The philosophical aspects of the special theory of relativity. Special theory of relativity and philosophy
To see the value of the theory of Einstein's relativity for the evolution of physical thought, it should be primarily to dwell on the most common concepts of the relativity of the position and movement of the bodies and homogeneity of space and time. In the theory of EINSHEYNAFigurizes the homogeneity and isotropy of space-time. Imagine a material particle, lost in an infinite, absolutely empty space. What does the words "spatial position" mean particles mean in this case? Does these words mean any real particle property? If there were other bodies in the space, we could determine the position of this particle in relation to them, but if the space is empty, the position of this particle turns out to be a strong concept. Spatial position has a physical meaning only when there are other bodies in space that serve as reference bodies. If you take different bodies as a reference bodies, we will come to various definitions of the spatial position of this particle. With any body, we can associate some reference system, such as a system of rectangular coordinates. Such systems are equal: In no matter how the reference system, we determined the position of the points, of which this body consists, the size and shape of the body will be among the same, and, measuring the distances between the points, we will not find the criterion to distinguish one reference system from the other . We can put the beginning of the coordinates at any point of space, we can then transfer it to the beginning to any other point, or turn the axis, or do both - the shape and sizes of the body with such a transfer and turn will not change, because the distance between any two fixed points of this body. The invariance of this distance in the transition from one reference system to the other is called invariance in relation to the Boundary transition. We say that the distances between the points of the body are invariants during the transition from one rectangular coordinate system, with another start and other axes. The distances between the points of the body serve as invariants of such coordinate transformations. In the invariance of distances between points relative to the transfer of the origin, the homogeneity of the space is expressed, the equality of all its points relative to the start of coordinates. If the points of space are equal, then we cannot determine the spatial position of the body in an absolute way, we cannot find a privileged reference system. When we talk about body position, i.e. On the coordinates of its points, then you must specify the reference system. The "spatial position" in this sense is a relative concept - a set of values \u200b\u200bthat change during the transition from one coordinate system to another system, in contrast to distances between points that do not change at the specified transition. The homogeneity of the space is expressed further, in that the free body, moving from one place to another, retains the same speed and, accordingly, retains the impulse acquired by it. Each change in speed and, accordingly, the impulse, we explain not to the fact that the body moved in space, but by interaction of tel. Changing the impulse of this body, we refer to a certain power field in which the body under consideration was. We also know the homogeneity of time. It is expressed in the preservation of energy. If, over time, the impact that has been tested by this body on the part of other bodies, in other words, if other bodies act in an invariably manner on this body, then the energy is preserved. We refer the change in body energy due to changes in the time of the forces acting on it, and not at the expense of time. Time in itself does not change the energy of the system, and in this sense, all moments are equal. We cannot find in time of a privileged moment, as well as can't find a point in space, different from other points on the behavior of the particle that fell into this point. Since all moments are equal, we can count the time from any momity, declaring it initial. Considering the course of events, we are convinced that they proceed in the invariably, regardless of the selection of the initial moment, the start of time. We could say that time is relatively in the sense that when you move from one beginning of the countdown of time to another, the description of the events remains fair and does not require revision. However, usually under the relativity of time understand something other. In the simple and obvious sense of the independence of the course of events from the selection of the initial moment, the relativity of time could not be the basis of the new theory, not at all obvious, overturning the usual idea of \u200b\u200btime.
Under the relativity of time, we will understand the dependence of the flow of time from the choice of the spatial reference system. Accordingly, an absolute time is the time that does not depend on the choice of the spatial coordinate system, which flows uniformly on all moving one relative to other reference systems, is a sequence of moments that coming simultaneously in all points of space. In classical physics there was an idea of \u200b\u200ba time stream that does not depend on real body movements - about the time that flows throughout the universe with the same speed. What real process is based on a similar idea of \u200b\u200babsolute time, a moment, at the same time advancing in remote locations? Recall the conditions for identifying time at different points
space. The time of the event that happened at point A 41 0, and the time of the event that happened at point A 42 can be identified if events are associated with the instantaneous impact of one event to another. Let it be in point 41 0 solid connected by an absolutely rigid, completely unforming rod with a body located at point A 42 0. The push obtained by the body at point A 41 0, instantly, with infinite-mindedness, is transmitted through the rod of the body at point 4 0a 42 0. Both bodies will be moved into one and The same moment. But the thing is that there are no absolutely rigid rods in nature, there is no instant actions of one body to another. The interactions of bodies are transmitted at a final rate, never exceeding the speed of light. In the stem connecting the bodies, the deformation arises, which spreads to the final velocity from one end of the rod to another, just as the light signal comes with a final speed from the light source to the screen. In nature, there are no instant physical processes connecting the events that occurred in a remote one from the other points of space. The concept of "one and the same point in time" has an absolute meaning. While we do not encounter slow movements of the bodies and we can attribute an infinite velocity to a light signal, a push transmitted through a solid rod or any other interaction of moving bodies. In the world of fast movements, when compared with which the spread of light and interaction between bodies, it is impossible to attribute infinitely greater speed. In this world, the concept of simultaneity has a relative point, and we must abandon the usual image of a single time flowing throughout the universe, the sequences of the same, simultaneous, moments at various points of space. Classical physics comes from a similar image. She admits that one and the same instantly comes everywhere - on Earth, in the sun, on Sirius, on extragalactic nebulae, which are so far from us that their light goes to us billions of years. If the interactions of the bodies (for example, the forces binding all bodies of nature) spread instantly, with an infinite speed, we could talk about the matches of the moment when the body begins to influence the other, and the moment when the second body, removed from the first, is experiencing this impact . We call the impact of the body to the other body removed from it. Instant signal transmission - the basis of identifying moments that have occurred in remote locations. Such identification can be represented as synchronization of the clock. It tasks to the clock to cod a 41 and at point A 42 is shown and the same time. If there are instant signals, this task is not difficult. The clock could be synchronized on the radio, a light signal, a shot of a gun, a mechanical pulse (planted, for example, the clock arrows in a 41 and in a 42 per long absolutely hard shaft), if the radio, light, sound and mechanical stresses in The shaft was transmitted with an infinitely high speed. In this case, we could talk about purely spatial connections in nature, about the processes flowing into a zero period of time. Accordingly, the three-dimensional geometry would have real physical samples. In this case, we could consider the space in this case, and such a look would give an accurate idea of \u200b\u200breality. Temporary instantaneous signals serve as direct physical equivalent of three-dimensional geometry. We see that the three-dimensional geometry finds a direct prototype in classical mechanics, which includes an idea of \u200b\u200ban infinite signal speed, the instantaneous spread of interactions between remote bodies. Classical mechanics admits that there are real physical processes that can be described with absolute accuracy instant photo. Instant photography, of course, stereoscopic is like a three-dimensional spatial cross section of the space-time world, this is the four-dimensional world of events taken in the same moment. Infinitely rapid interaction - a process that can be described within the instantaneous temporary picture of the world. But the field theory as a real physical environment eliminates the instantaneous Newtono long-range effect and instantaneous distribution of signals through an intermediate environment. Not only sound, but also light, and radio signals have a finite speed. The speed of light is the limit speed of the signals. What is the physical meaning of simultaneity in this case? What corresponds to the sequence of one and the same for the entire universe of moments? What corresponds to the concept of a single time, uniformly occupying all over the world? We can find some physical meaning of the concept of simultaneity and thus give an independent reality to a purely spatial aspect of being, on the one hand, and absolute time - on the other, even if all interactions apply to the final speed. But the condition for this is the existence of a fixed overall world ether and the ability to determine the speed of moving bodies in an absolute way, referring them to the ether as a single privileged reference body. Imagine a ship with screens on the nose and on the stern. In the center of the ship at equal distances from both screens light the lamp. The lantern light simultaneously reaches the screens, and moments when it occurs can be identified. The light falls on the screen, which is on the nose of the ship at the same moment as the screen on the stern. Thus, we find the physical mode of simultaneity. Synchronization using light signals simultaneously arriving in two points from a source located at an equal distance from them is possible if the light source and the specified two items rest in world air, i.e. When the ship is stationary in relation to Efira. Synchronization is possible in the case when the ship moves on the air. In the specified case, the light will reach the screen on the nose of the ship a little later, and to the screen on the stern - a little earlier. But, knowing the vehicle speed relative to the ether, we can determine the lunch of the beam going to the screen on the stern and delaying the beam going to the screen on the nose, and, given the specified advance and delay, synchronize the clock installed on the stern and on the ship's nose. We can, further, synchronize the clock on two ships moving relative to the ether with different, but constant speeds known to us. But for this it is also necessary that the speed of ships relative to the ether has a certain meaning and a certain value. There are two cases. If the ship is completely fascinated by the air, which is between the lantern and the screens, it will not be laundered to the beam going to the shield's nose. With full ether, the ship does not shift relative to the ether, which is above its deck, and the speed of light relative to the ship will not depend on the movement of the ship. However, we will be able to register register the ship movement using optical effects. In relation to the ship, the speed of light will not change, but it will change towards the shore. Let the ship move along the waterfront: on the waterfront two screen a 41 and a 42, and the distance between them is equal to the distance between the screens on the ship. When the screens on a moving ship were against the screens on the embankment, a lantern is lit in the center of the ship. If the ship fascinates the air, then the light light will reach simultaneously to the screen on the stern and to the screen on the nose, but in this case the light will reach different moments to the screens on the stationary promenade. In one direction, the speed of movement of the ship relative to the embankment will be added to the speed of light, and in the other direction the speed of the ship will need to deduct from the speed of light. Such a result is different speeds of light relative to the shore - it turns out if the ship is fascinated by the ether. If the ship does not enthrall the ether, then the light will move with the same speed relative to the shore and at different speeds relative to the ship. Thus, the change in the speed of the light will be the result of the movement of the ship in both cases. If the ship moves, carrying the ether, then the speed is changed relative to the shore; If the ship does not enthrall the ether, then the speed of light changes relative to the ship itself. In the middle of the XIX century, the technique of optical experiments and measurements made it possible to catch very small differences in the speed of light. It turned out to be possible to check whether the moving bodies of the ether are fascinated, or do not fond. In 1851, Fizo (1819 - 1896) proved that the bodies do not make completely ether. The speed of light, attributed to fixed bodies, does not change when the light passes through the moving medium. Fizo passed the beam of light through a fixed tube, which flowed water. Essentially, the water played the role of the ship, and the tube is a fixed shore. The result of the experience of FIZO led to the picture of the movement of bodies in a fixed ether without carrying the ether. The speed of this movement can be determined by the lane in the beam, catching up the body (for example, the beam pointing to the screen on the nose of the moving ship), compared with the beam, which comes towards the body (for example, compared to the lantern beam, directed to the screen on the stern). Thus, it was possible, as it seemed then, to distinguish the body, immobilely relative to the ether, from the body moving on the air. In the first speed of light, the same in all directions, in the second one changes depending on the direction of the beam. There is an absolute difference between peace and movement, they differ from each other with the character of optical processes in the resting and moving media. A similar point of view allowed to talk about the absolute simultaneity of events and the possibility of absolute clock synchronization. Light signals reaches the points located at the same distance from the fixed source, at the same moment. If the light source and screens move relative to the ether. Then we can determine and take into account the delay of the light signal caused by this movement. And to consider the same moment 1) the moment of light on the front screen with a start-up and 2) moment of hitting light on the back screen with ahead of time. The difference in the speed of light propagation will indicate the movement of the light source and screens with respect to the ether - the absolute reference body. The experiment, which was supposed to show a change in the speed of light in moving bodies and, accordingly, the absolute nature of the movement of these bodies was carried out in 1881 by Maykelson (1852 -1931). Subsequently, it was repeated more than once. Essentially, the Michelson experiment corresponded to comparing the speed of signals going to the screens on the stern and on the nose of the moving ship. But the land itself was used as a ship moving in space at a speed of about 30 km / s. Further, it was compared not the speed of the beam, catching up the body and the beam, which comes towards the body, and the speed of the propagation of light in the longitudinal and transverse directions. In the instrument applied in Michelson's experience, the so-called interferometer, one ray went in the direction of the earth's movement - in the longitudinal shoulder of the interferometer, and the other ray - in the transverse shoulder. The difference in the speeds of these rays was to demonstrate the dependence of the speed of light in the device from the movement of the Earth. The results of the Michelson experiment turned out to be negative. On the surface of the Earth, the light moves with the same speed in all directions. Such a conclusion seemed extremely paradoxical. He had to lead to a fundamental abandonment of the classic speed of the addition of speeds. The speed of light is the same in all bodies moving towards each other evenly and straight. The light passes with a constant speed, approximately equal to 300,000 km / s., Past the stationary body, past the body moving towards the light, past the body, which light catches. The light is a traveler who goes along the railway canvas between the paths, with the same speed relative to the oncoming train, relative to the train going in the same direction relative to the canvas itself, relative to the aircraft flying over it, etc. or The passenger, which moves along the car of the rush train with the same speed relative to the car and relative to the land. To refuse the classical principles that seemed completely obvious and continued, the brilliant force and courage of physical thought took place. Immediate predecessor. Einstein came very close to the theory of relativity, but they could not make a decisive step, could not allow the light that the light would not seem, but in reality it spreads with the same speed relative to the bodies that shift one relative to the other.
