of mass-energy and momentum. This is
well explained in modern SR text books.
Then, to reconcile conservation with gravitation, classical
GR1916 was developed, and further the application of
"HAMILTON"S PRINCIPLE..." 1916 that introduced
tensor densities and a variable determinant g=|g_uv|,
especially Eq.(21) of that paper.
What I'd like to do is discuss that equation further and
perhaps beg your opinion regarding it's strengths and
weaknesses, especially if & how quantum effects are in
accord with it.

What I argue is Eq.(21) can be incremented by a
quanta of energy, apart from a continuous derivative
that vanishes, that I agree with.

I take that argument from the definition that "M" in the
paper represents Mass that is quantized.

I suggest AE's "HAMILTON..." 1916 paper is pretty
much the 1905 paper with L/c^2, expressed in more
general terms, i.e. generally covariant as spec'd.
(AE still had the bad habit of using sqrt (-g), that
still propagates today).

Let's follow the evolution!
Good Show
Ken S. Tucker

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: About GR (kst)
    ... Ken S. Tucker wrote: ... > You and I are astronauts, sitting on the pad ... > energy was produced and emitted. ... > quantized radiation in the infared spectrum. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: About GR (kst)
    ... >> Ken S. Tucker wrote: ... > Thanks Sue ... A typical molecule, M, has many different energy levels. ... to the energy of the photon. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: magnetic monopoles
    ... To do so I need to add energy ... into the sphere since they will encounter repulsion ... Ken S. Tucker ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Work = energy?
    ... Ken S. Tucker wrote: ... doesn't handle Conservation of Energy too well, ... In our study's one may use instead the Conservation ... Power is a difficult idea for most. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Latter Day MMX - discussion of LIGO
    ... > | Ken S. Tucker wrote: ... > has a helicity of 1 and the other a helicity of 2. ... and manipulating only with chunks of energy. ... the approximation is exploiting. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Loading