How Induction Helped Einstein Discover Relativity!

Galilean principle of relativity states that you can't do any mechanical experiment that would detect an absolute motion and therefore all velocities are relative. When physicists discovered electromagnetism, this principle was thought to no longer hold in electromagnetic processes as the description of electromagnetic processes put a sharp distinction on which body is in motion in a given experiment. Yet, if you take a simple magnet and a coil, the result depends only on the relative motion of the two bodies even though both results are caused by different phenomena. To Einstein, it was a suspicious and how he tackled this problem you can see in the video :)

special thanks to
for vector graphics

for stock video

for sound effects

specifically

Magnet, Gear wheel, Planets, Airplane - designed by brgfx on freepik
Hands, Metal ring, Electricity - designed by macrovector on freepik
Light bulp designed by upklyak on freepik
Metal ball designed by Yuliya Pauliukevich on vecteezy
Navy blue concrete wall designed on freepik (author unknown)
Character - designed by pikisuperstar on freepik
Mountain landscape - designed by vectorpocket on freepik

[sciencetalks]

I like your approach to physics. You seem to be more focused on ideas rather than talking in terms of mathematical equations, as many others on YouTube frequently do. As I believe the right way to talk in physics is to discuss concepts and ideas, equations should be secondary. Yes, concepts of physics are highly mathematical in character and maths is must to analyse things and go further.... but still the concepts are primarily, equations should only play the supportive role...good work 👍

[massimilianodellaguzzo]

You are very good, this is another very interesting video ... thanks!😊😊😊

[monkerud]

it is the same in a medium as in special relativity, but as long as the physics in the stationary frame is the same as in a single frame in special relativity. you can then go two routes, either use a basis with identical speeds of light directionally for transformations between reference frames, or use another basis for relative motion in the medium. you can go either route, it gives the same results until you go to do something fancier with the physics. the two different forms of representation are identical causally so who cares as long as we are talking about lorentz invariant physics. just try to describe this thought experiment in terms of a different basis in the speed of light instead of in a different reference frame, it works out the exact same way.

[ulyssesfewl]

At 6:46 you may want to check the spelling of the word "Results" (Reuslts). Yes, I know, English is not your first language.

[williamwalker]

The Aether has not been disproven and Relativity is just an optical illusion. Einstein's theory of Special Relativity is based on 2 premises 1) Galilean Relativity: the laws of physics are the same in all inertial frames of reference 2) the speed of light is the same in all inertial frames of reference. I claim that the 2nd premise is already included in the 1st premise. This is because the speed of light c is a law of physics, and according to the 1st premise it must be the same in all inertial frames of reference. Another way of stating the 1st postulate, is that there is no experiment that can be done to determine the speed of an inertial moving body. So the 2nd postulate must be included in the 1st postulate, otherwise one could do an experiment based on the speed of light to determine the velocity of a moving inertial observer (like the Michelson Morley experiment). The 1st postulate predicts the Michelson Morley experimental outcome, and it can not measure the effects of the Aether! So if the 2 premises of Special Relativity are just the premise of Galilean Relativity, then according to logic, it is impossible to get different transformations (Lorentz transformations) than one gets for Galilean Relativity (Galilean transformations). Consequently Galilean Relativity must be the correct theory of Relativity. So if the effects of Relativity are observed in experiments, then the effects of Relativity must be an optical illusion.

[ourfamily.zsl]

You should watch the newton vs mach experiment

[monkerud]

a crucial difference between the two views optically is this, it doesn't change local causality so don't be too discouraged by it looking different. when you change basis in terms of what frame is treated as the stationary frame of a medium, you will have to apply length contraction to space as a whole. and that is fine, but it is never necessary, if you start with one frame and then you use a different basis for looking at moving frames, then the length contraction of space is just an optical effect, something seen but that isn't real, even if the causal consequences of it are identical. what you have instead is that everything that is moving with respect to the mediums stationary frame (which remember is just a convention if Lorentz symmetry if perfect) is length contracted locally, only that object with that velocity. this changes how this situation looks, it is like choosing a different kind of gauge for the problems, it doesn't change any results it just changes the representation. what is more important is when you go to include gravity and go to put it together with quantum field theory, you kind of need this point of view, this kind of convention locally to be able to modify the physics slightly to map onto nature. try it with the magnets, there is no longer any room for the silly explanation most youtubers give with an actual change in charge density, something different happens instead, i hope you will enjoy working that out :).

