Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T03:06:24.606Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Relativity and Electromagnetism: An Epistemological Appraisal

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Herbert Dingle*
Affiliation:
University of London

Abstract

This paper follows up the analysis of relativity theory begun by Margenau and Mould, by including electromagnetic theory which in their treatment was tacitly accepted. It is shown that the experiments on which Margenau and Mould rely to establish the special theory of relativity actually confirm the mutual consistency of the Maxwell-Lorentz electromagnetic theory and the special relativity theory, but throw no light on the validity of the two theories taken jointly. It is further shown that a modification of the rules of correspondence between the mathematical structure of the theories and immediate experience would bring the theories into agreement with an alternative relativity theory based on the Galilean instead of the Lorentz transformation. An experiment is suggested by which the need for such modification can be tested. A proof is then given that the rules of correspondence between the concepts of the special relativity theory (and therefore of current electromagnetic theory) and experience are not self-consistent, so that some modification of current ideas is essential. It is suggested that a generalisation of Maxwell's theory, in terms of Faraday's “ray vibrations” instead of Lorentz's static ether, might provide a satisfactory basis for a relativistic electromagnetic theory.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © 1959 by 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

1. Margenau, H. and Mould, R. A., Phil. of Sci., 24, 297 (1957).10.1086/287551CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Dingle, H., Mon. Not. R.A.S., 119, 67 (1959).Google Scholar
3. Dingle, H., Nature, June 20, 1959.Google Scholar
4. Einstein, A., Ann. Phys., 18, 639 (1905): English translation in “The Principle of Relativity” by A. Einstein and others, Methuen (1923), p. 69.Google Scholar
5. Ritz, W., Ann. de Chim. et de Phys., 13, 145 (1908).Google Scholar
6. Einstein, A., Ann. Phys., 17, 891 (1905): English translation in volume mentioned in ref. 4, p. 37.Google Scholar
7. Einstein, A., “The Meaning of Relativity”, Princeton University Press, Third Edition (1950), p. 28.Google Scholar
8. Maxwell, J. C., Phil. Trans., 155, 459 (1865).Google Scholar
9. Faraday, M., Phil. Mag., 28, 345 (1846).Google Scholar