Lorenz (1853-1928) put forward the theory that retains motionless ether and the classical rule of speed addition and at the same time compatible with the results of Michelson's experiments. Lorenz suggested that all bodies when driving are experiencing a longitudinal abbreviation, they reduce their length along the direction of movement. If all bodies reduce their longitudinal sizes, it is impossible to detect a similar reduction in direct measurement. Thus is considering the constancy of the speed of light discovered by Michelson as a purely phenomenological result of the mutual compensation of two effects of movement: a decrease in the speed of light and reduce the distance to them. From this point of view, the classical rule of speed addition remains unshakable. The absolute nature of the movement is preserved - the change in the speed of light exists; Consequently, the movement can be attributed not to other bodies, equal ether, and to a universal reference body - fixed ether. The reduction is absolute in nature - there is a true length of the rod, resting relative to the ether, in other words, a rod, which rests in the absolute sense. In 1905, Albert Einstein (1879-1955) published an article "To the electrodynamics of moving bodies." Einstein does not hide the absolute movement from the observer, but simply does not exist. If the movement relative to the ether does not cause any effects in moving bodies, it is physically A strong concept. Thus, from a physical picture of the world, the concept of one time, covering the entire universe, Einstein approached the most indigenous problems of science - to the problems of space, time and their connection with each other. If there is no global ether, then you can not attribute immobility And on this basis, it is necessary to consider it by the beginning of a fixed, in the absolute sense, a privileged coordinate system. Then it is impossible to talk about the absolute simultaneity of events, it cannot be argued that two events simultaneously in one systems are simultaneous and in any other coordinate system.
The ideas expressed by Einstein in 1905, in the coming years, very wide circles were interested. People felt that the theory, with such courage, encroached on traditional ideas about space and time, could not not lead to a development and use to very deep production and cultural shifts. Of course, only now the path from abstract reasoning about space and time for the presentation of the gravestial reserves of the energy, melting in the depths of the substance and waiting for its release to change the appearance of industrial equipment and culture. Until the middle of our century, only such insignificant changes in the energy of peace and peace of rest used in all areas of technology. Now practically used reactions appeared, in which the main array of the reasanced energy of rest is spent or replenished. In modern physics there is an idea of \u200b\u200bthe full transition of the energy of rest in the energy of motion, i.e. On the transformation of a particle, which has a lot of rest, into a particle with a zero mass of peace and a very large energy of movement and a mass of movement. Such transitions are observed in nature. Before practical application There are still far processes. Now the processes exempt the internal energy of atomic nuclei are used. The atomic energy industry turned out to be decisive experimental and practical proof of Einstein's relativity theory.
In 1907-1908. Herman Minkovsky (1864 - 1908) gave the theory of relativity to a very slender and important geometric shape for subsequent generalization. In the article "The principle of relativity" (1907) and in the report "Space and Time" (1908), Einstein's theory was formulated as a teaching about the invariants of four-dimensional Euclidean geometry. In motion geometric Figure In the space coordinate points change, and the distances between them remain unchanged. In itself, the four-dimensional representation of the movement of the particle can be easily assimilated, it seems almost obvious and, in essence, the usual. Everyone knows that real events are determined by four numbers: three spatial coordinates and time passed to the event from the beginning of the year, or from the beginning of the year, or from the beginning of the day. Matter space natural science
In 1908, Minkovsky presented the theory of relativity in the form of four-dimensional geometry. He called the particle stay at a point defined by four coordinates, "event", since the event in the mechanics should be understood something defined in space and in time - the particle stay at a certain spatial point at a certain point should be understood. Further, he called the set of events - a spatial-temporal manifold - "world", since the actual world is deployed in space in time. The line depicting the movement of the particle, i.e. The four-dimensional line, each point of which is determined by four coordinates, Minkovsky called the "world line".
Uniformity of space-time means that there are no highlighted space-time world points in nature. There is no event that would be an absolute beginning of the four-dimensional, space-time reference system. In the light of the ideas set forth by Einstein in 1905, the four-dimensional distance between world dots, i.e. The space-time interval will not change the imposition of the transfer of these points along the global line. This means that the spatial-temporal connection of the two events does not depend on which world point is selected as the beginning of the reference, and that any world point can play the role of this beginning. Thus, the idea of \u200b\u200bhomogeneity is the core idea of \u200b\u200bscience of the XVII-XX centuries. It is consistently generalized, transferred from space for a while, and further, to space-time.
In 1911-1916 Einstein created a general theory of relativity. The theory created in 1905 is called a special theory of relativity, as it is valid only for a special occasion, rectilinear and uniform movement.
For many years, Einstein ripened the idea of \u200b\u200bsubordinate to the accelerated movement by the principle of relativity and the creation of the general theory of relativity, considering not only inertial, but also all sorts of movements. The inertia strength acts uniformly on all items. Thereins the power, which also acts uniformly on all bodies. This is the power of gravity.
Einstein called the equivalence principle about the equivalence of gravity of gravity acting on the system, and the inertia forces manifested at an accelerated movement. This principle allows us to consider accelerated movement as relative. In fact, the manifestations of the accelerated movement (inertia forces) are no different from gravity in the fixed system. It means that there is no internal criterion of movement, and the movement can be judged only with respect to the external bodies. Movement, including the accelerated movement of the body A, consists in changing the distance from a certain reference body B, and we can argue with the same right that b is moving relative to A.
Einstein identified a sparkling lines of moving bodies, with the revival of space-time. This idea will always be a sample of courage and depth of physical thought and, at the same time, a model of a new nature of scientific thinking, which is real physical equivalents of Euclidean and non-smokey geometric relations. The body granted to itself moves in a straight line in three-dimensional space. It moves in a straight line in a four-dimensional space-time world, as on the schedule "space-time" each shift along the time axis (each time increment) is accompanied by the same increment of the spatial distance traveled. Thus, the movements on inertia correspond to the straight world lines, i.e. Direct four-dimensional space-time. The accelerated movements correspond to the curves world lumen-free space-time world. Communication reports the same acceleration. It reports the same acceleration and light. Consequently, the global lines are twist. If direct, drawn on the plane, suddenly turned out to be curves, and they would find the same curvature, we would suggest that the plane was twisted, became a curved surface, such as the surface of the ball. Perhaps, the uniformly twisting world lines means that the space-time in this world point (in this spatial paragraph and at the moment) has acquired a certain curvature. Changing the forces of gravity, change in the intensity and direction of gravity, can then be considered as a change in the curvature of space-time. The curvature of the line does not require explanations. The curvature of the surface is also a completely visual representation. We know that on the surface curve, for example, the surface of the globe, the theorem Euclidean geometry on the plane cease to be fair. Instead of direct short lines, other geodesic lines become short, for example, in the case of the surface of the Big Circle arc: to drive the shortest path from north to south, you need to move along the meridian arc. On the geodesic line, which replaces the straight, from one point, you can lower the set of different perpendicular, for example, from the pole to the equator. We cannot imagine the curvature of three-dimensional space. But we can call the curvature retreat of the three-dimensional world from the Geometry of Euclidea. We can do the same with a four-dimensional manifold. Repeat the initial provisions of the general theory of relativity. At each point, which is in the field of action of the forces of any large mass, such as the Sun, all bodies fall with the same acceleration, and not only the body, but also the light also acquires acceleration, and the same acceleration depending on the mass of the Sun. In four-dimensional geometry, such an acceleration can be represented as a space-time world. According to the general theory of relativity, the presence of heavy masses is awarded the spatio-temporal world, and this curvature is expressed in gravity that changes the path and speed of bodies and light rays. In 1919, astronomical observations were confirmed by the theory of Einstein - the general theory of relativity. The rays of stars are twist, passing by the Sun, and their deviations from the direct path were such as theoretically Einstein were calculated. The curvature of space-time varies depending on the distribution of heavy masses. If you go through the universe, without changing the directions, i.e. Following the surrounding lines of the surrounding space, then we will meet four-dimensional hillocks on the way - gravitational fields of planets, mountains - gravitational fields of stars, large ranges - Galaxian gravitational fields. Traveling in a similar way on the surface of the Earth, we, in addition to hills and mountains, we know about curvature ground surface In general, and we are confident that by continuing the path in the constant direction, for example, along the equator, back to the place, from where they left. When traveling in the Universe, we also face a common curvature space, which refers to the gravitational fields of planets, stars and galaxies, as the curvature of the Earth to the relief of its surface. If not only space is curved, but also time, we would return as a result of a space trip to the original spatial path and in the original spatial position. It's impossible. Einstein suggested that only the space is twisted.
In 1922 A.A.Fridman (1888-1925) put forward a hypothesis about changing the radius of the general curvature of space over time. Some astronomical observations confirm this hypothesis, the distances between the galaxies increase over time, the galaxies are running out. However, cosmological concepts associated with the overall theory of relativity are still very far from the certainty of the omnimization, which is characteristic of the special theory of relativity.
Introduction 3.
1. Matter, space, time 4
2. Causes of relativity theories
Einstein 9.
3. Theory of relativity A. Einstein 13
Conclusion 19.
References 20.
Introduction
Achievements of modern science indicate the preferences of a relational approach to understanding space and time. In this regard, first of all it is necessary to allocate the achievements of the physics of the 20th century. The creation of the theory of relativity was the significant step in understanding the nature of space and time, which allows you to deepen, clarify, specify the philosophical ideas about space and time.
Albert Einstein, physicist theorist, one of the founders modern physics, Born in Germany, since 1893 he lived in Switzerland, from 1914 in Germany, in 1933 emigrated to the United States. The creation of the theory of relativity was the most fundamental discovery of the XX century, which had a huge impact on the whole picture of the world,
According to modern researchers, the theory of relativity eliminated the universal time and left only a local time, which is determined by the intensity of fields and the speed of motion of material objects. Einstein formulated fundamentally new and important positions in the methodological relation that helped better realize the peculiarities of space and time in various areas of objective reality.
1. Matter, space, time
If you say that the external world is understood under matter, which exists independently of our consciousness, then many will agree with this approach. It is correlated and with ideas at a level of common sense. And unlike some philosophers, which seemed to be frozen to reason at the level of ordinary thinking, materialists take this "natural installation" as the basis for their theoretical constructions.
But, agreeing with such a preliminary understanding of matter, taking it as something of granted, people do not feel a sense of surprise and admire his deep meaning, wealth of methodological capabilities that are opened in its content. Assessing its meaning will help us a small historical analysis of the preceding concepts of matter, understanding the essence of this category.
The limitations of materialism XVIII century. In the understanding of matter, it was primarily expressed in absolutizing the scientific knowledge achieved, attempts to "endow" matter by physical characteristics. Thus, in the works of P. Golbach, along with the most common understanding of matter as a world perceived with the help of senses, it is said that matter has such absolute properties, like mass, inertia, impermeability, the ability to have a figure.
This means that the main principle of materiality was recognized as materiality, the physicity of the human surrounding people. However, with this approach, such physical phenomena, such as electricity and magnetic field, which clearly did not have the ability to have a figure turned out to be.
