Dieks Dennis
History and Philosophy of Science, Utrecht University, 3584 CC Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Entropy (Basel). 2024 Jul 18;26(7):608. doi: 10.3390/e26070608.
In his groundbreaking 1905 paper on special relativity, Einstein distinguished between local and global time in inertial systems, introducing his famous definition of distant simultaneity to give physical content to the notion of global time. Over the following decade, Einstein attempted to generalize this analysis of relativistic time to include accelerated frames of reference, which, according to the principle of equivalence, should also account for time in the presence of gravity. Characteristically, Einstein's methodology during this period focused on simple, intuitively accessible physical situations, exhibiting a high degree of symmetry. However, in the final general theory of relativity, the a priori existence of such global symmetries cannot be assumed. Despite this, Einstein repeated some of his early reasoning patterns even in his 1916 review paper on general relativity and in later writings. Modern commentators have criticized these arguments as confused, invalid, and inconsistent. Here, we defend Einstein in the specific context of his use of global time and his derivations of the gravitational redshift formula. We argue that a detailed examination of Einstein's early work clarifies his later reasoning and demonstrates its consistency and validity.
在1905年关于狭义相对论的开创性论文中,爱因斯坦区分了惯性系中的局部时间和全局时间,引入了他著名的远距离同时性定义,以便为全局时间的概念赋予物理内涵。在接下来的十年里,爱因斯坦试图将这种对相对论时间的分析推广到包括加速参考系,根据等效原理,加速参考系在有引力的情况下也应该能够解释时间问题。典型的是,爱因斯坦在这一时期的方法论聚焦于简单且直观易懂的物理情形,展现出高度的对称性。然而,在最终的广义相对论中,不能假定这种全局对称性的先验存在。尽管如此,爱因斯坦甚至在1916年关于广义相对论的综述论文以及后来的著作中,仍重复了他早期的一些推理模式。现代评论家批评这些论证混乱、无效且前后矛盾。在此,我们在爱因斯坦使用全局时间及其推导引力红移公式的特定背景下为他辩护。我们认为,对爱因斯坦早期工作的详细审视能够阐明他后期的推理过程,并证明其一致性和有效性。