Search

The clock comparison experiments to test special relativity mainly include the Michelson–Morley experiment, Kennedy–Thorndike experiment, Ives–Stilwell experiment and the comparison experiment of atomic clocks in two locations. These experiments can be roughly classified as the comparison of two types of clocks: optical clocks and atomic clocks. Through the comparison of such clocks, Lorentz invariance breaking parameters in the RMS framework can be tested. However, in such experiments, the structural effects of optical clocks have been fully considered, yet the structural effects of atomic clocks have not been carefully studied. Based on this, this paper analyzes the structural effects of atomic clocks in detail and divides the experiments into six types: the comparison of two atomic clocks, two optical clocks, and atomic clocks and optical clocks placed in different and the same locations. Finally, correction parameters for the experimental measurements are given. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper approaches Ernest Hemingway's short story "Homage to Switzerland" from two perspectives: biographical and relativistic, as the author inscribed some of his own experiences into this work of fiction, and he was also acquainted with Albert Einstein's fundamental ideas of time and space being relative depending on the experimenter's position. The first part discusses the biographical basis of the story and some possible intersecting points between the empirical author and his characters, as one is a degrading misogynist, the other is going through a divorce, and the third man's father shot himself. The second part focuses on the tripartite construction of the text, whose settings are three interchangeable Swiss towns with conspicuously similar participants in failed conversations. Drawing on Michael Reynolds's analysis of this story as an experiment in relativity, the paper scrutinises the paradoxical time references which proliferate towards the ending and concludes that there is no dominant time frame. It also includes an experiment based on special relativity, with the train as the main cause of events in the text. Finally, the paper proposes a new starting point in the reading of this story: the third section is the only one that opens in Stanzel's authorial, not figural narrative situation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this article is to provide a historical response to Michel Janssen's (2009) claim that the special theory of relativity establishes that relativistic phenomena are purely kinematical in nature, and that the relativistic study of such phenomena is completely independent of dynamical considerations regarding the systems displaying such behavior. This response will be formulated through a historical discussion of one of Janssen's cases, the experiments carried out by Walter Kaufmann on the velocity-dependence of the electron's mass. Through a discussion of the different responses formulated by early adherents of the principle of relativity (Albert Einstein, Max Planck, Hermann Minkowski and Max von Laue) to these experiments, it will be argued that the historical development of the special theory of relativity argues against Janssen's historical presentation of the case, and that this raises questions about his general philosophical claim. It will be shown, more specifically, that Planck and Einstein developed a relativistic response to the Kaufmann experiments on the basis of their study of the dynamics of radiation phenomena, and that this response differed significantly from the response formulated by Minkowski and Laue. In this way, it will be argued that there were, at the time, two different approaches to the theory of relativity, which differed with respect to its relation to theory, experiment, and history: Einstein's and Planck's heuristic approach, and Minkowski's and Laue's normative approach. This indicates that it is difficult to say, historically speaking, that the special theory of relativity establishes the kinematical nature of particular phenomena. Instead, it will be argued that the theory of relativity should not be seen as a theory but rather as outlining an approach, and that the nature of particular scientific phenomena is something that is open to scientific debate and dispute. • Janssen (2009) uses Kaufmann experiments for kinematical interpretation of relativity. • Historical investigation of relativistic response to Kaufmann. • Raises questions about application dynamics versus kinematics distinction. • Rather heuristics (Einstein, Planck) versus normativity (Minkowski, Laue). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

