Conceptual Definitions Taken for Granted in the Special Theory of Relativity

            Reading Albert Einstein's 1905 paper entitled, "On the Electrodynamics of Moving bodies", makes it necessary to identify the implied meanings in the use of certain word-concepts. Consider a few of the given meanings suggested by the word-concepts used by Einstein.

            -The meaning of the word-concept "special" is taken for granted and goes undefined and unexplained. Relativity is relativity. Actually, spacetime/motion events are relational to one another. There is nothing special or general about "relativity". Either matter-energy events exist as forms of spacetime/motion or, they do not. All spacetime/motion events are relational on infinite levels. There are no two main levels, one "general" [gravity] and one "special" [light speed]. Gravity and the speed of light are two matter-energy events, states and conditions of existence of spacetime/motion. These are two "phenomena" of an infinite number of spacetime/motion "phenomena" in matter-energy forms. Two specific matter-energy events cannot possibly cover and define the infinite levels of the theoretical conception of spacetime/motion. The conditions of existence of spacetime/motion define and determine the required theoretical conception needed to analyze all forms of matter-energy in spacetime/motion.
            -The use of the word-concepts "general relativity" and "special relativity" imply gravity relativity and lightspeed relativity, respectively. The implications are that relativity exists due to gravity and due to velocity events.  I find these implications to be misconceptions. Both gravity and light velocity, as described in the essays and in reality are specific forms of matter-energy events in spacetime/motion and require their own explanations as such. If the reasoning behind the implications for general/special relativity were correct, then one could reason relativity due to any number of physical and chemical constants [spacetime/motion events] infinitely so. [General relativity ideas came years after Einstein's 1905 paper, but their Inclusion is necessary for this point.]
            -The definition of the word-concept of "observer" is taken for granted and employed throughout the essay as though it had been explained or, as though everyone understands its given nature. The word-concept "observer" implies, firstly, human beings. Secondly, it implies the capacity "to see" by the human observer, that is, having sight, being able and capable of precisely observing the stipulated events of each analytical scenario. This means that the special theory of relativity leaves out any individual who does not have the capability to see/observe the events being described in the different thought processes in the essay. This fact also explains and demonstrates that the special theory of relativity corresponds only to the level of observation, and not to the level of changes/transformations in the objects themselves that are supposedly being observed. The observer can see and measure the perceived length contraction or time dilation (figuratively and physically in the spacecraft and/or aging individual/twin) but such observations are merely hypothetical perceptions; by no means physical ones.
The perceived matter-energy events described in the thought experiments suggest that the observers might actually see a moving body traveling near the speed of light. The perceived matter-energy events described in the thought experiments also appear to suggest that they actually undergo length contraction. The confirmation of this apparent suggestion may be observed in the countless number of times that scientists suggest that they have proven the theses in special relativity experimentally. Were it possible to prove the suggested consequences of special relativity, there would be no need to use the "observers" to explain these imaginary scenarios. Rather it would be necessary to present an explanation of length contraction of matter-energy events whether observed or not; solely limiting the objects considered to their states of being stationary and/or in motion relative to one another.
The word-concept "observers" appears in Einstein's analysis because those are the objects that are actually being analyzed as of their sight perception of the imaginary scenarios. Had Einstein eliminated the word-concept "observer" from his analysis of special relativity, then he would have been talking about how matter-energy events are in relation to one another in spacetime/motion, irrespective of their observation and/or measurement. How do the table and chair relate to one another in spacetime/motion; it matters not whether I am sitting on the chair and looking at the table or, sitting on the table and looking at the chair. And, then again, it is possible for me to analyze the table and chair, either sitting on the table/chair and/or looking at the chair/table. Each of these scenarios ultimately is susceptible to being analyzed [related to and measured] by human beings.
            -The use of the word-concept "observer" takes for granted that the observer has vision/eyesight and that requires the presence of light and visual sensory perception. In all the thought experiments offered by Einstein the presence of light is taken for granted and supposedly the mere fact that a matter-energy event is in motion or at rest relative to the abstracted speed of light causes visual perceptions (light reception) regarding the human observers. The implied definition of a human observer is that one observes with one's sight. The use of the word-concept measurement implies sensory perception and/or some kind of mental/physical contact with the object being measured. The word-concept "measurer" is never mentioned, but taken for granted in the word-concept used in the act of measurement/measuring/measured. It is not explained how the observer becomes the measurer, nor how such events can actually be measured.