There was an understanding of matter as a substance, which is especially characteristic of B. Spinoza philosophy. "The substance is not a world surrounding a person, but something worthy of this world that causes its existence." The substance has such attributes as stretching and thinking. It remained, however, it is not clear how the unified, eternal, unchanged substance with the world of changing things is connected. This gave a reason for ironic metaphor, comparing substance with a hanger, which is hung up various properties, leaving it unchanged.
The limitations of the understanding of matter in its both options was clearly discovered in the XIX century. Usually, the main reason that caused the need to transition to a new understanding of matter as a philosophical category, call the crisis of methodological foundations of physics at the turn of the XIX and XX centuries.
As is known, the most significant achievement of the philosophy of Marxism was the discovery of a materialistic understanding of history. Public being, according to this theory, determines the public consciousness. However, economic relations only ultimately determine the functioning and development of society; Public consciousness, ideology relatively independent and also affect social development. This Marxist theory differs from "Economic Determinism".
In the Marxist theory, as it were, the boundaries of the materiality, which include not only the items themselves with their realities and physicity, but also properties and relationships (not only fire, but also the properties of heat, not only the people themselves, but also their production relations, etc. d.). This is the contribution of Marxism to the understanding of matter, which is still not investigated enough.
Understanding matter as an objective reality that exists independently of the person and the non-identical aggregate of his sensations contributed to overcoming the contemplation of the previous philosophy. This is caused by the analysis of the role of practice in the process of cognition, which allows you to allocate new items and their properties included at this stage of historical development in objective reality.
The peculiarity of such an understanding of matter is that not only bodily objects, but also properties and relations of these items are recognized. The cost is material, because this is the number of socially necessary labor spent on the production of the product. The recognition of the materialism of production relations was the basis of a materialistic understanding of the history and study of the objective laws of the functioning and development of society.
You can try to find certain boundaries of the use of such categories as "Genesis" and "matter". First, being is a wider category, as it covers not only objective, but also subjective reality. Secondly, being and matter can be used to distinguish the existing and existing (which is). Then the existing may be represented as an objective reality, conscious of a person in the process of its activities.
In the modern methodology of scientific knowledge, such concepts as "physical reality", "biological reality", "social reality" occupy an important place. We are talking about objective reality, which becomes an affordable person in a certain sphere of its activities and at a certain stage of historical development.
The philosophical understanding of the world usually begins with the delimitation of material and ideal. But for more complete characteristics of the objects studied, other categories are needed. Among them, the categories "movement" and "rest" occupy an important place.
Marxist philosophy, based on the best traditions of previous thinkers, admits that the whole world is in a state of continuous movement, which is inherent in material objects inherent and does not need to exist in the intervention of the Divine Forces, in the penalty. The movement is understood as a philosophical category to indicate any change, ranging from simple movement and ending with thinking. The world is not a totality of completed things, but a totality of processes.
The basis of the social form of motion is the expedient activity of people, and above all, according to Marx, "Method for the production of material benefits." A person acts as an object and a subject of history. Ultimately, history is the activities of people pursuing their interests.
Space and time as independent categories appear already in the philosophy of the Ancient East, where they are considered along with such initials as fire, water, land (Sankhy). Aristotle among nine major categories are called time, place, position. In philosophy Ancient Greece The basic concepts of space and time begin to develop: substantial and relational. The first considers space and time as an independent entity, originated by the world; Second - as a way of the existence of material objects. Such an understanding of space and time finds the most vivid expression in the philosophy of Aristotle and the Lucreta Kara.
In the philosophy of the new time, the basis of the substantial concept was the provisions of I. Newton about absolute space and time. He argued that the absolute space in its essence regardless of something exterior remains always the same and fixed. Absolute time was considered as a net durability. The basis for such statements was the experience of classical physics, mathematical research (in particular, Euclidean geometry).
2. Causes of Einstein's theories of relativity
How was the private (special) theory of relativity of Einstein, narrowing the study of a global phenomenon to limited, private relativity, to the relativity of some basic concepts, to the private principle of relativity? Why did she even arise and fell on the fertile soil of public perception?
It is impossible not to notice the objective causes of the appearance of works on the theory of relativity. They are due to the "heated, revolutionary" political state of society and the spontaneous, dynamically developing natural science of the second half of the XIX - the beginning of the XX centuries. At that time, science, in many of its spheres, systematically rejected one after another many stereotypes - generally accepted standards of representations, which imposed a print on the methodological nihilism of the theory of relativity in general.
To a large extent, the appearance of the theory of relativity was influenced by the authoritative and now the philosophy of Immanuel Kant, recognized, finally, by the time the doctrine of infinity, as well as some mathematical works, for example, non-child Geometry Lobachevsky (1792-1856) and Riemann (1826-1866), Representations of the time of Minkovsky and Poincare. The above reasons and as a result, Einstein's theory of relativity unites the general absence of knowledge methodology, unites that they are not contradictory, but they are kindly interpreted (or they do not interrupt) basic, systemically forming their concept theories and do not apply the general scientific principles of knowledge. Why did they dare to do it? Because these concepts and principles were on the natural immaturity of science, methodologically not defined by their predecessors. And the use of the technologies of "processing of knowledge of knowledge" (methods of logic, mathematics, physics, etc.) made it possible to obtain very original outcomes at the exit.
Ancient Greek scientist Ptolemy, and then Immanuel Kant postulated the dependence of reality from the very knowledge. The object, according to Kant, exists as such only in the forms of activity of the subject. Until now, the methodology of knowledge applies the principle of Kant and Ptolemy: "What I see that essence." It comes to mind the parable of the four blind-wise men who feel the elephant. Moreover, each felling an elephant purely in certain places: only a leg, the other only belly, the third trunk, the fourth tail. And then they argued in the "truth" and the truthfulness of the "truthfulness" of the appearance of an elephant. In fact, in the approach to the knowledge of Kant and Ptolemy: "What I see that the essence," it was realized that such a subjective approach to knowledge and rejected the possibility of objective knowledge in comparison with generally accepted references - the principles of knowledge.
The concept of infinity is not defined in general scientific concept so far. This is not in principle, in principle, an irrelevant concept that does not have a reference, which means a relative comparative value.
For this reason, Minkowski identified his own vision of the concept of "time". When building their "metric spaces", he introduced the concept of a synonymous concept of time - "the plane of the world showing process", which "runs" at the speed of light from an arbitrary selected any "early coordinates". The basic concept of time, "adjusted" under the existing geometric process of cognition. And modern scientists are now intensively looking for ways and ways to travel in space-time.
The symbiosis of Minkowski and Riemann theories gave rise to a four-dimensional abstract interpretation of space - time having very limited practical applicability. For example, it cannot be applied to model real physical, changing objects of nature, as functions from the changing properties (parameters).
Space-time is the interpretation of the space of exhausts from the dimension of events that have only properties: the spatial coordinates of the occurrence of the occurrence and moments of the occurrence of events. The properties of space and time are unimproving each other, for the change of one, the other than the case does not change, does not depend. There is a space of events devoid of physical entity - nature (dimension).
The basis of the special theory of relativity, Einstein considered the principle of relativity, allegedly not contrary to the principle of the relativity of Galilee. The absence of methodologically formed concepts "time" and "simultaneity" in the scientific arsenal of Einstein, taking into account the adoption of the global constancy of the speed of light, allowed Einstein to "achieve" in the special theory of relativity of the simultaneity of events at various points of space using the two objects sent from one source Light signals, synchronizing the clock of these objects forming the same timeline.
According to Einstein, forming time on the clock of these objects and then give the objects of various speeds, it is the transformation of Lorentz, mathematically strictly justifies that the time in moving with different speeds objects flows in different ways. What in itself is not only mathematically, and is physically obvious. The clock in case of such a way of knowing the "time", with such a synchronization will go differently, for the time scale ceases to be a single reference for both hours of "runaway" differently from light sync pulses of the object time of objects in different ways. And if the standards scales are different, then the relationship of any duration of any process on the object to different references will be different. Systems then knowing the time not inertial. If the "flying" synchropulse with the speed "run away" with the speed of light, then such hours will stop at the facility. Einstein went to his generalization and conclusions much further. It "radically revolutionary" claims that both the lengths of objects will change both biological processes (for example, aging in the "Paradox of Gemini") will flow differently in objects (twins), which move relative to each other and relative to the light source with different speeds. In fact, Einstein as it were, as it were, the " Deals). "
3. Theory of Relativity A. Einstein
The most fundamental discovery of the XX century, which had a huge impact on the whole picture of the world, was the creation of the theory of relativity.
In 1905, Albert Einstein, young and nobody, the young and theoretical physicist (1879-1955) published an article in a special physical journal under a speedy headline "to electrodynamics of moving bodies". This article presents the so-called private theory of relativity.
Essentially, it was a new idea of \u200b\u200bspace and time, and, accordingly, he developed a new mechanic. Old, classical physics quite consistent with the practice that was dealing with macotels moving with not very large speeds. And only the studies of electromagnetic waves, fields and related other types of matter were forced to look at the laws of classical mechanics in a new way.
The experiments of Michelson and the theoretical works of Lorentz served as the basis for a new vision of the world of physical phenomena. This applies primarily by space and time, fundamental concepts that determine the construction of the whole picture of the world. Einstein showed that the abstraction of absolute space introduced by Newton and absolute time should be left and replaced by others. First of all, it should be noted that the characteristics of space and time will be different in different ways in systems of fixed and moving relative to each other.
So, if you measure the rocket on Earth and establish that its length is, for example, 40 meters, and then to determine the size of the same rocket, but moving at high speed relative to the Earth, it turns out that the result will be less than 40 meters. And if you measure the time current on Earth and on the rocket, it turns out that the readings of the clock will be different. At the rocket moving at high speed, in relation to the earth, it will flow slower, and the slower, the higher the speed of the rocket, the more it will approach the speed of light. From here, some relationships are followed, which from our usual practical point of view are paradoxical.
Such is the so-called twin paradox. Imagine twin brothers, one of which becomes a cosmonaut and goes into a long-term space trip, the other remains on Earth. Time passes. Spaceship returns. And there is approximately such a conversation between the brothers: "Hello," says that remained on Earth, "I'm glad to see you, but why didn't you change you at all, why are you so young, because from the moment you flew, thirty years have passed." "Hello," the cosmonaut answers, "and I am glad to see you, but why did you try so much, because I flew just five years." So, on the earth's clock, thirty years have passed, and only five cosmonauts. This means that time does not flow equally throughout the universe, its changes depend on the interaction of moving systems. This is one of the main findings of the theory of relativity.
This is a completely unexpected conclusion for common sense. It turns out that the rocket that had some fixed length at the start, when moving at a speed close to the speed of light, should be shorter. At the same time, in the same rocket, the course of hours would slow down, and the cosmonaut's pulse, and its brain rhythms, the exchange of substances in the cells of his body, that is, the time in such a rocket would be slower than the time from the observer remaining at the start site. This, of course, contradicts our everyday ideas, which were formed in the experience of relatively low speeds and are therefore insufficient for understanding the processes that are deployed with near-light velocities.
The theory of relativity discovered another essential side of the space-time relations of the material world. She revealed a deep relationship between space and time, showing that in nature there is a single space-time, and separate space and separately the time act as its peculiar projections to which it is split differently depending on the nature of the motion of tel.
The abstract ability of human thinking shares space and time, believing them separately from each other. But for the description and understanding of the world, their units are needed, which is easy to establish, analyzing even the situations of everyday life. In fact, to describe any event, not enough to determine only the place where it happened, it is important to specify the time when it happened.
Prior to the creation of the theory of relativity, it was believed that the objectivity of the spatial-temporal description is guaranteed only when the transitional and separate time intervals are preserved during the transition from one reference system. The theory of relativity summarized this position. Depending on the nature of the speed of reference systems, various splitting of a single space-time occurs on a separate spatial and separate time intervals, but occur in such a way that the change in one as it comes back to the change in the other. If, for example, a spatial interval decreased, then the time has increased the time, and vice versa.
