Re: What is the history of relativity theory? (continuation of Poincare thread)

Cl.Massé wrote:
> Some persons have difficulties to tell the
> difference between physics and mathematics, that's all.

Yes I noted that here. Some people cannot see that CKC formulation of
thermodynamics and MTE formulation are completely different from the
mathematical view (different axioms and therefore different theorems,
etc.) but both represent the same physics. In fact, are the same
thermodynamics.

> It is precisely because he don't that we have this debate. Poincaré =
*never*
> wrote down his postulates in an unambiguous and workable way. If not,
> please answer my challenge, quote him and work out the purported "Poinc=
aré
> theory".

There is not a paper containing Poincaré SR as there is not a paper
containing QM, like there is not a paper containing the CKC formulation
of thermodynamics. But, once studied all papers and books in CKC, it
was relatively easy to a single man, Tisza, wrote in a single
paper/book the MTE axioms.thermodynamics.

Einstein claimed newer read Poincaré and claimed that only knew a
Lorentz paper of ten years ago! I already provide evidence and
references of colleagues claiming that Einstein read Poincaré works
[7. Solovine M. Lettres =E0 Maurice Solovine. Gauthier-Villars: Paris,
1956.]. I also said that Einstein used the same notation and some other
detailes of 1904 paper by Lorentz (which Einstein claimed to unread). I
also provided historical evidence that when Einstein wrote to Hilbert
said that had submited the correct field equations of GR, when it has
been historically proven (in basis to recent chronology) that said not
the true.

Natursforsch 2004, 59a, 715.

arXiv 2004, physics/0405075 v3.

Etc.

I even offered reproductions of the correspondence between Hilbert and
Einstein.

http://canonicalscience.blogspot.com/2005/08/what-is-history-of-relativit=
y-theory.html

i think that it is very easy to write a paper when others did first the
pionnering work and let me remark again, there testimony that i cited
[7. Solovine M. Lettres =E0 Maurice Solovine. Gauthier-Villars: Paris,
1956.] that Einstein read Poincaré work. Moreover, more recent works
are always more logical. Hamiltonian mechanics is more logical,
mathematically rigorous, and powerful than original Newton mechanics,
but Hamilton based his work in previous Newton work.

> Einstein didn't rejected all the postulates used by non-relativistic
> mechanics, that's not the issue at all. What is important is the new
> principles he introduced and made clear, without which special relativi=
ty
> doesn't work, and the hidden assumption he identified and dispelled. T=
his
> great discovery doesn't deserve this nitpicking.

I have posted a new reply on 'Derivation of Lorent transformation'. I
wait your reply. how i and other explained to you, the two 'new'
principles stated by Einstein was stated by Poincaré before. The PoR.
I reproduce here and the constancy of c, including two references to
won Poincaré writtings, one mine and other provided by Harald?, that
you misread or 'attack' with strange arguments.

such as i see, your emphasis is in claiming that Einstein relativity is
very very different from Lorentz or Poincaré ones. However the own
Einstein (1907) clearly recognized [obtained from Logunov article i
already cited]

"Surprisingly, however, it turned out that a sufficiently sharpened
conception of time was all that was needed to overcome the difficulty
discussed. One had only to realize that an auxiliary quantity
introduced by H. A. Lorentz, and named by him 'local time', couldbe
defined as 'time' in general. If one adheres to this definition of
time, the basic equations of Lorentz's,
theory correspond to the principle of relativity . . ."

But that step was done by Poincaré. I already CITED his work where
Poincaré states that local time is a real time and Poincaré even
defined it in terms of clocks, like Einstein did after. I cannot repeat
the cites and references each time that i wrote here. You would read
with care previous posts before reply.

When Pauli does not studied Poincaré works, Pauli claimed that SR was
obtained by Einstein. This Pauli cited is always cited against
Poincaré. But when studied Poincaré relativity theory in posterior
years (1955), Pauli said

"Both Einstein and Poincare, took their stand on the preparatory work
of H.A. Lorentz, who had already come quite close to the result,
without however quite reaching it. In the agreement between the results
of the methods followed independently of each other by Einstein and
Poincaré..."

*Agreement*. Pauli says *Agreement*. There is nothing really new
(regarding fundamentals) in Einstein papers that was not contained in
previous Poincaré work. Therefore Einstein paternity of SR is an
unjustice.

I am finalizing the new version of my web document (cited above) on
history of relativity. It will be updated in some fews days. It has
been generalized and corrected. The current version has 17 references.
The new extended has close to 30!

I have revised and including very, very recent material on the topic
like that appears in the AMS journal.

Jean Mawhin. Henri Poincaré. A Life in the
Service of Science AMS 2005, 52(9), 1036-1044

that will be published in OCTOBER. Which material supporting i (and
others) said

"But it is unquestionable that Poincaré anticipated the so-called
Minkowski space-time."

"His books on Maxwell theory contain the germs of special relativity
and led him to analyze, correct, and name the Lorentz transformations."

"Poincaré published in 1905 a note (followed by an extended memoir) on
the dynamics of the electron, containing the whole mathematics of
special
relativity."

"[...] the mathematician Poincaré reached relativistic kinematics via
Maxwell's electromagnetic theory[...]"


Juan R.

Center for CANONICAL |SCIENCE)

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: "The Einstein Hoax"
    ... >> which used Dr. Einstein's Special Relativity (which is easily seen to>> be ... >> the showing that mathematics could used to make advances in the>> physical ... >> "The Einstein Hoax",http://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm, was written>> to ... There is no skewed physics. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The relativity of simultaneity
    ... I can give you a fresh perspective on the mathematics of the relativity ... Einstein used a mathematical approach which he called "practical geometry." ... So, for practitioners of constructivism or practical geometry, the only way ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The relativity of simultaneity
    ... I can give you a fresh perspective on the mathematics of the relativity ... Einstein used a mathematical approach which he called "practical geometry." ... So, for practitioners of constructivism or practical geometry, the only way ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The relativity of simultaneity
    ... I can give you a fresh perspective on the mathematics of the relativity ... Einstein used a mathematical approach which he called "practical geometry." ... So, for practitioners of constructivism or practical geometry, the only way ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The relativity of simultaneity
    ... I can give you a fresh perspective on the mathematics of the relativity ... Einstein used a mathematical approach which he called "practical geometry." ... So, for practitioners of constructivism or practical geometry, the only way ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)