According to Minkoswki, Einstein's special theory of relativity (STR) reveals that 'space by itself, and time by itself are doomed to fade away into mere shadows'. But perceptual experience represents objects as instantiating shapes like squareness -- properties of 'space by itself '. Thus, STR seems to threaten the veridicality of shape experience. In response to this worry (a worry more fundamental than those raised by Einstein's general theory of relativity), some have argued that we should analyze the contents of our spatial experiences on the model of traditional secondary qualities. On this picture -- defended in recent work by Chalmers (2012 and forthcoming) -- an experience of squareness just represents whatever property usually causes such experiences. This view salvages the veridicality of shape experience, but leaves the nature of the properties we perceive outside our ken. I argue that such a move is unwarranted: STR is compatible with the idea that shape experience acquaints us with the spatial character of our world. In defending this claim, I propose a view on which shape experience presents familiar Euclidean spatial properties veridically, while implicitly representing those properties as instantiated in a particular manner -- namely, relative to our own frame of reference. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Among the most promising prospects for a theory of physics beyond the standard model is supersymmetry. In this talk, the latest results from the CMS experiment at the LHC on searches for supersymmetry produced through strong production and electroweak production channels are presented using 20/fb of data from the 8 TeV LHC run, with particular focus on gluino and stop searches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Numerous experiments have been carried out to validate the Lorentz transformation or to find possible violations of Lorentz invariance, based on test theories to test special relativity. The test theory of Mansouri and Sexl (MS) provides a general framework for the transformation of inertial frames, presuming a preferred system of reference. Based on the MS framework, this paper systematically approaches the relativistic Doppler effect such that its dependency on transformation coefficients and parameters can be investigated. The Doppler effect is formulated in a complex Euclidean space where time is represented with imaginary numbers. Two formulae of the Doppler effect, which have been derived in an arbitrary transformation within the MS framework, are presented: one between an inertial frame and the preferred one and the other between arbitrary inertial frames. It is shown from the former formulation that the Doppler effect is independent of the synchronization of clocks, which implies that the Doppler-shifted frequency in the absolute synchronization is the same as that in the standard synchronization. The latter formula can allow us to find Doppler shifts without information on the velocities of inertial frames relative to the preferred frame. Exploiting these theoretical results, we examine the transverse and the longitudinal Doppler effects in detail. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Magnet Cycles and Stability Periods of the CMS Experiment are studied with the Alignment Link System data recorded along the 2008–2013 years of operation. The motions of the mechanical structures due to the magnetic field forces are studied and the mechanical stability of the detector during the physics data taking periods is verified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, I analyze the relation between visualization and explanatory understanding in thought experiments. I discuss two thought experiments from special relativity. Both cases lead to a paradox, which can however be explained (away) as non-contradictory. The resolution in one of the two cases sheds light on the nature of thought experiments more generally by indicating what sort of thing it is that we see when we are observing events in the mind's own laboratory. And it will in turn shed light on the notions of explanation and understanding as they arise in thought experiments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An essay is presented concerning on the circular ether drift experiment. Topics discussed by the author include the focus of the experiments which is to measures the rate of the atomic clock and the speed of light, and several experiments which includes the anisotropy of light in Global Positioning System (GPS) world, the anisotropy of light in Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), and light anisotropy in cosmic background radiation (CBR).

A literary criticism of the book "Mind, Meaning and Reality: Essays in Philosophy" by D.H. Mellor is presented. It mentions the use of Special Theory of Relativity (STR) to study the meaning of time, the direction of the movement of the NOW and Neo-Lorentzian interpretation. It also mentions the relationship between frame of reference and special relativity, dependence between what exists and what is present and metaphilosophy of mind.

The article focuses on a new method to teach the Compton effect in a modern physics class. Topics discussed include derivation of Compton effect by physicist Arthur Compton, application of classical physics principles and non-relativistic theory to the derivation and, related statistical data and equations. Experiments tests of the relativistic and non-relativistic Compton shift and the importance of the phenomenon as a pedagogical model are also discussed.

We use apparatus based on two Geiger–Müller tubes, a simple electronic circuit and a Raspberry Pi computer to illustrate relativistic time dilation affecting cosmic-ray muons travelling through the atmosphere to the Earth’s surface. The experiment we describe lends itself to both classroom demonstration to accompany the topic of special relativity and to extended investigations for more inquisitive students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]