[DrDeuteron]

3:20 I don't think the generated current in the moving coil is exactly the same as the stationary coil. It's transverse to the motion, and is going to pick up a 1/gamma in the magnet's fame. Ofc, the ammeter will read the same, which means: moving ammeters don't work!

[edwardmacnab]

if your local system is not in motion, 3 atomic clocks can be used to prove it by being all running at the same time frequency . And for a system IN Motion, the same 3 clocks can be used to prove that motion, 1 being fast, the 2nd being slower, and the 3rd being even slower

[seetharama]

The magnetic field around a magnet can be imagined like some fine web or mesh which moves along the magnet. In fact magnetic field can be imagined as an imbalanced electric field in disguise.This will not affect aether except for some turbulence, just like effect of wielding a stick in air. When a magnet approaches a coil or vice versa a surplus charge tends to deposit on the coil this causes a transient current in the circuit. Therefore relative motion only matters.

[drstrangelove]

Nicely explained. I don't think that I ever realized that a moving magnetic field generates an electric field around it...? It would be interesting to see the two Maxwell's eqns being referenced and to see how Einstein modified them to remove the issue...? I've see professors explain how in Relativity there is only one phenomenon (say electric) and the other can be understood as resulting from a shortening of lengths due to relative motion. Is that how Einstein resolved the issue?

Oh, wait, you said that the issue results from the Lorentz force eqn, right? Aha. So did Einstein's transformation "fix" the issue? It would be good to see how.

[monkerud]

the thing is mechanical and electrodynamical experiments are basically the same thing. the utility of the ether medium is not really a necessity until you try to put the structure of matter into the picture with its broken scale invariance and quantum like phenomena like entanglement, then it is necessary to have a medium or foliated approach, because entanglement has character to is that has been taken for granted to be independent of simulaneity of space like events, but it is not so in detail, and we will see that in a couple of years hopefully.

[and_rs-emut]

When the magnet moves the magnetic field disappears? If not, shouldn't both parts (electric and magnetic) of the Lorenz force act on electrons?

[rk]

That was very good and a much more intuitive way to understand that electricity and magnetism are two sides of the same coin. But as an aside, I have a question about your example. It seems to me when we are in the frame where the ring moves and the magnet is stationary, the velocity of the ring is parallel to the bar magnet's field, not perpendicular. So to my mind V x B = 0.

[minhaskhan]

Plz also make video on hyperbolic distances in spacetime

[ScienceRevised]

How would Maxwell explain the induction of current in a conductor who is moving relative to the rest frame of magnet?

[williamwalker]

The speed of light is not a constant as once thought, and this has now been proved by Electrodynamic theory and by Experiments done by many independent researchers. The results clearly show that light propagates instantaneously when it is created by a source, and reduces to approximately the speed of light in the farfield, about one wavelength from the source, and never becomes equal to exactly c. This corresponds the phase speed, group speed, and information speed. Any theory assuming the speed of light is a constant, such as Special Relativity and General Relativity are wrong, and it has implications to Quantum theories as well. So this fact about the speed of light affects all of Modern Physics. Often it is stated that Relativity has been verified by so many experiments, how can it be wrong. Well no experiment can prove a theory, and can only provide evidence that a theory is correct. But one experiment can absolutely disprove a theory,   and the new speed of light experiments proving the speed of light is not a constant is such a proof. So what does it mean? Well a derivation of Relativity using instantaneous nearfield light yields Galilean Relativity. This can easily seen by inserting c=infinity into the Lorentz Transform, yielding the GalileanTransform, where time is the same in all inertial frames. So a moving object observed with instantaneous nearfield light will yield no Relativistic effects, whereas by changing the frequency of the light such that farfield light is used will observe Relativistic effects. But since time and space are real and independent of the frequency of light used to measure its effects, then one must conclude the effects of Relativity are just an optical illusion.

