Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T04:24:45.490Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Field Unification in the Maxwell-Lorentz Theory with Absolute Space

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Robert Rynasiewicz
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Although Trautman (1966) appears to give a unified-field treatment of electrodynamics in Newtonian spacetime, there are difficulties in cogently interpreting it as such in relation to the facts of electromagnetic and magneto-electric induction. Presented here is a covariant, nonunified field treatment of the Maxwell-Lorentz theory with absolute space. This dispels a worry in Earman (1989) as to whether there are any historically realistic examples in which absolute space plays an indispensable role. It also shows how Trautman's formulation can be rendered coherent, albeit at the cost of deunification, by reinterpreting the Maxwell tensor as a composite object involving, in part, elements from Newtonian spacetime.

Type
Philosophy of Space and Time
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 70 , Issue 5: Proceedings of the 2002 Biennial Meeting of The Philosophy of Science Association. Part I: Contributed Papers , December 2003 , pp. 1063 - 1072
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Des Coudres, Theodor (1889), “Über das Verhalten des lichtäthers Bewegungen der Erde”, Über das Verhalten des lichtäthers Bewegungen der Erde 38:71–79.Google Scholar
Drude, Paul (1900), Lehrbuch der Optik. Leipzig: S. Hirzel.Google Scholar
Earman, John (1974), “Covariance, Invariance and the Equivalence of Frames”, Covariance, Invariance and the Equivalence of Frames 4:267–289.Google Scholar
Earman, John (1989), World Enough and Spacetime, Absolute versus Relational Theories of Space and Time. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Earman, John, and Friedman, Michael (1973), “The Meaning and Status of Newton's Law of Inertia and the Nature of Gravitational Forces”, The Meaning and Status of Newton's Law of Inertia and the Nature of Gravitational Forces 40:329–359.Google Scholar
Einstein, Albert (1905), “Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper”, Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper 17:891–921.Google Scholar
Friedman, Michael (1983), Foundations of Spacetime Theories: Relativistic Physics and Philosophy of Science. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Lorentz, Hendrik A. (1895), Versuch einer Theorie der elektrischen und optischen Erscheinungen in bewegten Körpern. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
Lorentz, Hendrik A. (1904), “Electromagnetic Phenomena in a System Moving with Any Velocity Smaller than That of Light”, Electromagnetic Phenomena in a System Moving with Any Velocity Smaller than That of Light 6:809–831.Google Scholar
Lorentz, Hendrik A. (1909), The Theory of Electrons and Its Applications to the Phenomena of Light and Radiant Heat. Leipzig: B. G. Teubner.Google Scholar
Rynasiewicz, Robert (1988), “Lorentz's Local Time and the Theorem of Corresponding States”, PSA 1988, Vol. 1., 67–74. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association.Google Scholar
Trautman, Andrzej (1966), “Comparison of Newtonian and Relativistic Theories of Spacetime”, in Hoffmann, Banesh (ed.), Perspectives in Geometry and Relativity. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Trouton, Frederick T. (1902), “The Results of an Electrical Experiment, Involving the Relative Motion of the Earth and Ether”, The Results of an Electrical Experiment, Involving the Relative Motion of the Earth and Ether 7:379–384.Google Scholar
Trouton, F. T., and Noble, H. R. (1904), “The Mechanical Forces Acting on a Charged Electric Condenser Moving through Space”, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society (London) 202:165–181.Google Scholar