4 ms·
It wasn't that far-fetched as it sounds now: using Maxwell's equation, one can easily derive the speed of light, c. But then the question is: speed relative to
by yongjik 7y ago
It wasn't that far-fetched as it sounds now: using Maxwell's equation, one can easily derive the speed of light, c. But then the question is: speed relative to what? Because Maxwell's equation doesn't tell exactly what it is relative to.
But, as we all know, speed is relative, so it must be relative to something - then the something ought to be the medium for light. So people started looking for it - and it refused to show up even when it should! The famous Michelson–Morley experiment.
Of course, it was resolved by theory of relativity: it turns out the speed of light is relative to everything! You just have to slow down time itself, no big deal.
- hansbo 7y agoI always found this fascinating. The enormous shift in physics that occurred in the early 20th century must have been so exciting to experience first hand.
- mudita 7y agoIt seems like it had a lasting psychological impact on the thinking of the generation of scientists, who lived through this radical revolution . I found very interesting this moment in an interview with Freeman Dyson, where he describes the difference in thinking between two generations of scientists around 1950 (Oppenheimer, Bohr, Heisenberg… vs. Feynman, Schwinger…): "they lived through this radical revolution of quantum electrodynamics, which was so successful, they wanted to have something like that again" "each of them had radical proposals, which turned out to be totally useless and in the meantime it was the young people who actually were the conservatives" https://youtu.be/N44DZJW4LSw?t=67 https://youtu.be/N44DZJW4LSw?t=67 The whole interview is very much worth watching, also from a historical perspective.