It turns out that splitting into space and time that occurs differently at different speeds of movement is carried out so that the space-time interval, that is, the joint space-time (the distance between two nearby points of space and time) is always preserved, or, I am expressed by scientific language, remains an invariant. The objectivity of the spatial-temporary event does not depend on which reference system and at what speed by moving the observer it characterizes. The spatial and temporal properties of the objects of the apostle are variable when the speed of movement of objects is changed, but space-time intervals remain invariant. Thus, the special theory of relativity revealed the inner connection between the spaces and the time as forms of being of matter. On the other hand, since the change in spatial and time intervals depends on the nature of the body's movement, it turned out that space and time are determined by the states of moving matter. They are as if moving matter.
Thus, the philosophical conclusions from the special theory of relativity indicate a relational consideration of space and time: although space and time are objective, their properties depend on the nature of the movement of matter, are associated with moving matter.
The ideas of the special theory of relativity were further developed and concretization in the overall theory of relativity, which was created by Einstein in 1916. In this theory, it was shown that the geometry of space-time is determined by the nature of the field of gravity, which, in turn, is determined by the mutual arrangement of the masses. Near the large solid masses, the space is curved (its deviation from the Euclidean metric) and slowing the course of time. If we set the space-time geometry, then the nature of the field is automatically set, and vice versa: if a certain character of the field of grave, the location of the masses relative to each other is set, then the character of space-time is automatically set. Here, space, time, matter and movement are organically woven among themselves.
A feature of the created Einstein theory of relativity is that it explores the movement of objects at the rate approaching the speed of light (300,000 km per second).
In a special theory of relativity, it is argued that with the approach of the velocity of the object to the speed of light, "time intervals are slowed down, and the object length is reduced."
The overall theory of relativity argues that near large fields, the time slows down, and the space is twisted. In a strong field, the shortest distance between the points will not be straight, and the geophysical curve corresponding to the curvature of gravitational power lines. In such a space, the sum of the corners of the triangle will be larger or less than 180 °, which is described by non-child geometries of N. Lobachevsky and B. Riemann. The curvature of the light beam in the field of the sun was tested by English scientists already in 1919 during a solar eclipse.
If in a special theory of relativity, the connection of space and time with material factors was expressed only depending on their movement during abstraction from the effect of gravity, then in the general theory of relativity, their determination of the structure, the nature of the material objects (substance and electromagnetic field) was revealed. It turned out that gravity affects electromagnetic radiation. In gravity, a binding thread between space objects was found, the basis of ordering in space, the general conclusion was made about the structure of the world as spherical education.
Einstein theory cannot be considered as a refutation of Newton's theory. There is continuity between them. The principles of classical mechanics retain their meaning in relativistic mechanics within low speeds. Therefore, some researchers (for example, Louis de Broglil) argue that the theory of relativity in a certain sense can be considered as a crown of classical physics.
Conclusion
The special theory of relativity, the construction of which was completed by A. Einstein in 1905, proved that in the real physical world, spatial and time intervals change during the transition from one reference system to another.
The reference system in physics is an image of a real physical laboratory equipped with clocks and rules, that is, tools, with which the spatial and temporal characteristics of tel can be measured. The old physicist believed that if the reference systems move evenly and straightly relative to each other (such a movement is called inertial), then spatial intervals (the distance between two nearby points) and time intervals (the duration between two events) do not change.
The theory of relativity of these ideas denied, or rather, showed their limited applicability. It turned out that only when the speed of movement is small in relation to the speed of light, one can approximately believe that the size of the bodies and the time of time remains alone and the same, but when it comes to movements with speeds close to the speed of light, the change in spatial and time intervals becomes noticeable. With an increase in the relative speed of the reference system, the spatial intervals are reduced, and temporary is stretched.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Alekseev P.V., Panin AV Philosophy: Tutorial. - 3rd ed., Pererab. and add. - M.: TK Velby, Publishing House Prospekt, 2003. - 608 p.
2. Asmus V. F. Antique philosophy. 3rd ed. M., 2001.
3. Golbach P. System of Nature // Selected works: in 2 tons. T. 1. - M., 1983.- S. 59-67.
4. Grunbaum A. Philosophical problems of space and time. M., 1998.
5. Cassirer E. The Theory of Relativity Einstein. Per. with it. Ed. Second, 2008. 144 p.
6. Kuznetsov V.G., Kuznetsova I.D., Mironov V.V., Momjyan K.kh. Philosophy: Tutorial. - M.: Infra-M, 2004. - 519 p.
7. Marx K., Engels F. Collected Works. T. 19. - P. 377.
8. Motroshilova N. V. Birth and development of philosophical ideas: historical and philosophical essays and portraits. M., 1991.
9. Spinoza B. Short treatise about God, man and his happiness // Selected works: in 2 tons. T. 1. - M., 1987. - P. 82 - 83.
10. Philosophy: Tutorial / Ed. prof. V.N. Lavrinenko. - 2nd ed., Act. and add. - M.: Lawyer. 2004.
11. Philosophy: Tutorial / Ed. prof. O.A. Mitrushenkova. - M.: Gardariki, 2002. - 655 s.
12. Einstein A. Physics and Reality: Cons. Scientific Tr. T. 4. - M., 1967.
Introduction
The relevance of research. IN late XIX. The beginning of the 20th centuries was made a number of the largest discoveries from which the revolution began in physics. She led to the revision of almost all classical theories in physics. Perhaps one of the largest most important and the most important role in the formation of modern physics, along with quantum theory, was the theory of Relativity A. Einstein.
The creation of the theory of relativity made it possible to revise traditional views and ideas about the material world. Such a revision of the existing views was necessary, as many problems have accumulated in physics that could not be solved with the help of existing theories.
At this stage, in physics, contradictions were manifested between the classical principle of relativity and the provision on the universal constant, as well as between the classical mechanics and electrodynamics. There were many attempts to give other formulations by the laws of electrodynamics, but they were not crowned with success. All of this played the role of prerequisites for creating the theory of relativity.
Einstein's work along with a huge meaning in physics, also have a large philosophical meaning. The evidence of this follows that the theory of relativity is associated with such concepts as matter, space, time and movement, and they are one of the fundamental philosophical concepts. That is why the analysis and consideration of the very theory of Einstein, but also the philosophical views of one of the largest scientists of the 20th century, makes sense for the philosophical methodology. The position of Einstein in physics can only be understood in the light of his general philosophical concept, in the light of how he understood the unity of the laws of nature and the path of his knowledge, as he understood the connection existing in nature, as well as the subject of physics research. It is this fact that the influence of philosophy on the program and the method of physical research is the main reason for the question of what the philosophical views of the scientist.
The degree of the development of the topic. The author carried out work on the analysis of philosophical literature, which can be classified according to the following groups: Historical and philosophical literature on the problem of the relationship of philosophy and physics (Rechenbakh, S. I. Vavilov, N. Bor, A. B. Migdal, S. Weinberg, V. V. Ilin, V. S. Gott, V. G. Sidorov et al.); According to philosophy and methodology of science (in particular, physics) and on the problems of the foundations of physico-mathematical knowledge (in the domestic literature - V. V. Ilyin, V. G. Sidorov, E. P. Nikitin, A. N. Kochergin, Ji. A. Mikeshina, V. N. Vandyshev, E. I. Kukushkin, Ji. B. Logunova, Yu. A.Petrov, Yu. B. Molchanov, S. S. Gusev, G. L. Tulchinsky, A. S. Nikiforov, V. T. Manuilov et al.; In foreign literature - S. Gruff, Chalmers AF, Simon Yr, Cornwell S; Stamp SE, etc.); According to the history of physics (M. Planck, D. K. Maxwell, G. E. Gorelik, I. D. Novikov, A. V. Shileiko, T. I. Shileiko, A. M. Mostepanenko, V. I. Grigoriev, G. Ya. Myakyshev, etc.); Historical and philosophical literature on the problems of the relationship of philosophy and physics (M. Globanovsky, V. F. Asmus, V. I. Shinkaruk, N. T. Abramova, I. B. Novik, S. P. Chernosub, A. M . Anisov, Dobbs V. J. T., V. I. Kololyko, R. S. Karpinskaya, I. K. Lisew, etc.); Works on the study of philosophical problems of relativity theory (I. I. Goldenblat, Rechenbach, K. X. Rakhmatullin, V. I. Sekerin, D. P. Gribanov, L. Ya. Stanis, K. X. Delocarov, E. M. Chudinov et al.)
The goal of the course research. The purpose of this term paper It is the definition of the gnoseological roots of the concepts of space and time in the theory of relativity A. Einstein. To achieve the goal, it is assumed to solve the following tasks:
1. Consideration of philosophical and methodological trends in the science of the early XX century;
2. Disclosure of Einstein's features approach to understanding the static and dynamic time, material and mathematical space.
The scientific novelty of the work is reflected in the provisions endowered:
1. Disclosure of the philosophical features of Einstein theory;
2. Determination of the methodological foundations of the work of the scientist;
3. Determination of the philosophical and ideological picture of the world of the thinker who served as the basis for the development of the concept of relativity theory.
1. The problem of determining the philosophical views of Einstein.
How to answer the question about what the philosophy was led Einstein, who he is in his philosophical views - materialist, idealist or positivist? It is impossible to give an unequivocal answer to this question: in his writings, it is possible to find enough statements in favor of any direction.
It is known, for example, that Einstein highly appreciated the critical work of Mach against the a priori ideas of Cant or the introduction of Newton in the use of classical physics of the concepts of absolute space, time, movement, in general, metaphysical concepts, which in experience, as Mah understands, nothing is matched. Einstein has repeatedly stated that the concept of Mach helped him critically comprehend the initial positions of classical physics. Einstein has also been repeatedly determined by the theory as a system of streamlining our sensual perceptions, and not as a reflection of the objective patterns of the outside world. These formulations are not accidental for Einstein, they are found in his work throughout his life. Thus, in lectures on the basics of the theory of relativity, read and Princeton University in 1921, he argued that the concept and system of concepts are valuable for us only inspired, as they facilitate us to see the complexes of our experiences. In 1936, the article Physics and Reality Einstein wrote: In contrast to psychology, the physics interprets directly only sensory perceptions and "comprehension" of their connection. And further: I believe that the first step in the establishment of a "real external world" is to educate the concept of bodily objects and bodily objects different species. From the entire variety of sensual perceptions, we mentally and randomly allocate constantly repeating complexes of sensual perceptions (partially in coincidence with sensual perceptions, which can be interpreted as the signs of sensual experience of other people) and we compare them the concept of a bodily object. In the book, the evolution of physics is said: With the help of physical theories, we are trying to find a way through the labyrinth of the observed facts, streamline and comprehend the world of our sensual perceptions. Finally, in his autobiography we meet: ... Every our thinking is the same kind: it represents a free game with the concepts. The rationale for this game is the opportunity to obey sensual perceptions by means of it. The concept of "truth" is still not applicable to this formation; this concept may, in my opinion, be introduced only when there is a conditional agreement regarding the elements and rules of the game. And further: the system of concepts is the creation of a person, as well as the syntax rules, Defining its structure ... All concepts, even coming to sensations and experiences, are from a logical point of view by arbitrary provisions, just as the concept of causality, which is primarily discussed.
These are the judgments of Einstein, in which the influence of positivistic philosophy is undoubtedly detected. However, another is also known. We remember that the positivistic views of Ostvalda and Mach Einstein called philosophical prejudices, prevented by them to find the correct interpretation of the facts leading to the recognition of atoms and molecules. Further. Its disagreement with the ideas of quantum mechanics, in particular with the introduction of statistical patterns, along with dynamic, Einstein motivated the fact that the transition from the description of the things themselves to the description of the probabilities of the appearance of things is the transition to positivism. Criticizing the argument in favor of quantum mechanics, is he in? Answer to criticism (1949) wrote: What I don't like in this kind of argument is, in my opinion, the overall positivist position, which, from my point of view, is untenable and which, In my opinion, it also leads to the same as the principle of Berkeley - ESSE EST Percipi (exist - it means to be perceived). Einstein believed that the protection of the statistical interpretation of quantum mechanics is the protection of positivistic views. Even in the friendly correspondence, Einstein opposes positivism. At the end of the forties, speaking of a desirable meeting with Born, he wrote to him: although you will never agree with my point of view, she could have been repaired. I would also enjoy breaking your positivistic philosophical views. But back to Einstein. This, of course, is a serious argument, so as not to recognize Einstein positivist if he rejected a whole direction in physics, the enormous practical importance of which he always and unconditionally recognized, rejected due to what he considered it the basis of the positivist. Another thing is Einstein's right, intense quantum physics as essentially to its positivist; In this case, it is significant to emphasize that, rejecting it, he was guided by antipositivistic motives.