-The use of the word-concept "observer" in fact, represents a misnomer for a third reference frame. One level of special relativity is to know what happens between the two objects within two different selected reference frames. Another level is to know what happens with these two selected frames in relation to a third reference frame ---the one within which the observer is situated and stipulated.  In the analysis of these minimally selected three reference frames, it is necessary to know what happens to the subjects/objects in each frame referenced in terms of spacetime/motion events and in terms of what the observer actually observes and what occurs to the obejcts observed|measured. Relativists generally confuse or skim over these two analytical needs and confuse them with one another. At times, what the observer may see or potentially observe is presented as though that is what actually occurs with regard to the objects observed.
            - The word-concept "reference frame" implies the word-concept and perspective of the  "observer". It implies the idea of a selected frame of reference (a selection of events to be related) from which the observer makes an analysis of matter-energy events situated in spacetime/motion.  The word-concept "reference frame" pertains to a methodological requisite employed by the cited observer and not to the composition of spacetime/motion matter-energy events.
In the different "imaginary physical experiments" Einstein selects different subjects/objects and their relationships to be analyzed or, rather, thought about.
            -The word-concept "imaginary physical experiment" used by Einstein represents a contradiction of modifying terms (imaginary and physical). The concept appears to reflect a variation of the German word-concept, Gedankenexperiment (= thought experiment) that was popular during his time. However, he appears to have attempted to give the theoretical exercise a more material base by substituting the word "physical" for that of "thought".
            -The use of the word-concepts "rigid rod" and "measuring-rod" remain undefined, taken for granted in their meanings. It is never explained why the measuring-rod itself does not suffer length contraction thus rendering it a useless tool for measuring other relativist objects. ["In accordance with the principle of relativity the length to be discovered by the operation (a) ---we will call it 'the length of the rod in the moving system'--- must be equal to the length l of the stationary rod". Einstein, 1905, page2; emphasis mine.] Understandably,anything in the moving reference frame near the speed of light will be length contracted as well, rendering its measurement to be a mute point.
            -The implication that mass and velocity are directly related in spacetime. The idea of speed/velocity, the speed of light takes for granted that any matter-energy event traveling at the speed of light undergoes internal changes/transformations in its material composition. The underlying thesis in the special theory of relativity is that the mere fact of velocity (relative motion) means that all matter-energy events undergo change in their make-up, from any non-zero velocity up to and not beyond the speed of light. If you travel faster supposedly you get older, or it contracts, and the mass/energy increase. These supposed relativist truths, however, are stated indirectly through sight perception/observation. However, they are ultimately forwarded as actually happening, with consequences occurring to the objects involved in the imaginary thought experiments. The statement is made that "special relativity" occurs at all levels of matter-energy in spacetime, only it is impossible to measure its imperceptible change at low speeds/velocities". Supposedly, it is only possible to measure "special relativity" at velocities near the speed of light in vacuum. However, the dilemma is that a mass cannot achieve the speed of light without gaining infinite mass, that basically nothing but light and electromagnetic radiation can attain the speed of light. So, the radically extreme 99% length contraction of an object is basically incommensurable after all, but believed to occur perceptively. And, due to the imprecise science writing, it is suggested to occur physically in all matter-energy nearing the speed of light, while sustaining at the same time that no matter-energy event can near the speed of light because mathematically it would require infinite mass. Such ideas are indicative of circular reasoning without spacetime/motion bases.
            -The theory of special relativity takes for granted, through the concept of the "observer", that the imaginary thought analysis pertains to the visible light spectrum and not to the entire electromagnetic spectrum. The thought experiments in the essay on the special theory of relativity are based on human visual observations and measurements of non-relativist objects being observed. And, when light is observed in the thought experiments, it is understood that the observation is in relation to visible light observed. The visible part of the light spectrum or the electromagnetic spectrum comprises "only one-thousandth of a percent of the spectrum". [Source: Wm. Harris & Craig Freudenrich, "How Light Works"]. Given the significance assigned to the "observer" throughout the "imaginary physical experiments" (an individual with good eyesight), the theory of special relativity addresses 1/1000th of a percent of the electromagnetic spectrum, i.e., visible light.
Excluded from those thought experiments based on human observations are radio waves, microwaves, infrared waves, ultraviolet waves, x-rays and gamma rays. Only visible rays are understood to be the ones that can be "observed" by an observer in the stipulated thought experiments as described in the 1905 essay. The supposed posterior use of the "muon" to prove the special theory of relativity is simply incongruent out of phase thinking with Einstein's essay about visible light observation. As soon as Einstein designed all of his "imaginary physical experiments" around the "observer" then all affirmations are restricted to the visible light spectrum.
            There appears to be a general tendency among relativists to present their assumptions, conjectures, theses and the like as though they actually have been confirmed or exist. It becomes next to impossible to know when a particular idea is being theorized and when it has been confirmed in reality, when it actually exists.
            Now, consider a list of word-concepts employed by Einstein in his 1905 paper on special relativity that reference "moving bodies".  [Emphasis mine.]

