Re: What should a theory give us?

Tom Roberts wrote:
John Kennaugh wrote:
Gerald L. O'Barr wrote:
1) Correct math (correct math predictions)
2) Believable.
3) Is based upon causes and effects.
4) Provides explanations.
Such old fashioned criteria for quality control have been ditched by
modern physics IN ORDER THAT relativity can be accepted as a theory.

Those are not "old fashioned", they are ANCIENT. Since Galileo and
Newton, SCIENCE has not been anything like that! In particular,
EXPERIMENTS are not even mentioned! That list is useless, as is your
claim. The meaning of "theory" changed in order to do science,
CENTURIES before relativity.

Einstein defined a 'principle theory' and declared that relativity is a
principle theory. Please point out a definition of a 'principle theory'
prior to Einstein's - at the time of Galileo to prove your point.

Einstein himself stated:

"We can distinguish various kinds of theories
in physics. MOST of them are constructive.
They attempt to build up a picture of the more
complex phenomena out of the materials of a
relatively simple formal scheme from which
they start out. Thus the kinetic theory of gases
seeks to reduce mechanical, thermal, and
diffusional processes to movements of molecules
-- i.e., to build them up out of the hypothesis of
molecular motion. When we say that we have
succeeded in understanding a group of natural
processes we invariably mean that a constructive
theory has been found which covers the
processes in question.
The advantages of the constructive theory
are completeness, adaptability, and clearness." [1]

I would suggest that Gerald's idea of a theory would be satisfied by
what Einstein describes as a 'constructive theory'. Note that Einstein
concedes that "Most [theories] are constructive". Take Maxwell's aether
theory for example. That is constructive. There is an aether. A charge
causes a stress in that aether. The stress pattern is what we call a
'field'. This can affect another charge at a distance and the
interaction of the stress patterns gives an action at a distance force.
A magnetic field is the result of moving charge. The stress in the
aether can propagate in the medium and transfer energy to a remote
point. Permittivity and permeability are the physical properties of the
aether which determine at what speed the stress in the aether
propagates. You do not have to go back to before Galileo to find a
theory which at the time was

2) Believable.
3) based upon causes and effects.
4) Provides explanations.

In keeping with the new order it is quite likely that Maxwell is today
presented as a mathematical model stripped of its original physical
cause and effect and physical explanation so that people like you can
claim that all theories since Galileo conform to the new thinking. It is
called rewriting history.

"... there exists a second, which I will
call "principle-theories." These employ the
analytic, not the synthetic, method. The elements
which form their bases and starting-point are not
hypothetically constructed but empirically
discovered ones, general characteristics of
natural processes, principles that give rise to
mathematically formulated criteria which these
separate processes or the theoretical
representations of them have to satisfy.
The advantages of ... the principle theory are
logical perfection and security of the foundations.
The theory of relativity belongs to the latter
class. In order to grasp its nature, one needs
first of all to become acquainted with the
principles on which it is based. " [1]

You may note that 'postulates' have now become 'the principles on which
the theory is based' and such 'elements which form their bases ... are
.... empirically discovered '. I have described the empirical
interpretation of the MMX which is described by the second postulate in
my previous post. The MMX showed that the speed of the observation
platform w.r.t the aether was always zero i.e. the observer is always
stationary w.r.t the aether. The second postulate is simply describing
exactly what an observer stationary w.r.t the aether experiences. It was
what everyone thought at the time and was considered a self evident
truth which is why no justification was needed or given. It was the
first postulate which Einstein thought might be controversial which is
why he justified it at length.

While I cannot claim to have studied the contemporary literature Sir
Edmund Whittaker did [2]
"(1905) Einstein published a paper which set forth the relativity
theory of Poincare and Lorentz with some amplification, and which
attracted much attention. He asserted as a fundamental principle the
constancy of the velocity of light, i.e., that the velocity of light in
a vacuum is the same in all systems of reference which are moving
relatively to each other, an assertion which at the time was widely
accepted."

Put it another way. You have a belief system - 'Relativity is right'
- so you redefine what a theory is and what you expect from a theory.



How naive you are. And ignorant of both history and physics.


What I should have said is

Put it another way. You have a belief system - 'Relativity is right' -
so you redefine what a theory is and what you expect from a theory - and
then naively convince yourself that theories have always been like that
:o).

To say nothing of trying to rewrite history to purge it of the taboo E
word.


BTW quantum theory stresses old definitions FAR more than does relativity.

bully for it.

[1] Found in: "What is the Theory of Relativity?",
Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, Three Rivers
Press, p. 228-9.

[2] Sir Edmund Whittaker - "The History of Theories of Aether and
Electricity" Volume 2 1953
--
John Kennaugh

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Article: A Century of Einstein
    ... > I have never read this article of Einstein in Sci Am why I am ... > to the physical properties of the aether, ... > of Einstein's theories of relativity, ... > substrate of radiant energy from all astrophysical bodies, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Article: A Century of Einstein
    ... > I have never read this article of Einstein in Sci Am why I am ... > to the physical properties of the aether, ... > of Einstein's theories of relativity, ... > substrate of radiant energy from all astrophysical bodies, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • A SHORT COMPARITION BETWEEN NEWTON AND EINSTEIN
    ... A COMPARITION OF ACHIEVEMENTS BETWEEN NEWTON AND EINSTEIN ... relativity is completely errant theory. ... The Principle of the relativity in the restricted sense. ... coordinate system from which we observe it. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Lamb shift ZPF cutoff and foundations of Einsteins theory of gravity
    ... But this is not enough to give us *actual physical relativity* ... Einstein gave to his theory of gravitation". ... his proposed extended relativity principle as a natural development of ... Theoretical Physics" - worth buying. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Lamb shift ZPF cutoff and foundations of Einsteins theory of gravity
    ... But this is not enough to give us *actual physical relativity* ... Einstein gave to his theory of gravitation". ... his proposed extended relativity principle as a natural development of ... Theoretical Physics" - worth buying. ...
    (sci.astro)