英语论文网

ini [13] did not understand the need of Einstein’s notion of a local time (see sections 4 and 7). Logunov and Mestvirishvili [12] did not see the implicit notion of physical space, and thus turned again Einstein. Also, based on Pauli’s version, theorists like Wald [18] believed in unrestricted covariance without being aware of the physical space. It is impossible to replace Einstein’s equivalence principle, which has been firmly established on the theoretical ground of universality of physics, with merely the existence of local Minkowski spaces. Since such a replacement demands that coordinates have no physical meanings [32], and thus runs against the weighty fact that there are non-scalars in physics. Such a replacement will end up in theoretical disagreement with Einstein, since his implicit notion of a physical space requires definitive physical meanings for coordinates of a space-time coordinate system in physics. Such a replacement will also be incompatible with the principle of causality [17] since the question of physical causes would be ignored. It has been judged that the theories of the Wheeler-Hawking School are not really general relativity [29,33]. Ohanian and Ruffini [13] supported this judgment by rejecting both principles of Einstein. Wheeler, who showed them the way, reaffirmed this judgment by endorsing their book. Hawking [25] also makes clear his disagreements with Einstein. Einstein’s equivalence principle is the foundation of general relativity, and is clearly still viable in physics. It is hoped that this paper would add an impetus for restoring the confidence on Einstein’s principle and thus the further development of Einstein’s general relativity. 9. Acknowledgments This paper is dedicated to Professor P. Morrison of Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who suggested this problem, for fruitful discussions over years. The author gratefully acknowledges stimulating discussions with Professors C. Au, C. L. Cao, Mauro Francaviglia, Li-Zhi Fang, J. L. Friedman, L. Ford, R. Geroch, A. H. Guth, J. E. Hogarth, H. Nicolai, A. Napier, Liu Liao, H. C. Ohanian, Ethan T. Vishniac, R. M. Wald, Erick J. Weinberg, J. A. Wheeler, H. Yilmaz, Yu Yun-qiang, and Y. Z. Zhang. Special thanks are to Dr. H. C. Chan for reading through this manuscript and useful suggestions, and the referees for valuable comments and pointing out related literature. This work is supported in part by Innotec Design, Inc., U. S. A. ENDNOTES 1) There are three books on gravitation and general relativity, which exceed 500 pages, on the market. They are: a) Gravitation and Cosmology: principles and applications of the general theory of relativity (John Wiley Inc., 667 pages) by. S. Weinberg; b) Gravitation (Freeman, 1279 pages) by C. W. Misner, K. S. Thorne, & J. A. Wheeler; c) Stars and Relativity (Dover, 522 pages) by Ya. B. Zel’dovich & I. D. Novikov. 2) The disagreement between Einstein and Pauli unequivocally clarified that the effects of uniform acceleration is equivalent to only a special kind of gravity as shown in Einstein’s version of infinitesimal equivalence principle [1,15]. 3) Some theorists, for example Bergmann [31] and Liu [34], believed incorrectly that the equivalence of all frames of reference must be represented by the equivalence of all coordinate systems. For instance, the exchange of the time coordinate and a spatial coordinate would form a new coordinate system. But such a new coordinate system is not related to any fram