Title: Moving bodies
            - Moving bodies [first usage undefined]
- one or the other of these bodies is in motion [refers to conductor and magnet]
- Moving bodies based on Maxwell's theory for stationary bodies
            - rigid bodies (systems of co-ordinates) clocks, and electromagnetic processes
            - the electrodynamics of moving bodies
            - Let us take a system of co-ordinates [rigid bodies?]
            - the stationary system
- the moving system
            - a moving rigid body
            - the same body at rest
            - a system of co-ordinates     
            - Moving rigid bodies and moving clocks
            - a rigid sphere
            - system K
            - system k
            - the stationary system K
            - the moving system k
            - small rigid bodies (ions, electrons)
            -  optics of moving bodies
            - electrically charged body
            - a system of co-ordinates moving with the body
            - the electron is at rest relatively to a system of co-ordinates

Einstein settles on using the word-concepts "stationary system" and "moving system" throughout the "imaginary physical experiments". The word-concepts "body" and "system" appear to be interchangeable throughout the text. In the final analysis, one might consider [moving] bodies equaling systems of co-ordinates.
            The use of many word-concepts suddenly appears in Einstein's 1905 paper [internet version pagination], which generally go undefined and unexplained. They just suddenly come into use. Comments on language usage should ultimately examine the original German document, but for now some observations regarding methodological concepts are relevant. Consider selected word-concepts in Einstein 's 1905 paper on special relativity that are not clearly stated or defined.

