Classical Derivation of Auxiliary Lorentz Transforms: Their Relations with Special Relativity ()
Abstract
In this paper we have given a direct deduction of the auxiliary Lorentz transforms from the consideration of Maxwell. In the Maxwell’s theory, if c is considered to be the speed of light in ether space, his equations should be affected on the surface of the moving earth. But curiously, all electromagnetic phenomena as measured on the surface of the moving earth are independent of the movement of this planet. To dissolve this problem, Einstein (1905) assumes that Maxwell’s equations are invariant to all measurers in steady motion which acts as the foundation of Special Relativity. This assumption of Einstein is possible when all four auxiliary Lorentz transforms are real. There is not a single proof that could properly justify Einstein’s assumption. On the contrary it is now known that classical electrodynamics could easily explain all relativistic phenomena rationally.
Share and Cite:
S. Hajra, "Classical Derivation of Auxiliary Lorentz Transforms: Their Relations with Special Relativity,"
Journal of Modern Physics, Vol. 3 No. 10, 2012, pp. 1458-1464. doi:
10.4236/jmp.2012.310180.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
|
[1]
|
J. J. Thomson, “On the Magnetic Effects Produced by Motion in the Electric Field,” Philosophical Magazine, Vol. 28, No. 170, 1889, pp. 1-14.
Hdoi:10.1080/14786448908619821
|
|
[2]
|
H. A. Lorentz, “Electromagnetic Phenomena in a System Moving with Any Velocity Smaller than That of Light,” Proceedings of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, Vol. 6, 1904, pp. 809-831.
|
|
[3]
|
S. Hajra, “Classical Interpretations of Relativistic Phenomena,” Journal of Modern Physics, Vol. 3, No. 2, 2012, pp. 187-199. Hdoi:10.4236/jmp.2012.32026
|
|
[4]
|
P. Lorrain and D. Corson, “Electromagnetic Fields and Waves,” 2nd Edition, CBS Publishers and Distributors, Delhi, 1986, pp. 271-276.
|
|
[5]
|
A. Einstein, “On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies,” Annalen der Physik, 17, 1905, pp. 891-921.
Hdoi:10.1002/andp.19053221004
|