英语论文网

’s work. Therefore he summarized as follows: “Einstein’s principle of equivalence asserted that the properties of space that manifest themselves in inertial effects are really the properties of a field structure in space; moreover this same structure also governs gravitational effects. As a result, the privileged inertial states of motion defined by inertial effects are not properties of space but of this structure and the various possible dispositions of inertial motion in space are determined completely by it. Space of itself is to be expected to designate no states of motion as privileged.” From the above, although Norton [9] got the basic idea, he also missed Einstein’s infinitesimal equivalence principle. He did not realize that Einstein presented his infinitesimal version as if just simple consequences of his earlier version (see section 6). A main reason of his failure, among others, seems to be his inability to distinguish between a restricted space-time coordinate system in physics and an arbitrary Gaussian coordinate system in mathematics (see section 4). Moreover, among those who accepted Einstein’s equation and formulism, some theorists questioned or even rejected Einstein’s physical principles. After acce pting Einstein’s equation, Fock [11] took the lead of discrediting Einstein’s principle of relativity with his own version of “principle of relativity” of his personal pReference (see section 4) and Einstein’s equivalence principle with the support of his erroneous calculations on uniform gravity (see section 5). Based on Fock [11] viewpoints and problems related to unrestricted covariance, Logunov and Mestvirishvili [12] constructed “The Relativistic Theory of Gravitation” which modifies Einstein’s formulism and rejects both Einstein’s principles. Recently, H. C. Ohanian and R. Ruffini [13] also adapted Fock’s viewpoints in their book “Gravitation and Spacetime”. Referring to Fock [11] and Synge [10], they also explicitly rejected Einstein’s principle of general relativity and criticized Einstein’s equivalence principle as confusing instead of examining their own understanding in physics. Nevertheless, J. A. Wheeler [13] evaluated this book as “The best book on the market of 500 pages or less1) on gravitation and general relativity.” Also, C. J. Goebel [13] commented, “A special strength of this book is the attention paid to experimental gravity and to the physical aspects of general relativity.” Thus, misunderstandings have been developed into viewpoints that are explicitly against Einstein’s general relativity. Einstein’s theory is severely attacked by those who claimed to be his disciples, although most of them taking a somewhat indirect approach. To defense general relativity from being abused, as a first step, it is necessary to clarify Einstein’s equivalence principle, and to identify the related conceptual as well as mathematical errors. In this paper, for the convenience of the readers, we analyze Pauli’s subtle misinterpretation of Einstein’s equivalence principle [9] with some crucial details (section 2). Then, we start with a discussion on Einstein’s 1911 paper and the initial form of his equivalence principle [8]. The merits and deficiency of his early approach are deliberated (section 3). To clarify Einstein’s view on gravity and the meaning of his equivalence principle, the problem of uniform rotation is analyzed. Also, the meaning of Einstein’s generally covariance is clarified as for mathematical calcul