Both the General & Special Relativity discarded Newtonian mechanics of absoluteness. According to Einstein's view, Time, Mass, Length and Space are interdependent. So, Did Relativity discarded only absoluteness in space and mentioned that all motions are relative... What else suffocated in Physics due to Relativity..?
|
|
With SR, the absoluteness of simultaneity was discarded, i.e., two events may have the same time coordinate in one inertial frame but not in relatively moving others. In GR, where the geometry of a general spacetime evolves, the very notion of simultaneous is arbitrary. From "Gravitation" by MTW:
|
|||
|
|
|
In short Newtonian mechanics with Galilean relativity allowed that all observer could agree on both
Special relativity holds that neither of these differences are invariant, but that all inertial observers can agree on the interval $\mathrm{d}s^2 = c^2\mathrm{d}t^2 -\mathrm{d}x^2 - \mathrm{d}y^2 - \mathrm{d}z^2$ between two events. General relativity complicates the matter more by inserting a possibly non-flat metric intro the calculation of the interval. |
||||
|
The assumption of absolute spacial references was easily disprovable even in Newton's time, from the fact that his laws of motion were preserved in inertial frames, making it impossible to state that something is objectively not moving. However, this pseudo-religious standpoint of Newton's fit in well with the then generally held belief of an absolute time reference, which was surely a more forgivable mistake due to the nearly imperceptible effect of time dilation in normal life. Another of Newton's prejudices was handed down to him through centuries of teachings in geometry, namely that the universe was entirely Euclidean. That this idea was inevitably to give way to general relativity echoes what relativity did to the idea of absolute space/time. |
|||
|
|