Since General Relativity is based on Special Relativity, then it has the same problem. A better theory of Gravity is Gravitoelectromagnetism which assumes gravity can be mathematically described by 4 Maxwell equations, similar to to those of electromagnetic theory. It is well known that General Relativity reduces to Gravitoelectromagnetism for weak fields, which is all that we observe. Using this theory, analysis of an oscillating mass yields a wave equation set equal to a source term. Analysis of this equation shows that the phase speed, group speed, and information speed are instantaneous in the nearfield and reduce to the speed of light in the farfield. This theory then accounts for all the observed gravitational effects including instantaneous nearfield and the speed of light farfield. The main difference is that this theory is a field theory, and not a geometrical theory like General Relativity. Because it is a field theory, Gravity can be then be quantized as the Graviton.

Lastly it should be mentioned that this research shows that the Pilot Wave interpretation of Quantum Mechanics can no longer be criticized for requiring instantaneous interaction of the pilot wave, thereby violating Relativity.  It should also be noted that nearfield electromagnetic fields can be explained by quantum mechanics using the Pilot Wave interpretation of quantum mechanics and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle (HUP), where Δx and Δp are interpreted as averages, and not the uncertainty in the values as in other interpretations of quantum mechanics. So in HUP: Δx Δp = h, where Δp=mΔv, and m is an effective mass due to momentum, thus HUP becomes: Δx Δv = h/m.  In the nearfield where the field is created, Δx=0, therefore Δv=infinity. In the farfield, HUP: Δx Δp = h, where p = h/λ. HUP then becomes: Δx  h/λ = h, or Δx=λ. Also in the farfield HUP becomes: λmΔv=h, thus Δv=h/(mλ). Since p=h/λ, then Δv=p/m. Also since p=mc, then Δv=c. So in summary, in the nearfield Δv=infinity, and in the farfield  Δv=c, where Δv is the average velocity of the photon according to Pilot Wave theory. Consequently the Pilot wave interpretation should become the preferred interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. It should also be noted that this argument can be applied to all fields, including the graviton. Hence all fields should exhibit instantaneous nearfield and speed c farfield behavior, and this can explain the non-local effects observed in quantum entangled particles.




Dr. William Walker - PhD in physics from ETH Zurich, 1997

[michaelbariso]

According to relativity the curvature of space affects the very flow of time itself, but which way does time curve? To the left or right? Disciples never ask these questions because the 1st commandment in relativity is to never question thy lawgiver! If spacetime is flat how can time be curved? According to relativity the curvature of space affects the very flow of time itself, but which way does time curve? To the left or right? Disciples never ask these questions because the 1st commandment in relativity is to never question thy lawgiver! Most people know the difference between science and science fiction whereas many autistics do not, taking things literally they find it difficult to distinguish between science vs reality. 1 in 44 identify with autism spectrum disorder and that creates a big problem, do the math. A perfect example: a rock falling out of an airplane cannot possibly reach light speed at 186, 000 mi./s but because Einstein said gravity travels at the speed of light and the speed of light is constant they will try to find a mathematical equation for wind resistance not realizing if a rock traveled at the speed of light it would burn up in Earths atmosphere long before it hit the ground.

Autistics feel the logical thinking of science is one of their gifts-strengths and as such science becomes their identity-religious belief system, thus science must always be true-correct, thinking in absolutes. Einstein said the acceleration of stars are responsible for gravity and the moving of time, then why is gravity near zero in space?! Answer, cause time is near zero 🙂 Even tho the gravity in a black hole is a weak force it compresses time, energy and matter into a vortex of infinite density, while twisting time, energy and matter out of it's hole at the speed of light it proves all those fake over unity devices are real and the universe created itself from free energy! Two cars traveling at the same speed will arrive at their destination at the exact same time, if one one driver says he got there first we have GPS to prove he was lying. Can you guess way Einstein removed the ether ( the coordinates of cosmological objects in space ) before he released his paper on relativity in 1905?

