Quote:
Originally Posted by Grey
It discards the notion of absolute space, and also removes the idea that the measurements of clocks and rulers can be considered independent of their motion. It also postulates that the measured speed of certain types of things will be found to have the same value regardless of how the observer is moving. Newton would have considered all of those to be a radical departure from his ideas about motion.
|
So, a "radical departure" is what the original theorizer would have considered radical?
I would say, rather, that it refined Newtonian mechanics by explaining how, in non-earth-normal conditions, rulers, clocks, and the like will lose their seemingly absolute meaning, and light will have surprising properties.
I won't attempt to speak for Newton.
I, furthermore, disagree with the idea that the change is "radical". A radical change, to me, would refute previous work, rather than enhance it. A radical change, for instance, is understanding that "junk DNA" might have function.