Page 1:
            -Moving bodies based on Maxwell's theory for stationary bodies
            -Absolute rest             [cwj: denied by Einstein]
            -"Absolutely stationary space" [cwj: denied by Einstein]
            - Empty space            [cwj: accepted by Einstein]
-Rigid bodies ('systems of coordinates')
-Clocks                       [cwj: the word-concept "timepiece" may be more
 appropriate]
            -Material point           [cwj: possibly an attempt to counter particle wave theories]
            -"Stationary system"   [cwj: Note change from "bodies" to "system".]
Page 2:
-The motion of a material point
            -The watch                 [cwj: later watch or clock interchangeable]
            -An observer               [cwj: the most significant word-concept goes undefined]
            -Imaginary physical experiments
[cwj: likely reference to Gedankenexperiment suspected;
the word-concept "imaginary" appears to be irrelevant to a science physics paper and contradictory to the word-concept physical]
Page 3:
            -Empty space             [cwj: a significant concept given Einstein's rejection of
Luminiferous aether and "absolutely stationary space"]
            -Ray of light               [cwj: the word-concept "photon" did not exist in 1905]
            -Rigid rod
            -A measuring-rod
Page 4:
            -Moving rigid body    [specified as ions and electrons on page 14]
-Absolute signification           [cwj: It seems contradictory that Einstein speaks
about absolute meaning in an essay that denies the existence of absolute space and time.]
            -"Stationary" space     [cwj: in quotes as distinct from stationary without quotes]
            -Reasons of symmetry           
            -Stationary system      [cwj: repeats stationary concept without quotes]
Page 5:
            -Properties of homogeneity
            -Independent of time [cwj: an ambiguous word-concept as Einstein attempted to
 unite space and time into a unitary concept of
spacetime.]
Page 6:
            -Moving system          [cwj: as distinct/similar as moving body]
            -Light is compatible with the principle of relativity
[cwj: why would anyone even toy with the idea that light &
 relativity are unrelated? And, what does
"compatible" mean?]
            -Two fundamental principles are compatible
           [cwj: one would expect fundamental principles to be
"compatible"?]
Page 7:
            -State of parallel translatory motion parallel to the axis…
[cwj: wordiness here outdone by first example below on
page 8.]
            -Identical transformation
            -the sense of the motion         [cwj: possibly meaning the direction of travel]
            -a rigid sphere
Page 8:
            -A rigid body which, measured in a state of rest, has the form of a sphere, therefore has in a state of motion ---viewed from the stationary system--- the form of an ellipsoid of revolution with the axes…
[cwj: there must be a better way to present this statement]
            -the X dimension appears shortened in the ratio
[cwj: no comment, other than to ask how would an
observer know of such a physical appearance]
            -For v = c all moving objects ---viewed from the "stationary" system--- shrivel up into plane figures.                   [cwj: Ibid.]
            -an infinitely great velocity
[cwj: that's c; when he squares c, well, the "infinitely great
                                               velocity is that much greater, 299,792,458 times greater]
            -uniform motion
            -one of the clocks which are qualified 
[cwj: stumped]
            -the time marked by the clock is slow
            -peculiar consequence           [cwj: "paradox" possibly; vague word-concept]
            -a polygonal line
            -a continuously curved line
            -a closed curve
-a balance-clock at the equator must go more slowly, by a very small amount, than a precisely similar clock situated at one of the poles under otherwise identical conditions
Page 9:
            -parallelogram of velocities
            -the resultant velocity in a symmetrical manner
            -a composition of two velocities        [cwj: addition]
            -the velocity of light cannot be altered by the composition with a velocity less
than that of light
            -by compounding two transformations
            -parallel transformations ---necessarily--- form a group      
[cwj: what is a group?]
            -the requisite laws of the theory of kinematics corresponding to our two principles
[cwj: laws required by what, by whom?]
Page 10:
            -ponderomotive effects
[cwj: stumped]
            -must express exactly the same thing
           [cwj: nothing in spacetime is the same]
            -the equations of the two systems agree, with the exception… 
[cwj: they agree, but…]
            -the systems of equations at corresponding places must agree, with the
exception…    [cwj: ibid]
Page 11:
            -point charge of electricity
            -the relevant instant    [cwj: relevant to what?]
            -"electromotive force"
            -unit electric point charge
            -"magnetomotive force"
            -an auxiliary concept [cwj: stumped]
            - the "seat" of electrodynamic electromotive forces (unipolar machines)
Page 12:
            -the vectors defining the amplitude of the wave-train
            -wave-normals [later direction of the ray]
-the constitution of these waves
            -an infinitely distant source of light   
[cwj: "infinitely distant" does not exist in spacetime]
            -the connecting line ["source-observer"]
[cwj: no line exists; figuratively only]
            -the frequency of the light perceived by the observer
[cwj: finally stated]
            -any velocities whatever
            -the law of aberration in its most general form
            -an observer approaching a source of light with the velocity c
[cwj: which has velocity c?]
            -infinite intensity
-Page 13:
            -the ratio of the "measured in motion" to the "measured at rest" energy
            -a given light complex
[cwj: unknown]
            -surface elements of a spherical surface
[cwj: redundancy]
            -this surface permanently encloses the same light complex
[cwj: unknown continues]
            -the spherical surface ---viewed in the moving system--- is an ellipsoidal surface
-the energy and the frequency of a light complex vary with the state of motion of the observer in accordance with the same law
            -the co-ordinate plane…be a perfectly reflecting surface
            -the plane waves
            -the incidental light
            -incident upon unit area of the mirror
            -unit of surface of the mirror
Page 14:
            -the principle of energy
            -the pressure of light
            -In agreement with experiment and with other theories
[cwj: Just throw it out there]
            -the optics of moving bodies
            -the theorem of the addition of velocities
            -the basis of our kinematical principles
Page 15:
            -the electron is at rest as long as its motion is slow
[cwj: tautology]
            -at the moment we give it [the electron] our attention
[cwj: stumped]
            -the ordinary point of view   
[cwj: elsewhere customary?]
            -the "longitudinal" and the "transverse" mass of the moving electron
[cwj: how possibly can the mass of an object be separated
into specified masses as such?]
Page 16:
            -ponderable material points
[cwj: everything that exists is ponderable; to ponder does not mean to analyse]
            -the energy of motion W of the electron
            -the whole process of motion that we are considering
[cwj: unsure of that the "whole process" may be]
            -ponderable masses    [cwj: modification of form of "observation"]
            -equally strong deflective action
            -the magnetic power of deflexion
            -the electric power of deflexion
            -the radius of curvature of the path of the electron

            Undoubtedly the reader has thought of many more comments about these word-concepts than the selected few that I posted between brackets. An infinite array of observations may be made about the word-concepts employed by Einstein in his 1905 essay.
            Nonetheless, Einstein is essentially stating that there is no "absolute rest", nor "absolutely stationary space", nor a "luminiferous ether", but that "empty space in which electromagnetic processes take place" does exist [page 1, pargraph 2].

©2014 Copyrighted. Charles William Johnson. All rights reserved.