An extremely interesting understanding of the knowledge of the knowledge was expressed by Einstein in the article Influence of Maxwell on the evolution of ideas about the physical reality, written by the century since the birth of Maxwell in 1931. He starts this article with the following statement:? Belief in the existence of an external world, independent of the perceive subject, is The basis of all natural science. But since sensory perception gives information about this outdoor world, or about "physical reality", only indirectly, we can cover the last only as speculative means. From this it follows that our ideas about physical reality can never be final. We should always Being ready to change these ideas, i.e. to change the axiomatic base of physics, - to justify the facts of perception of the most perfect way. And indeed, a quick look at the development of physics shows that it is experiencing deep changes over time.
This statement is close to materialism, and it is difficult to understand how Einstein combines such opposite points of view. However, he not only combines them, but also aware of this conscious, which perplexity can cause this alignment. But he considers this bewilderment at the expense of philosophers who are too tough in its concepts, which are true, solid, but still an abstract scheme. The scientist is impossible to put in any scheme. His position, by Einstein, is more difficult because it must be considered with the results of its research and take points of view incompatible in the same system. In his answer to criticism, he writes that the philosopher, once thought of some system, ... will be inclined to interpret the wealth of the ideas of the exact sciences in the sense of its system and not recognize that it does not suit his system. The scholar cannot afford that the aspirations to theoretical and cognitive systematics came so far. He gratefully adopted the theoretical and cognitive analysis of concepts, but the external conditions that are put by the facts of experiences do not allow him when building its world concepts to limit itself to the installations of one theoretical and cognitive system. In this case, he must systematize a philosopher-gnoseologist seem like a unprincipled opportuncher. "
Einstein under different reasons emphasizes the impossibility of the naturalist to stick to any single philosophical system. Responding to Margenau about his allegations that the position of Einstein ... contains the features of rationalism, as well as extreme empiricism, Einstein writes in response to criticism: This remark is completely correct. Where this fluctuation comes from, the logical system of concepts is physician to the insight, since its concepts and approval are required to communicate with the world of experiences (Experiences). The one who wishes to establish such a system will meet with a dangerous obstacle in the form of an arbitrary choice. That is why they try to connect their concepts with the world of experiences directly and necessary. In this case, the views of the researcher empiric. This path is often fruitful, but it is always discovered for doubt due to the fact that a separate concept and a single statement can express something compared with empirically data ultimately only due to the holistic system. Then they recognize that there is no path from this experience to the world of concepts. Then the views of the researcher are becoming rationalistic, because he recognizes the logical independence of the system. In such a position, there is a danger that when searching for this system, you can lose all contact with the world of experiences. The oscillations between these extremes seem to me with unmountable.
Of course, it is impossible to agree with the inevitability for the naturalist look in the eyes of a philosopher unprincipled opportunist? And be in the eternal, faint oscillation between philosophical extremes. If philosophy exists like a science, and not as a biased scheme, then such categories such as an objective external world, sensations as information about him, concepts and theory, as a generalization of information, which are an image of objective reality should be summarized in it consistently. We are convinced that such a philosophy exists.
However, it will be more correct to consider Einstein's views in all their complexity and try to understand where this complexity appeared. And then he himself gave a good advice, as belonging to the self-esteem of the scientist. In an interesting Spencersky lecture on the method of theoretical physics (1933), he said :? If you want something to find out from physicists of theoretical physicists about the methods that they use, I advise you to firmly stick to one principle: do not listen to what they say, and better Learn their actions. The one who opens something in this area, the products of his creative imagination seem to be so necessary and natural that he considers them not as creating thinking, but as a reality data. And he would like to consider them so that others.
Study the actions of scientists is a fair advice. Professional activity imposes a deep imprint for the whole way of thinking of a scientist, and indeed any figure. Through this window professional activity He sees the world, his appearance, his patterns, the way to comprehend it. What a scientist reached in science, as it seems to be the path to this achievement, - this is a randering of his sometimes complex contradictory worldview. Here, in our opinion, there is a key to understanding the views and the most Einstein, the inconsistency of which he understood from the point of view of holistic philosophy. But in this case, we will have to answer the question: what was the main thing in Einstein's professional activities
It is hardly possible to doubt that with all the wonderful ideas of Einstein in the field of quantum and statistical physics, the main side of its activities has always been (and remained the mainstream for him) the development of the theory of relativity and it, Einstein, a system of generalization and expansion of the scope of this theory . Electromagnetic and gravitational fields, which have just become in the years of his youth by reality for physicists, a space-time continuum, as a single theoretical basis for all physics, are the circle of problems closely connected with each other, which from an early time and until the end of the life owned Einstein, In the development of which his soul was invested and his mind.
Work on these problems and the method of their solution just had a decisive effect on the views of Einstein. We must, therefore, try to consider how the philosophical ideas could lead and, apparently, led Einstein his development of the theory of relativity and meditation over its results.
2. rational ways to build physical theory.
So, the professional experience of Einstein approves him in thought that the concepts are organically connected with the theory, they receive their content and justification through it. And the theory reflects the world only as a whole. The question arises: how the theory itself is built
Mach, who served Einstein in a stimulating example of the criticism of the absolute categories of Newtonian physics, answered this question simply. The concept is pure mental education. Feature Concepts - this is a memory of the constant complex of perceptions and the allocation of major perceptions in it, according to which the entire complex is remembered (abstraction, by Mahu). Scientific theories are intended to streamline many facts of perceptions that cannot be kept in memory without such an order.
The theory, in Makh, does not contain anything more than all the individual facts of perception, it is only an economical record of them for the sake of facilitating memory. Einstein could not go on this issue. He has already seen in theory more than just a compressed entry of the facts of perceptions: it gives a picture of the world, its connections that cannot be obtained directly in the phanta perceptions. Does not give this picture and the theory, built on physical experiments. An example of such the theory Einstein saw in the theory of Newton's theory. She gave a lot, but Einstein had to reform it, because it contained many concepts not needed for a generalized perfect theory. Such a theory, although it has an external excuse, since explains the experience, but it is internally imperfect.
The need to transform the classical theory of gravity and successful experience of building a new reformed theory suggested to him: the direct experience does not lead to a unambiguous theory.
Einstein has long ago came to this conclusion and was guided by him in theoretical work, but the most sharply formulated him in a creative autobiography, in which the traveled path passed: the theory of gravity taught me and to another: a collection of empirical facts, no matter how extensively it could not lead To such complex equations. On experience you can check theory, but there is no way from experience in building the theory.
Here we see and direct reference to your professional experience, on our method of building the theory of gravity (the importance of professional experience we emphasized above) and a sharp denying path from experience in building the theory. The fact that the experience contains and the mutual relationships of experienced data find their expression only in the conclusions of the theory; The conclusions of the theory really must comply with the experience, otherwise the theory will be an empty scheme. Here experience acts only as a measure of the evaluation of the theory and only after the theory is created.
But if there are no ways to build the theory, then it is its origin in lectures on the method of theoretical physics Einstein said: The fact that this reflection is possible, the only value and justification of the entire system and especially the concepts and fundamental laws underlying it . Otherwise, these recent essence of the free inventions of the human reason, which cannot be justified by the nature of this mind, no other type of a priori. The physicist finds out such fundamental concepts and laws that are further logically unavailable. The most important purpose of the theory is - Einstein continued - so that these incorporated elements can and so that they are as simple as possible, but so that it does not exclude an accurate display of what is contained in the experience?
Here we see the expression of two important epistemological ideas that Einstein considered the conclusion from his method to construct the theory of gravity. The first idea is that the concepts and theories of the essence of the free invention of the mind, the second is that the theoretical task is to find the simplest elements of the simplest elements, fundamental concepts that should be based on the theory.
The idea that the concepts and theory of the essence of the free inventions of the mind are not an accidental statement of Einstein, this idea can be found in almost all of its work, in which methodological problems are discussed, starting from the articles of the construction of the theory of phrase, continuing the book by the evolution of physics written for mass Reader, and ending with his creative autobiography.
Comprehension of the role of the theory as integrity in which each physical category plays a service role - great achievement Modern theoretical thought. The works of Einstein, - however, not only him - strongly contributed to the assimilation of this truth.
But we saw that Einstein denied the way from the experience of building the theory. The path that Mach suggested could not satisfy Einstein. With all its high assessment of the Makhovsky criticism of the a priori concepts of Newtonian physics, Einstein could not adopt the thesis of positivism about the existence of only the world of sensations, the concepts of both mental entities, about theories as an economical record all the same facts of perception. Einstein himself created theories, and not at all in this way, which indicated Mach; All Einstein's professional experience expressed an internal protest against the Makhovskiy to the problem of the origin of concepts and theories. He led to a deeper conclusion.
If the formation of the theory is not such an increasing operation with the facts of perceptions, complexes of perceptions, as indicated by the max, and the logical process, as a result of which the holistic logical system arises, the conclusions of which coincide with new complexes of sensations, then this really instills faith in the existence of an external world, independent From the perceiving entity, that both the world and sensations are expressed by this world.
However, it was exactly what Einstein raised over positivism, led him to rationalism. In fact, we think about it in its substantiation of why oscillations are inevitable between empiricism and rationalism. Here Einstein states something newly consciousness: researchers come to the conclusion that a separate concept and a single statement can express something comparable with empirically data ultimately only due to the holistic system. But then they recognize that there is no path from this experience to the world of concepts. Then the views of the researcher are becoming ratheristic. Thus, Einstein himself recognizes that it was revealed by the role of the theory as integrity to rationalism.
The statements of Einstein, in which he expressed sympathy for an outstanding rationalerist of the XVII century - Spinoza. But, perhaps, its method is closer to rationalism of the senior contemporary Spinoza - Descartes.
As in our time, Einstein took the sample of the scientific method, the geometric method of Euclidean and mathematics in general (Einstein speaks about it and in lecture on the method of theoretical physics and in creative autobiography), and its time and Descartes relied on the geometric method (as is known, the geometry was The profession of Descartes, he marked the beginning of the analytical methods in it). In? Reasoning about the method for the leadership of the mind and finding truth in the sciences (1637) Descartes wrote :? Those long chains of simple and light reasoning, which are usually used by geometers to walk to their most difficult evidence, gave me the case to imagine that all things capable of becoming a subject of knowledge of people stand between themselves in the same sequence. If it is not possible to beware of TRUE anything that is not, and always to observe the order, in which one should output one of the other, then there are no such remote things that could not be achieved, and such intimate, which could not be discovered . In this rationalistic scheme of Descartes, all things are among themselves in the same sequence as in geometry, and in it the logical consequences of its scheme coincide with experience. Descartes (like Einstein in our time) was looking for the original background of knowledge, of which he could bring all knowledge: I tried to find the principles or the first reasons for everything that exists or can exist in the world ... Then I studied the first and most ordinary consequences You can withdraw from these reasons: And it seems to me that in this way I found the sky, shining, stars and on them water, air, fire, minerals and some other items, the most common and simple, and therefore more accessible knowledge.
As you know, Decarg recognized it impossible to practically hold this logical thread to the most remote things, for although things and stand in a geometric sequence, this sequence in some point becomes ambiguous, and what branch of these sequences is implemented in nature - the human mind Logically cannot solve. Consequently, you can turn them into our favor, only going from the consequences of reasons and producing many different experiments. Descartes believed in the rational structure of the world, but he acknowledged that it is possible to reflect it in thinking only in principle, it is practically necessary to go up from consequences. The position of Einstein is characterized by the fact that in this matter he did not go on any compromises.
Einstein rationalism is distinguished from classic and otherwise. In classical rationalism (Descartes), all consequences are derived from the initial principles, they are deployed to a serial chain, in which each link follows from the previous one and each of them can be compared with the real world.
