The following diary of Albert Einstein when he first discovered THEORY OF RELATIVITY, but before he said "Once you begin to understand and truly master the thoughts and feelings, that's when you see HOW YOU CREATE YOUR OWN REALITY. Therein lies your freedom and BIGGEST POWER!
enjoy!
Is not an easy thing to tell the complete how do I get the theory of relativity. This is caused by the existence of diverse complexity that indirectly motivates human thought. I also do not want to convey in detail the development of my thoughts based on my scientific papers, but I will simply convey to you the essence of the development of these ideas.
I first got the idea to build a theory of relativity some 17 years ago (1905). I can not say exactly where these ideas came, but I'm sure this idea comes from the optical problem on moving objects. Light propagating in a sea of ether and earth moving in the same ether. Therefore ether movement can be observed from Earth. But I never found one ether flow is observational evidence in the literature of physics. I am very motivated to prove the flow of the ether relative to the earth, in other words the earth movement in the ether. At that time I did not doubt the existence of ether and ether move it. Actually I expect the possibility of observation on the difference between the speed of light moving in the direction of motion of the earth and the light that move in opposite (with the help of a mirror reflection). My ideas can be realized by using a pair of thermocouples to measure the difference in their heat or energy. This idea is similar to Albert Michelson interference experiment, but the moment I am not so familiar with the Michelson experiment.
I am acquainted with the results-nil (null-result) Michelson experiment when I was a student and since then I was obsessed with my idea. Intuitively I feel that if we accept the result-nil then it will take us to the conclusion that our views about the earth moving in the ether is wrong. This is the first step that draws me toward the theory of special relativity. Since that time I began to believe that if the Earth moves around the sun, the movement can never be detected by experiments that use light.
In 1895 I read the papers Hendrik Lorentz who claims that he can solve the problems of electrodynamics completely through the first approach, ie an approach where the power of two or more of the ratio between object velocity and the speed of light is negligible. After that I tried to develop an argument Lorentz Armand Fizeau on experimental results by assuming that the equations of motion of electrons, as has been evidenced Lorentz, applicable in both the reference coordinate system on moving objects as well as on vakuum. I am confident with the validity of electrodynamics which is prepared by Maxwell and Lorentz, and I am very confident that they accurately describe the actual natural phenomena. What's more the fact that the same equation applies in the moving coordinate system and vakuum system, clearly show the invariance (no change) light. However, this conclusion is contrary to the law of velocity composition adopted for the moment. Why are the two basic laws contradict each other? The big problem is making me think hard. I have to spend a full year in vain in exploring the opportunity to modify the theory of Lorentz. This problem looks too heavy for me!
One day, a conversation with my friend in Bern help me solve this big problem. I visited on a sunny day and asked him: "Right now I'm faced with big problems that I think can never be resolved. Now I want to share this with you." I spent the various discussions with him. Suddenly I get a very important idea. The next day I said to him: "Thank you very much. I have solved all my problems."
My main idea for solving this problem with regard to the concept of time. Time should not be defined a priori as an absolute reality. Time to be dependent on the speed signal. This major problem can be solved with the new concept of time.
Only in five weeks for me to finish the principle of special relativity after the discovery. I also have no doubts about the validity of this principle from the philosophical side. Moreover, this principle is in accordance with the principle of Mach, at least partially when compared with the success of the theory of general relativity. This is how I build a theory of special relativity.
The first step towards the theory of general relativity appeared two years later (1907) in a different way.
I'm not too satisfied with the theory of special relativity because relativity principle is limited to the relative motion with constant velocity but can not be applied to motion in general. In 1907 I was asked by Johannes Stark to write a review of various experimental results from the theory of special relativity in its annual report Jahrbuch und der Radioaktivitaet Electronics. When asked to write this article I realized that the theory of special relativity can be applied to all phenomena of nature except gravity. I really want to find a way to apply this theory in the case of gravity. But I can not accomplish this with ease. One thing that frustrated me was the fact that although the theory of special relativity provides a perfect relation between inertia and energy, while the relationship between inertia and the weight (inertia and gravity systems) are not touched at all. I suspect that this problem is far beyond the scope of the theory of special relativity.
One day I was sitting on a chair at the Swiss Patent Office in Bern. This is when a brilliant idea crossed my mind. "A person in free fall will not know his weight." This simple idea gives me a deep thought. Wild emotions that hit me was pushing me toward the theory of gravity. I re-think, "Someone who has an acceleration in free fall." Observations made by this person actually done on an accelerated system. I decided to extend the principle of relativity to include acceleration. I also hope that, by generalizing this theory I will at once solve the problem of gravity. This is explained by the fact that people who do not feel the free fall due to the weight of other gravitational field that eliminates the Earth's gravitational field. In other words, every object that accelerated need new gravitational field.
Yet I can not solve this problem completely. I spent eight years to reduce real relationships. Before that, I just get the basic pieces of the theory.
Ernst Mach also claims the principle of equivalence between accelerated systems. But clearly this is not compatible with regular geometry. This is because if the system-system of this kind is allowed, then Euclidean geometry is not applicable in every system. Explain the laws of physics without geometry is tantamount to explain a thought without words. We must prepare these words before we can explain our thinking. So, what should I put as the foundation of my theory?
This issue remained unresolved until 1912. In that year I realized that the theory of Karl Friedrich Gauss surface can be a good basis to solve the mystery of the above. For me, the coordinates of Gauss surface is a very important equipment. But I do not know that George Riemann previously had developed the basics of geometry that is very profound. I only remember that my theory of Gauss to the lecture from a mathematics professor named Carl Friedrich geysers when I was a student. So I am increasingly convinced that the basic properties of geometry must have a physical meaning.
Upon returning to Zurich from Prague I met my close friend of mine, a mathematician, Marcel Grossmann. He helped me find references to mathematics rather strange to me when I was in the Swiss patent office in Bern. This is my first time to learn from the work of Curbastro Ricci and Riemann papers. I asked him if my problem can be solved by the Riemann theory, namely whether the invariance of the line element is sufficient to determine all the coefficients that I was looking for. Next, I collaborated with him in writing a paper in 1913, although the actual gravity equation can not be lowered at that time. Further investigation using the theory of Riemann, unfortunately, a lot of conclusions that are contrary to my expectations.
Two years passed while I still rack my brain to solve this problem. In the end I found one mistake in my previous calculations. I again try to lower the true gravity equation based on invariant theory. After two weeks of work, the final answer came in front of me.
After 1915 I started working on the problem of cosmology. I am doing research regarding the geometry and timing of the universe. This research is based on the discussion of the boundary condition theory of general relativity and inertia arguments Mach. Although I do not know how far the impact on the substance of the Mach idea of general relativity of inertia, I believe that thinking big is my basic philosophy.
At first I tried to make the boundary condition becomes invariant gravitational equations. Later I was even able to eliminate this restriction by assuming that the universe is closed. Thus I managed to solve the problem of cosmology. As the result shows that inertia appears as a relative nature of matter and must disappear if no other objects that interact with it. I'm sure if this important property makes the theory of general relativity satisfy us even though in the view of epistemology.
With this I want to end my short story about how I built the theory of relativity. Thank you very much