Einstein said"...special relativity was never a theory about reality". This is what's known as the escape clause, mal practice insurance. Just in case someone with common sense was onto the bullsh** asymmetry principles. If the James Webb space telescope is able to see galaxies billions of years in Earths past, then those same galaxies in Earths past would be able to see the Milky Way galaxy billions of years in the future before it existed duh.
Run it in reverse, if galaxies are billions of years in each others past then both clocks are ticking slower so their time would be moving backwards. Visible light and radio waves are part of the same electromagnetic spectrum, . if a galaxies light is billions of light-years in Earth's past (no longer there) then radio waves would allow people on Earth to contact dead aliens billions of light-years in Earth's past! 🙂 If images of light have a limitation of speed explain how our eyes are able to view stars and galaxies that are billions of years apart from each other, gradually leading back to a big bang singularity?! If the James Webb space telescope is viewing all Einstein's space-times in the same space-time then there is only one time and the the big bang is nothing but a fairytale duh

The light between our eyes and these cosmological objects travel no distance, therefore have no speed limit. God is laughing at Einstein 🙂. If the speed of light is finite (limited) to 186, 000 mi./s explain how images of stars, planets and galaxies could reach their destination when cosmological objects are moving apart from each other at light speed in a big bang expansion? Automatic tracking?! This this is like throwing a ball to a catcher that that has left the baseball field, billions of light years in Earths past. Images of light cannot travel for billions of years without an energy source, when you don't pay your electric bill, the lights go out duh. If Einstein's space-time were true we wouldn't need the James Webb space telescope to see the light from Earth's past, we'd just use our eyes to see yesterday's light on our TV's and lamps, why pay for electricity when Einstein tells us we can see yesterday's light today?! 🙂 Anyone using GPS astronomy software, a computerized GoTo telescope or equatorial mount can disprove General, Special relativity and big bang in less than 30 seconds by simply dialing in the coordinates. Anyone can be naïve, it takes endurance to be ignorant smh.

If stars, planets and galaxies were in different dimensions of space-time they couldn't possibly be tracked duh. If Einstein's space-time were true we'd be blinded by the light from Earth's past, yesterday's light would still be on our, TV's, PC's cell phones and lamps. Explain why (only) light and images from galaxies billions of years in Earths past time travel into our future, but not gravity, electromagnetic forces and galaxies that also reside in the same space-time? Ghosts are believed to appear as images of light from Earths past as well. Einstein’s ghosts from galaxies past cannot travel anywhere because the past no longer exists. Einstein's special relativity simply stated is the belief that the universe has no universal time, yet each star, galaxy and planet billions of light years apart from each other can be clearly viewed in one universal time 🙂. Doublethink is a process of indoctrination in which subjects are expected to simultaneously accept two conflicting beliefs as truth, often at odds with their own memory or sense of reality. The images taken with the James Webb space telescope are in real time.
If all the fundamental forces in the fabric of Einstein's space-time were stretched, warped and curved, then everything in the fabric of space-time would be stretched, warped and curved. Including the images in telescopes, TVs and everything you see with your eyes. Unless the electron beam in a CRT television is focused precisely on the screen in real time the dots in each frame would be out of sync with geometry (out of convergence with time) similar to the DCU digital conversion circuit in modern televisions. Our eyes only retain still image frames for 15 ms, if time was relative the images in your eyes would be out of sync. Every movie you've ever viewed relies on the same timing principles of a basic movie projector.

@YouTube

[lamatk]

Because you are studying in Czechia I suppose you are Czech. Ahoj, nechceš někdy natočit video v češtině? Podle mě by to bylo skvělé, protože videí o fyzice na této úrovni v češtině opravdu moc není (krom záznamu přednášek).

[emf]

Did Einstein do any experiments to see if c, the speed of light, remains constant in a vacuum with a strong magnetic field, or in a vacuum with a strong electric field??