Einstein also proceeded from the fact that physical theory is a closed logical structure and therefore can be tested only in general, in its final conclusions. Consequently, the theory is not deployed to a sequential circuit of the consequences in which each link can be checked. Before receiving the final conclusions, the researcher creates the theory purely logically. In the process of creating the theory of the Mind follows its laws; Einstein persistently emphasizes that the theory is free invention of the mind; Rationalism is brought to the limit.
When discussing the gnoseological problems, Einstein does not put forward as a decisive criterion of knowledge of the active interaction of a person with the outside world, the change in the external world on the basis of knowledge.
It compares the conclusions of the theory with the world of perceptions, by satisfying the consciousness that perceptions somehow associate a person with the outside world.
As the theory of external world created by the mind relates to the outside world, it can be judged by how it explains, organizes the world of perceptions, which is undoubtedly called by the outside world. Confirmation of the last fact Einstein sees not in purposeful interaction with the outside world, but that our perceptions have a proper (or extravaluinary) character, that is, the same perceptions under the same circumstances are inherent in one person, but a number of people.
Thus, in Einstein, the theory arises not from experience, but freely invented by reason on the basis of a more or less advanced selection of concepts -Krpichi foundation- and, bypassing the outside world, turns into the world of perceptions directly with the world, with the permanent, which is found in it, Explains and streamlines it. This closure of the theory directly to the world of perceptions leaves greater freedom in the design of theories. Einstein reasoned: since the theory as a whole should meet the facts of perceptions, then it can be an arbitrary, free invention of reason, but in this theory necessary. By this, he explains the one, at first glance, paradoxical, the fact that although mathematics (geometry) deals with idealized objects (and therefore it is always true), yet it is necessary for the knowledge of reality. This is an explanation in the next position of Einstein, which he expressed the geometry and experience at the ceremonial meeting of the Prussian Academy of Sciences in 1921: Geometry (D) does not mean anything about the correlation of real objects, and only geometry along with a combination of physical laws (f) describes this ratio. I expressing symbolically, we can say that only the amount (g) + () is subject to verification of experience? Thus, in reality, it is possible to choose both (g) and individual parts (F) by arbitrarily; All these laws are conditional. To avoid contradiction, it is necessary only to choose the remaining parts (f) so that the experience justifies together (d) and complete (f).
This idea belongs to Poincaré, but Einstein admitted that? Such a view of Poincare is completely correct. In this idea, in contradiction with the above-looking look at the theory, the positivist thesis is clearly implemented: the theory is the system of streamlining sensual perceptions, and there may be many such arrange systems. So that it becomes obvious, recall the reasoning of the Posyenbach's positivist in his Philosophical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (1946) in connection with the discussion of the question of whether they exist in physics unobservable. This question, says Reichnbach, is similar to the question: there is a tree when it is stopped watching the answer, on Reichnbahu, can be any: you can assume the disappearance of the tree or its doubling, tripling, etc., but it is important to comply with one rule: to each assumption Such a design of physical laws must be consistent, which would justify in all cases perception of one shadow. These will be different, but legitimate descriptions of unobservable; In Ranosheology Reyhenbach they constitute the class of equivalent descriptions. What happens in reality, for Reichnbach is insignificant, for him the reality is only the fact of this perception (one tree shadow).
Essentially, Einstein adheres to the same idea of \u200b\u200bthe possibility of many equivalent descriptions of sensual perceptions. However, unlike positivists, Einstein recognizes that sensual perceptions go from the outside world, which, therefore, exists. But the external world itself is represented by Einstein a mystery.
He finds this idea - the world is a mystery - very valuable and indicates that it comes from Kant. In response to criticism, Einstein writes: I was not raised in the traditions of Kant and quite late came to understand that really valuable, which also has his teachings, along with delusions that are now completely obvious. It is concluded in the approval: the real is not given to us, but it is nodded (in the form of a riddle). This, obviously, means: to cover the interpersonal, there is a speculative construction, the base of which lies solely in it itself. This speculative design refers precisely to the real (by definition), and all further questions about the nature of the real are unworthy.
Is this concept more popular been set out in the book? Evolution of physics?. In it, the authors write :? Physical concepts are the essence of the free creation of the human mind and are not uniquely defined by the outside world, as it may sometimes seem. In our desire to understand reality, we are partly similar to a person who wants to understand the mechanism of closed watches. He sees the dial and moving arrows, even hears ticking, but it has no means to open their housing. If he is a sharpman, he can draw a certain picture of the mechanism that would answer everything he watches, but he can never be quite sure that his picture is the only one who could explain his observations. It will never be able to compare his picture with a real mechanism, and he cannot even imagine the opportunity or meaning of such a comparison. But he, of course, is confident that as his knowledge increases, the picture of reality is becoming easier and easier and will explain the increasing number of his sensual perceptions. He can even believe in the existence of the ideal limit of knowledge and that the human mind brings to this limit. It can call this ideal limit to objective truth. Now we have a full-finished picture of the world and ways of his knowledge, as Einstein represented. In this picture, the place is valid all the philosophical directions - realism and positivism, rationalism and cantifancy, and undoubtedly elements of a number of other philosophical directions. Einstein saw in this dignity of the philosophical views of the naturalist, the expression of the need for it is not considered with a one-sided philosophical scheme, but with the real versatile process of knowledge.
In this chapter, we traced how Gnoseology Einstein was born from his understanding own experience Building physical theories. In the next chapter, we consider the question of whether this gnoseology was justified when he began to be guided by it in the interpretation of already created physical theories, as well as in the development of new ones.
3. Gnosetology Einstein and the real process of knowledge. Enenstein experience and theory.
So, in the course of the development of the theory of relativity and the generalized theory, Einstein developed some methodological weapon, the theory of knowledge of the naturalist.
From experience there is no way to build theory. Concepts and theories have no experienced origin, but not a priori. They are the essence of the free invention of the mind, which is justified only in comparison of the final conclusions of the theory with experience. The naturalist takes the minimum number of the simplest "bricks" for the foundation and on this conceptual foundation builds internally the most perfect theory. The direct target of the theory is the ordering of our perceptions. If this is achieved, we can believe that the theory we constructed to some extent consistent with the external, Always closed from us the world corresponds to the insight, since perceptions are a consequence of processes in it.
Such is the scheme of the knowledge of Einstein. The main thing is that the method of knowledge of Einstein is distinguished by the dedication of the path from the experience of building the theory. At the same time, this denial is the weakest point of its gnoseology.
But maybe this denial is a random, although the repetitive reservation of the great physics, to criticize which it would be unworthy, isn't it known that Einstein even at that time when he developed his generalizing theories, relied on experience, such as experimental facts of equality And Einstein did not show inertia (together with Infeld) in the evolution of physics, as under the influence of the opening of new facts, new ideas and concepts arise, as in particular, the concept of the field is and established - the main thing in Einstein physics
All this is undoubtedly so. Nevertheless, Einstein's reference to the experience does not change the above-shared rationalistic scheme of its knowledge outlined above, in which the selection of a conceptual foundation and the construction of the theory based on it is essential. In other words, individual links Einstein on experience do not mean that his conclusion is no path from experience in building the theory? - Random reservation for him. It will become clear if we consider the most common form of a physical theory of physical theory with the experiment and compare it with that role, what experience is played by Einstein.
Physical cognition begins with the establishment of some experimental relations, in certain ways of binding physical categories (concepts, values) with each other (the essence of categories in these relations is always determined in the light of existing theories). These experimental relations may appear (again in the light of existing theories) even contradict to each other.
But since they are manifestations of the same type of objects, the task is necessary: \u200b\u200bto find a logical condition for their compatibility, to summarize them. Consequently, the essence of the generalization of this kind consists of experimental facts is cumulatively as a single logically related system, in finding the conditions for the compilation of the results of various experiments. In physics, these conditions are formulated as mathematical equations or inequalities. Their finding, of course, is a difficult and sometimes painful process, sometimes tightening for many years. The result of this process is the theory.
The relationship between the aggregate of experimental facts and the theory is mutually. In other words, the theory should be such a generalization of the experimentally established relations, which from it under certain conditions should re-arise the IE of the relationship, which led to the formation of Leopmi. But this requirement for genuine theory is not enough. The theory does not simply summarize the experimental relations, which became known to the researcher, but it (in the complete opposite of Mahu) goes beyond their limits, disclosing the objective relations of nature through them. And if these objective bonds are really disclosed correctly, the theory will inevitably lead to disclosure and such relations that exist in the nature of objects, but have not yet been known to the researcher. This is the heuristic meaning of the theory.
She does not passively summarize the already known experience, but gives new knowledge, expands the possibilities of experience. The theory is more than a simple amount of single experiments.
That is why in Marxist philosophy the theory is considered to be considered as an image of objective reality.
The specified path of generalization of nodal experiments is the most common and deep way to form the theory. It is actually implemented in all fruitful physical theories, although it is not always aware.
Thus, a quantum mechanic was created, as well as the theory of relativity (? Special?). And such a generalization actually implemented Einstein himself, which in those years has not yet developed its special concept of knowledge and was spontaneous. We should not forget that Einstein was repelled from the classical theory of Maxwell, in which experimental facts in the field of electromagnetism established by its predecessors were already summarized. But Maxwell's theory turned out to be incompletely generalized; It was necessary to take into account such facts as symmetry (relativity) of electromagnetic interactions and the independence of the speed of light from the movement of its source. This is further generalization and fulfilled Einstein, which led him to the theory of relativity.
Such a method of generalization is difficult, but it is the only possible, and it is always fruitful in its results. We cannot here enter a detailed consideration of the theory and its connection with the experiment, but we note two more substantial points.
The theory relies on a certain circle of uniquely established experimental relations. The condition of the compatibility of these relationships is also always unambiguous. This means that the theory acts as a unambiguous image of the outside world, both in general and in its parts.
There may be various forms of theory; When clarified, they are equivalent, as it was, for example, with respect to matrix and wave forms of quantum mechanics. The process of generalization, which led to the theory of relativity (special), was so unequivocal that it was not one Einstein, but also other physicists, especially Lorenz, Poincare. Lorenz contrary to personal sympathies, as Max Born shows, was forced to abandon the mechanistic idea about the existence of a special carrier of electromagnetic processes - ether; He, as you know, brought significant for the theory of relativity of the transformations equation that received his name, and was forced to introduce local time in inertial systems?, although I did not understand its meaning. Poincare just a few months later, Einstein published an article about the electron dynamics (1906) in which essentially there were all the necessary elements of the theory of relativity. In a word, experimental facts at the beginning of our century with the inevitability of all physicists to the unambiguous theoretical generalization of the relativity. Further. The theory, which is the wording of the conditions for the compatibility of experimental facts, due to its nature, relies only on the established experimental relations and does not imply in advance any specific ideas about the properties of the object or certain types of connections operating in the object. The latter can be obtained only as a result of finding the conditions for the joints of the experiments, that is, as a result of the production of physical theory. This is a very important property of this method of formation theories, for it means that this method does not impose a researcher with any a priori ideas about the facility or the links acting in it; By virtue of this, it is the necessary and most common way of disclosure in the object of new properties and a new type of bonds, moreover, its conclusions are implemented with forced strength, often contrary to the skills and psychological resistance of the researcher.
We now consider the role that the experience is assigned in the scheme of the knowledge of Einstein. This role is twofold. On one of them, Einstein is clear: the conclusions of the theory should coincide with the experience, without this the theory would turn into an empty scheme. This provision is undoubtedly. But this is a posteriori, control function of experience. It takes an adequate object of the theory among all created, contributing to the development of science as a whole, but it does not directly construct the theory.
Experience plays in the Einstein scheme and another role. In the scheme of constructing Einstein theory, it is not difficult to see two stages: on the first it designs a conceptual foundation, and on the second it is based on it the theory. But where he takes the concepts for the foundation Einstein argues that the concepts (as well as the theory) is the product of the free invention of the mind. But, of course, he does not come up with them arbitrarily, and actually selects, selects among those who have already arisen in physics for some reason. We will not explore this process for the occurrence of concepts and their subsequent consolidation or deviation. Einstein (and Infeld) showed this process in the evolution of physics. It is clear that in the emergence of a physical concept, experience plays a certain (but not direct, not in the sense of positivism or operationalism) role. Einstein, he plays a role in the selection of concepts for a conceptual foundation (equality of severe and inertial masses). But this is not the right role that the experience is played when the only possible condition of the compatibility of experiments is found. Einstein Rights: The role that he himself takes experience does not give him the opportunity to find ways from experience in building the theory. It is completely combined with the concept of theory as a product of the free invention of the mind, with all the resulting consequences, namely, that the same facts can be displayed in different theories that one theory differs from other various conceptual foundations laid down the theory that in addition to the criterion The external justification of the theory there is still an internal perfection criterion, etc.
