DOC.
18
DISCUSSION OF DOC.
17
351
Doc.
18
"Discussion"
Following
Lecture
Version of
"The
Theory
of
Relativity"
[IN: Naturforschende Gesellschaft
in
Zürich.
Sitzungsberichte (1911):
II-IX. Published
in
vol. 4
of
Vierteljahrschrift
der
Naturforschenden Gesellschaft
in
Zürich 56
(1911).
Minutes
of the
meeting
of
16
January
1911.]
Discussion
After
a
few
warm
words
of
regret
on
account
of the
impending departure
of the
speaker,
Prof.
Kleiner
presents
his
opinion on
the
relativity principle
in
the
following
way:
[1]
[Prof.
Kleiner:]
As
far
as
the
principle
of
relativity
is concerned,
it
is
being
called
revolutionary.
This
is
being
done
especially
with
regard
to
those
postulates
that
are
uniquely
Einsteinian
innovations in
our physical
picture.
This
concerns
most
of
all
the
formulation of the
concept
of
time.
Until
now
we were
accustomed
to view
time
as
something
that
always flows,
under
all
circumstances,
in
the
same
direction,
as
something
that
exists
independently
of
our thoughts.
We have
become
accustomed to
imagine
that
somewhere
in
the
world
there
exists
a
clock
that
categorizes
time.
At least
one thought
it
permissible
to
imagine
the
thing
in such
a
way.
But
according
to
the
relativity
principle,
time turns out to be
dependent
on velocities, on
coordinates,
on spatial
magnitudes.
This
is
what
is
supposed
to constitute
the
revolutionary
character of
the
new
conception
of
time.
If
we
examine
the
issue
more
closely,
it turns out
that
we are dealing
with
improvements
in
precision
that
were greatly
needed,
because
if
we
recall how
we
arrive at
the determinations of
time,
we
realize that
everything
is
very simple as long as
we are dealing
with
the determination of
events in
our
immediate
vicinity.
We
have
our
good
old
clocks
and
can
fix
the instant of
time at which
something happens.
Things
are
quite
different
in
regard
to this
certainty
about time
when it
comes
to
the
temporal
determination of
events
that
are
distant
from
us.
We
know that
the
light
from certain
fixed stars
reaches
us
only
after
many years,
so
that
we can
say
that
by
virtue of
this fact
we can
look into the
past.
We
can
also
quite easily imagine
that
we are
looking
into
the
future,
so
that
this
stability
in
the
conception
of
time has
now
already
been undermined
to
some
extent
by
the
facts.
Let
us imagine a man
who
is
accustomed to
rely
on
his
hearing
devices
for
his
orientation.
Such would
be the
case
with
a
blind
man.
Let
us
assume
that he
suddenly
regains
his
sight
and
sees a man driving
in nails with
a
hammer.
He
will
then
have
the
peculiar experience
of
seeing
the
fall
of the
hammer
first,
and
only
thereafter
hearing
the
blow.
But
he has
been conditioned
to
regard hearing as
that
which
corresponds
to
the
phenomenon,
and
according
to his
way
of
thinking,
he
now
has in his
eyes
an organ
with which
he
looks
into the future. He
sees an
event
before
it has
actually
happened.
I
mention
this
because
it shows
precisely
how
the
interpretation
of
the
time
concept
also
depends
on
the
manner
in which
we explain
to
ourselves the
Previous Page Next Page