The idea of \u200b\u200bthe multiplicity of theories that displays the same facts, but differ in the fact that they are built on the basis of various conceptual foundations, is not confirmed by the real process of knowledge. There is no reason to believe that the two theories of the -Nuunton and Einstein and Einstein are related to the same circle of facts, but only in different ways they are ordered, because de the first has an imperfect conceptual foundation, and the second-consistent. These theories have to classify these theories. Both of these theories are not near with each other, as Einstein repeatedly emphasized, and in a certain respect to each other, and the second covers a wider range of facts than the first. The theory of Newton's gravity is valid only for speeds, small relatively with the speed of the plate, and the potentials, small relatively with the square of the speed of light. The generalized theory of Einstein is also covered by the fields of high speeds and silkiels, and at least their values \u200b\u200btake the form of Newtonian theory.
Both theories are various deepening of the knowledge of nature. It is impossible to argue that the conceptual foundation and the theory itself is freely constructed by reason. Comment Born on this subject (see page 560) was fair. It is impossible to accept the idea that the world is and forever will be a mystery to us. If the body of the world mechanism is tightly closed and will never reveal from us, then the requirements for theory become not so rigid, since the external excuse for its final conclusions is actually reduced to one degree or another ordering of our perceptions. This concept deprives the theory of unambiguous reliability, which has repeatedly recognized and.
But the real knowledge of the person is not developed at all: today there are no theories, and tomorrow will be the theory, covering all the closed world, the case of the mechanism of which we will never be able to open. A person creates theories relating not to the world as a whole, but to a separate circle of nature phenomena. At the same time, it continuously interacts with nature, both before the creation of the theory and after. He creates a theory on the basis of interaction and checks its theoretical conclusions about it through interaction, through the practice. As a result, the person continuously expands and deepens its connections with nature. This is the process of knowledge of nature. This is the disclosure of the body of the world mechanism. Only ignoring this constant interaction with the outside world, the researcher may argue that its theory is a product of the free invention of the mind. What this ignoring led to the practice of Einstein himself, we will see later, but as long as we consider, to which result it leads in the very theory of knowledge. In a logical aspect, physical theory represents some connection of physical categories or concepts. Having a "bricks" for the foundation, Einstein starts building the theory, establishing some connection between selected concepts. But what types of links it uses only the types of bonds expressed by differential equations for the field - in private derivatives. Consequently, Einstein's gnoseology comes from a predetermined Type of casual connections attributed to the outside world: This is a unambiguous continuous connection of events adjacent in time and space. Support in connection of this type for Einstein is inevitable, because he does not know other connections and he has no way to learn knowledge about them, because he does not consider the conditions of compatibility. various experiments. Ignoring this method revealing real connections in nature and force Einstein to implicitly postulate that the external world is subject to the relationship of the specified type.
It turns out that a prioritism, the validity of which Einstein subjected to a fair criticism, seeking to free his classical physics, acts in the theories of Einstein in a new form: now a priori character is already acquired by non-individual physical categories, but a certain type of natural ties characteristic of classical physics.
But where it follows that the world should obey the type of links, which is known to the researcher during the development of the theory or for some reason the closest to his spirit, and that if the outside world really has the laws of other type, how to get about this ? Does the adopted method of cognition as an obstacle to knowledge
This is exactly what is. This is a contradiction, but it is inevitable for rationalism, both classical and modern. But the classical rationalism for his time was a progressive current, as he opposed the dogmas who claimed that the truth was given only in church books, and put forward the idea that the creative mind of a person was able to read it in the book of nature itself. In our time, the theological dogmas overcomed and rationalist philosophy only slows down the knowledge: it is not able to uncover a new type in the nature.
And if Einstein opened them at a certain stage, as it was said above, revealed because it actually applied the non-rationalistic method of knowledge.
So, Einstein recognized the experience, but he underestimated his gnoseological importance, its essential role in building the theory. He used the experience so that he allowed the possibility of multiplicity of theories describing the same circle of facts, and eliminated the possibility of knowledge of objective links and properties of a new type.
4. Quantum theory and Gnoseology Einstein.
It was possible to create the theory of quantum phenomena that way that Einstein recognized the only correct certainly, no.
Einstein's method included proper position The theory displays a certain set of external phenomena only as a whole, determining the meaning and content of the concepts used in it (physical categories). We remember that the awareness of this fact led him to the departure from the positivism of Mach and the operationalism of Bridzman. But the Einstein method also included the requirement of pre-selection of the simplest concepts for a conceptual foundation, from which the theory should be rationalistic; He also predetermined the type of ties between physical categories.
But as it was possible to say in advance which concepts among the classical physics developed by classical physics can be selected for the foundation and are applied in quantum phenomena theory? And was it possible to use the classic type of ties in it? The first period of the accumulation of facts in this area has detected the impossibility of selecting pre-initial concepts and the type of links between them in order to then build the theory of rationalistic method. It was too obvious. It was necessary to look for another path to the theory. And physicists found him, not immediately, not without hesitation, of course.
If you discard it subjective, which brought and bring individual authors to the presentation and interpretation of quantum theory, and briefly formulate objective essence The methods that quantum mechanics were created, this essence can be expressed as follows.
In the field of atomic phenomena, physics met with a number of nodal experimental facts, unusual and even strange in terms of already well-known classical laws. The researcher must proceed from these experimental relations and consider them cumulatively as a single logical system. He can not make any assumptions in advance about the nature of physical objects and their states, nor about the nature of their relationships, it cannot build any certain models of the world under study. It does not select any simplest concepts for the foundation and does not change their meaning in advance, before the formation of the theory; In each individual experiment, it simply uses the already established concepts, the concepts of classical physics.
What he should also be guided, so this is the provision that under certain physical conditions - when a quantum of action can be neglected - any new theory should take the form of an already tested classical theory. This is the so-called principle of conformity.
But the principle of conformity is not the principle imposed on the outside, imperatively; Essentially, he also expresses an experienced fact - the reliability of the laws of classical physics under certain, classical conditions.
So as a result of the generalization of the nodal experimental facts of atomic physics, their logical relationship is established, the condition of their compatibility is a quantum theory. The nature of physical objects and their states, as well as the nature of their relationships, the physicist takes such what they turn out to be in the results of the generalized theory.
They are certainly no longer the ones in classical theories; The requirement to comply with the conditions of compatibility, a new set of experiments, that is, the new theory, imposed his imprint on the nature of the categories and connections between them. Since the quantum theory created in this way is confirmed and subsequent experiments, predicts new, not yet found in physicists laboratories, and. In addition, it also satisfies the principle of conformity, it is considered as the theory, adequate to the outside world, as well as all its composite elements and interrelations established in it are also applied.
Thus, in the field of atomic phenomena, it was precisely such a method of formation of theories, which allowed to disclose a new one in nature, made it possible to go beyond the limits of already known patterns, already known ideas about physical objects and their characteristics.
In quantum mechanics, he led to the conclusion that the physical properties of the object should be considered not as absolute inherent in the object itself, but only as the relative defined interaction of objects in holistic system. Thereby, the presentations of classical physics are eliminated not only about the existence of reference systems with absolute properties, but also on the existence of physical objects with absolute properties. In this sense, the quantum theory continues and deepens Einstein's activities in the field of transformation of classical representations. Quantum theory also enriched the characteristic of the state of the physical object, determining it on the set of its potential possibilities.
In the same way, this method objectified a new form of causing connections - statistical patterns. The latter arise here from the creature of the theory itself, confirmed by practice, and not as the temporary replacement of the exact dynamic patterns used by us in the conditions of the harvesters of our knowledge.
Here, for illustrating the power of this method, only some examples of the disclosure of the new in nature are given. But this method of building theories and the investigations arising from it did not fit into the system of Einstein's ideas about the structure of the world, about the paths of his knowledge, that only unambiguous bonds reflected in structural or differential equations can be the only form of causal connection in nature. The idea of \u200b\u200bcontinuum, on which Einstein relied in the theory of relativity, and in the generalized theory of gravity, and in the development of a single field theory, only with one, specified above, the type of causal connections. All this led to the fact that Einstein, who emanated from his own method of building theories, could not agree with the main ideas quantum Physics.
Einstein, of course, brought his arguments against the adoption of quantum ideas. At first glance, they even seem convincing. But with a more attentive review, it becomes clear that they rely on a priori ideas about the nature of quantum objects and processes, namely, this does not allow the method of consideration of the conditions for the compatibility of experimental facts, leading to a new theory, to creating a new objective reality. Objending Boru, Born, Pauli, Gaitler and others, Einstein in response to criticism indicates that the wave function does not give a complete description of the decay of a separate individual atom, since it does not contain any indications regarding the time of the time of the decay of the radioactive atom (italing Einstein) . But each is primarily inclined to assume, it continues, that the individual atom breaks down at a certain point in time. In this formulation, the problem is clearly detected by the a priori approach of Einstein: the picture of the process is outlawed before the theory is created, from the position of this visual picture, the criticism of a new theory is being conducted. Here the arguments and consequences are made up to the head.
We remember that the quantum theory appeared as a result of finding the conditions for the compatibility of experimental facts in the field of micro-reference, that it predicted new facts that it even goes into classical (proven!) Theory in classical conditions, which, therefore, and nothing - Others, not any visual picture acts as an adequate image of physical reality.
And this theory leads to another picture of the decay of the atom. According to the theory (which is a generalization of the experience, the numerous consequences of which are confirmed by the experiment!), The time of decay and energy are associated so that the time the time is determined, the uncertain energy becomes the change in energy. Our ideas about the decay mechanism should change, they must correspond to theory. This requirement is not new, it is similar to how Einstein at one time demanded that our ideas about the structure of the fluid correspond to the proven theory of Brownian movement. On this basis, we had to recognize the existence of atoms and molecules, although they were not observed directly.
However, although Einstein was in due time and came to the conclusion about the need to interpret theory as integrity, the mechanism of radioactive decay, he considered not in the light of its quantum theory, and on the basis of the usual ideas, which for this case were already as a priori.
In response to criticism, he describes a small discussion between criticism and a defender of quantum mechanics (physicome-theorient).
In the mouth of the latter, he invests the next argument in defense of quantum ideas :? The approval about the existence of a certain point of decay makes sense if I can, in principle, determine this moment experimentally ... All the impaired difficulty is obtained because something unobservable is issued as ,.real " (Such is the answer physicist theorist).
This alleged answer (no doubt that such answers met) Einstein and called (see page 548) by the positivist, leading to the principle of Berkeley: to exist, it means to be observed. But there is no logic. Positivism claims: There are only my sensations, observations, perception; They do not reflect anything outside me (sensations can be similar only to the feelings, says Berkeley). Another thing is a statement: this presentation in this area does not match anything (does not correspond to nothing in the real world by the demonstration!). The arguments of Einstein against Mach were convincing: the atoms were unobservable directly, but they were, and they were observed indirectly, in particular through the theory of Brownian traffic, which Einstein proved. Einstein's arguments against quantum mechanics are inconclusive because he wants to make believe in the existence of such an unobservable, which does not find reflections in the theory of physical reality, and on the contrary, is excluded by it. Similarly, at one time, the ratio of the uncertainty of the coordinates and the pulse of the quantum object was criticized :? It is impossible to simultaneously determine the coordinates and impulse? Well, it's only modern technique; In the future, when the technique enhances, the coordinates and impulses can be measured absolutely accurately. It is impossible to put the limits to our knowledge!?.
This criticism proceeded from the fact that the coordinates and momentum of the quantum object always exist in a certain accurate value, out of connection with each other, only the procedure is impossible at the same time accurate measure These values \u200b\u200bwith modern technique.
But such a criticism reveals a misunderstanding that the quantum theory (the heuristic meaning of which Einstein always recognized!) The root changed our ideas about the quantum object and processes occurring in the quantum region.
We remember which powerful impulse gave Einstein himself to the development of statistical methods of physics. Nevertheless, all the second half of life, he categorically denied their objective meaning. In a letter, Max Born on December 3, 1947 he wrote :? My physical position I can not justify you so that you recognize it any reasonable. Of course, I understand that a fundamentally statistical point of view, the need for which within the framework of the existing formalism was first clearly realized by you, contains a significant proportion of truth. However, I can not seriously believe in this theory, because it is incompatible with the main position that physics should represent reality in space and in time without mystical long-range ... What am I firmly convinced, so this is that in the end will stop On the theory in which naturally related things will not be likely, but facts, as it was considered recently granted. In the rationale for this belief, I can not give logical arguments, and my little finger, as a witness, i.e., authority, which does not inspire confidence outside of my skin?. All the life of Einstein was disturbed by a dual, corpuscular nature of quantum objects (the so-called dualism?).
He, who opened the photon structure of the world, argued now that all discrete formations are elementary particles, atoms, photons, etc. P.- The essence of singularity ( Differential equations, since nothing except them, Einstein, is not a form of expression of causal communication. This primarily refers to statistical patterns. But modern quantum electrodynamics reveals statistical patterns and the field. Differential equations (Maxwells) electromagnetic field Reflect only the one side, which is considered in macroscopic electrodynamics, i.e., patterns in processes in which changes in the average values \u200b\u200bof variables play a significant role. The microprocessions have to deal with fluctuations of variable fields near average values \u200b\u200band field quantization. Therefore, the transition to the field cannot free the physics from statistical patterns. Some authors are discussing the question: does the negative position of Einstein do not follow in relation to quantum theory from any transmission of future ways to organize physics, paths that their associates still see, but who have already revealed before his mental eyes?
No, we see that it follows from his methodology, from his understanding of ways to build theory, from his a priori interpretation of the structure of the outside world, from the fact that a certain type of ties predetermined in advance.
This attitude to the quantum theory appeared not as a result of the accumulation of a new experimental material that doubt the basis of the theory, not as a result of any or even other people's achievements. It appeared shortly after building a generalized theory of gravity, whose success did he take for confirmation? The general principle of relativity? And for justification of the rationalistic methodology already produced by him.
On March 8, 1920, Einstein wrote Max Born:? In his free time, I always thought about quantum problems from the point of view of relativity. I do not think that this theory can do without continuum. However, I still failed to give a tangible image of my favorite idea - to understand a quantum theory using differential equations, applying conditions for special solutions?. A little earlier, in the same year (January 27), he wrote Born:? I am also very disturbing the problem of causality. Will the absorption and radiation of light by quanta ever understood in the sense of complete causality or will the statistical balance last? I have to admit that I have no courage of belief. But I am very, very reluctant to refuse the full causality ....
The world, according to Einstein, is represented only in the form of continuum, and the theory should express it through differential equations that are the only form of causal communication, which is the meaning of these letters. Already at that time, the whole methodology of Einstein brightly affected them. It changed nothing to the end of his life. Now this methodology has already obviously arose against the main development of physics.
Conclusion.
The theory of the knowledge of Einstein, developed by him on the basis of a peculiar interpretation of its own successful construction of the theory of relativity and the generalized theory of grave, was not justified. Highly appreciating the importance of the theory as integrity, rising in this respect over the gnoseology of positivism, Einstein failed to fully extract her deep meaning and even depleted it, because I did not understand the logical and genetic connection of the theory with experience. He turned out to be his main thesis that there is no way from experience in building the theory. This thesis led Einstein not only to the denial of the main ideas of quantum physics, but also to creating an artificial obstacle to the knowledge of the links of a new type in nature. He led to the development of the rationalistic theory of knowledge and the formulation of the physics development program, which was unrealized.
But Einstein himself was never indulging. He firmly believed in the spike way and hope did not leave him. This resistance of the spirit can be studied at Einstein.
Resistance to the Spirit ... It is impossible not to be filled with deep respect for Einstein as a person. High moral purity of Einstein; his deepest loyalty to science; His unpretentiousness in personal life; Its sincere contempt for glory, to external well-being, to money; His mental attitude towards people and constant willingness to morally and materially help everyone, in the honesty, he is convinced; His burning hatred of all kinds of bureaucratis; His freedom and fearless, with whom he threw in the face of the governors of the accusation of the interests of mankind; His persistent struggle against war as a means of solving controversial issues between nations and especially against atomic war - all this shows a large, noble soul in it. And yet, with all these qualities, he was extremely individual and alone. His Duma about the present and the future of humanity was combined in it with naivety in the matters of social and political; In philosophy, he was criticized from different sides. And even in his element - in physics - he remained on the slope of the years alone.
The overwhelming majority of physicists did not go to Einstein to the end. Life forced them to look for another line of physics development. But in their eyes, Einstein is still the great physicist of our time.
What he did for physics in its critical turning period will forever keep his importance in its development. We will not call him an unprincipled opportunist in philosophy. Such a name deserve those who go to the transaction with conscience. Einstein was not like that. He was convinced of the rightness of his way, but we could not not say: in the theory of knowledge, he was mistaken. Generating it, he relied on the too narrow base of his professional experience and his too unilaterally interpreted. It had an impact on the understanding of the paths of further development of physics. Accurate, at one time addressed to them, can be returned to himself: philosophical prejudices and he prevented him to correctly determine the ways of knowledge and prospects for the development of physics.
The list of references is absent
Download: You do not have access to download files from our server.
The American physicist and philosopher F. Frank said that physics of the twentieth century, especially the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics stopped the movement of philosophical thought to materialism, based on the domination of the mechanical picture of the world in the last century. Frank said that "in the theory of relativity, the law of preserving matter no longer has strength; Matter can turn into intangible entities, in energy. " However, all idealistic interpretations of the theory of relativity are based on distorted conclusions. An example of this can be the fact that sometimes idealists replaced the philosophical content of the concepts of "absolute" and "relative" physical. They argue that since the coordinates of the particle and its speed will always remain purely relative values \u200b\u200b(in the physical sense), that is, they will never even turn into absolute values \u200b\u200band therefore, allegedly, will never be able to reflect the absolute truth (in the philosophical sense) . In reality, the coordinates and speed, despite the fact that they do not have an absolute character (in the physical sense), are an approach to absolute truth. The theory of relativity establishes the relative nature of space and time (in the physical sense), and idealists interrupt it as denial of it the objective nature of space and time. The relative nature of the simultaneity and sequence of two events arising from the relativity of time, idealists are trying to use for denial of the desired nature of the causal bond. In dialectic and materialistic understanding and classical ideas about space and time and presentation on the theory of relativity there are relative truths that include only elements of absolute truth. Matter until the middle of the XIX century, the concept of matter in physics was identical to the concept of matter. Until this time, physics knew the matter only as a substance that could have three states. Such an idea of \u200b\u200bmatter was due to the fact that the objects of studying classical physics were only moving material bodies in the form of a substance, except for the substance, natural science did not know other types and states of matter (electromagnetic processes were related to or to real matter, or its properties) " For this reason, the mechanical properties of the substance were recognized as universal properties of the world as a whole. Einstein mentioned this in his works, writing that "for physics of the beginning of the nineteenth century, the reality of our external world consisted of particles between which there are simple forces depending only on distance."
There is hardly another physical theory that would be so often "refuted" as a special theory of relativity. Her critics can be divided into two groups. Representatives of the first group are opposed to physics. As a rule, they either revive the doctrine of the ether or deny the invariance of the speed of light in vacuo. Representatives of the second group are opposed to philosophy. The physics was sufficiently said earlier, now we turn directly to philosophy.
Any physicist is not able to exhaust from philosophy. This circumstance is extremely rarely taken into account by the authors of scientific and educational books in physics.
When analyzing the views of Einstein, Reyhenbach and Poincaré, the author already had to refer to the philosophical views of physicists. Reichnbach is an in-law. As such, it gives the experimental value, absoluting its importance.
Poincare - Conventionalist. It gives paramount importance to conventions, conventional agreements. For him, they are insurmountable.
Einstein is a critical conceptualist. He argues, above all, about concepts, noting, among other things, in our opinion, somewhat categorically their independence from the experiment.
At first glance, the presence of the difference in philosophical positions of outstanding scientists seems incomprehensible. Why do they adhere to different positions? Because every person is peculiar. Any kind of knowledge is comprehended by people unenochnakovo.
At the beginning of the XX century. Einstein lived in Germany, in which neocantians and phenomenologans dominated among philosophers. Those and others expressed critically to the special theory of relativity. Neokantians, in particular, P. Natorp, proceeded from the position of Kant, according to which space and time are required conditions Contemplation of all, including physical, phenomena. Therefore, they rejected the views of Einstein, according to which the space and time relative to physical dynamics are not primary, but secondary.
Phenomenologists, in particular, O. Becker, were concerned about other circumstances. They sought in all their statements to be guided by life practice. Phenomenologists believed that there were no obstacles to the constitution of the vital concept of absolute simultaneity. But Einstein rejected such an opportunity.
In Germany, the Review of Einstein met many years of resistance from adherents of methodological constructivism, which in relation to physics interpreted it as a protophysics. The largest figures of this philosophical direction were the city of Dingler and P. Lorenzen. Both believed that Einstein, building his theory, was not consistent, for he had no theory of time and space. And it must be set. But in this case, they say, do not do without the Euclidean geometry. The impeccable construction of the theory involves some prerequisites, i.e. Protophysics. As you can see, the constructivists inherited the conviction of Kant on the backgrounds of the theory.
The representative of the philosophy of life The famous Henri Bergson also applies to Einstein critically. Their confrontation is quite significant already inspired, since Bergson professionally engaged in the problem of time. His most interested in not so much physical as biological time. Physics, he believed, rests on replacing the time of creativity by the time, which is unsatisfactory. Bergson's desire to comprehend physical time from the standpoint of biological time did not lead to noticeable successes.
Relations to the special theory of relativity in our country were quite contradictory, where dialectical materialism dominated a long time in philosophy. The indicative milestone in this story was the article V. A. Foka. Prior to its appearance, the criticism of the theory of relativity, headed by its informal leader A. A. Maximov, felt pretty freely. The main line of criticism of Einstein consisted of identifying relativistic mechanics with philosophical relativism (all relatively, blessing). But it is fundamentally different concepts. The philosophical relativist Einstein was never.
After the article of the Fock, another line prevailed. Now they proved that the special theory of relativity indicates the benefit of dialectic materialism, and Einstein himself is if not dialectical, then at least a natural materialist.
About two decades were quite popular were the views of A. D. Alexandrov. In his opinion, the special theory of relativity is the theory of "absolute space-time determined by the very matter itself, the theory in which the relativity is completely clearly and it is necessary to occupy a subordinate, secondary aspect."
This statement can hardly be called correct. First, the concept of matter is missing in physics. Apparently, it is meant the whole set of physical processes. Secondly, they cannot define space-time, for by definition it is their own side. Thirdly, space-time is not an independent formation. As noted earlier, the concept of space- time fixes only the relationship between time and space. Fourth, incorrectly the term "absolute" is opposed to the term "relative". Absolute means that does not depend anything. Alexandrov also believed that space-time depends on matter. Fifth, there is no reason for the indulgent characteristics of the relative. It is not secondary in relation to neither absolute or invariant. The invariant interval, and the length of the length and duration that are relative to its composition, but there is no primary and secondary in this ratio.
In the future, the absolute majority of physicists characterizing the special theory of relativity, preferred not to mention the philosophical directions. The philosophers began to be exempted from dialectic and materialistic titration only in the 1990s.
It remains to notice that liberation from the restrictions of any philosophical direction should be welcomed. But if it is accompanied by ignoring cognitive benchmarks, then there is spam.
conclusions
- 1. The physicist is not able to avoid philosophical conclusions, peculiar generalizations of what he knows.
- 2. Always need to strive for the harmony of philosophy and physics. It comes only if the philosophy is not entered into physics as an element alien to her, but acts as a methaphonic ascent in it itself.
