Visit https://testbankmall.

com to download the full version and

explore more testbank or solution manual

Solution Manual for Programming with Microsoft

Visual Basic 2017 8th by Zak

_____ Click the link below to download _____

https://testbankmall.com/product/solution-manual-for-
programming-with-microsoft-visual-basic-2017-8th-by-
zak/

Explore and download more testbank at testbankmall.com

Here are some suggested products you might be interested in.
Click the link to download

Solution Manual for Programming with Microsoft Visual

Basic 2015, 7th Edition

https://testbankmall.com/product/solution-manual-for-programming-with-
microsoft-visual-basic-2015-7th-edition/

Test Bank for Programming with Microsoft Visual Basic

2012, 6th Edition

https://testbankmall.com/product/test-bank-for-programming-with-
microsoft-visual-basic-2012-6th-edition/

Solution Manual for Microsoft Visual Basic Programs to

Accompany Programming Logic and Design, 8th Edition Jo Ann
Smith
https://testbankmall.com/product/solution-manual-for-microsoft-visual-
basic-programs-to-accompany-programming-logic-and-design-8th-edition-
jo-ann-smith/

Psychology Frontiers and Applications Canadian 6th Edition

Passer Test Bank

https://testbankmall.com/product/psychology-frontiers-and-
applications-canadian-6th-edition-passer-test-bank/
Understandable Statistics Concepts and Methods 12th
Edition Brase Solutions Manual

https://testbankmall.com/product/understandable-statistics-concepts-
and-methods-12th-edition-brase-solutions-manual/

Management Leading and Collaborating in a Competitive

World Bateman 11th Edition Solutions Manual

https://testbankmall.com/product/management-leading-and-collaborating-
in-a-competitive-world-bateman-11th-edition-solutions-manual/

Solution Manual for Global Business 3rd Edition by Peng

https://testbankmall.com/product/solution-manual-for-global-
business-3rd-edition-by-peng/

Foundations of Psychiatric Mental Health Nursing: A

Clinical Approach Test Bank

https://testbankmall.com/product/foundations-of-psychiatric-mental-
health-nursing-a-clinical-approach-test-bank/

Test Bank for Calculate with Confidence 1st Canadian

Edition by Morris

https://testbankmall.com/product/test-bank-for-calculate-with-
confidence-1st-canadian-edition-by-morris/
Test Bank for A People and a Nation A History of the
United States, Volume I To 1877, 9th Edition

https://testbankmall.com/product/test-bank-for-a-people-and-a-nation-
a-history-of-the-united-states-volume-i-to-1877-9th-edition/
computer information systems and accounting as well as a Master of Arts in adult
and continuing education.
• ISBN-10 : 9781337102124
• ISBN-13 : 978-1337102124
Table contents:
CHAPTER 1: An Introduction to Visual Studio 2017 and Visual Basic
FOCUS ON THE CONCEPTS LESSON
F-1 Computer Programming Terminology?
F-2 The Programmer’s Job
F-3 The Visual Basic Programming Language?
F-4 The Visual Studio IDE?
F-5 Assigning Names to Objects
Apply the Concepts Lesson
A-1 Start and Configure Visual Studio Community 2017
A-2 Create a Windows Forms Application?
A-3 Manage the Windows in the IDE
A-4 Change a Form File’s Name
A-5 Change the Properties of a Form
The Name Property
The Font Property
The MaximizeBox, StartPosition, and Text Properties
A-6 Save a Solution
A-7 Close and Open a Solution
A-8 Add a Control to a Form
A-9 Use the Format Menu?
A-10 Lock the Controls on the Form??
A-11 Start and End an Application?
A-12 Enter Code and Comments in the Code Editor Window
The Me.Close() Statement
Assignment Statements and Comments
A-13 Print an Application’s Code and Interface
A-14 Exit Visual Studio and Run an Executable File
Summary
Key Terms
Review Questions
Exercises
CHAPTER 2: Planning Applications and Designing Interfaces
FOCUS ON THE CONCEPTS LESSON
F-1 Planning a Windows Forms Application
F-2 Windows Standards for Interfaces
Guidelines for Identifying Labels and Buttons
Guidelines for Including Graphics
Guidelines for Selecting Fonts
Guidelines for Using Color
F-3 Access Keys
F-4 Tab Order
Apply the Concepts Lesson
A-1 Create a Planning Chart for a Windows Forms Application
A-2 Design an Interface Using the Windows Standards
A-3 Add a Label Control to the Form
A-4 Add a Text Box to the Form
A-5 Set the Tab Order
Summary
Key Terms
Review Questions
Exercises
CHAPTER 3: Coding with Variables, Named Constants, and Calculations
FOCUS ON THE CONCEPTS LESSON
F-1 Pseudocode and Flowcharts
F-2 Main Memory of a Computer
F-3 Variables
Selecting an Appropriate Data Type
Selecting an Appropriate Name
Examples of Variable Declaration Statements
F-4 TryParse Method
F-5 Arithmetic Expressions
F-6 Assigning a Value to an Existing Variable
F-7 ToString Method
F-8 Option Statements
F-9 Named Constants
Apply the Concepts Lesson
A-1 Determine a Memory Location’s Scope and Lifetime
A-2 Use Procedure-Level Variables
A-3 Use Procedure-Level Named Constants
A-4 Use a Class-Level Variable
A-5 Use a Static Variable
A-6 Use a Class-Level Named Constant
A-7 Professionalize Your Application’s Interface
Coding the TextChanged Event Procedure
Coding the Enter Event Procedure
Summary
Key Terms
Review Questions
Exercises
CHAPTER 4: The Selection Structure
FOCUS ON THE CONCEPTS LESSON
F-1 Selection Structures
F-2 If…Then…Else Statement
F-3 Comparison Operators
Comparison Operator Example: Total Due Application
Comparison Operator Example: Net Income/Loss Application
F-4 Logical Operators
Logical Operator Example: Gross Pay Calculator Application
F-5 Summary of Operators
F-6 String Comparisons
String Comparison Example: Shipping Application
F-7 Nested Selection Structures
F-8 Multiple-Alternative Selection Structures
F-9 Select Case Statement
Specifying a Range of Values in a Case Clause
Apply the Concepts Lesson
A-1 Add a Check Box to a Form
A-2 Code an Interface That Contains Check Boxes
CheckBox’s CheckedChanged Event
A-3 Add a Radio Button to a Form
A-4 Code an Interface That Contains Radio Buttons
RadioButton’s CheckedChanged Event
Using the Select Case Statement with Radio Buttons
A-5 Group Objects Using a Group Box Control
A-6 Professionalize Your Application’s Interface
Coding a Text Box’s KeyPress Event Procedure
A-7 Professionalize Your Code Using Arithmetic Assignment Operators
Summary
Key Terms
Review Questions
Exercises
CHAPTER 5: The Repetition Structure
FOCUS ON THE CONCEPTS LESSON
F-1 Repetition Structures
F-2 Do…Loop Statement (Pretest Loop)
F-3 String Concatenation
F-4 Infinite Loops
F-5 Do…Loop Statement (Posttest Loop)
F-6 Counters and Accumulators
F-7 For…Next Statement
Comparing the For…Next and Do…Loop Statements
Flowcharting a For…Next Loop
Apply the Concepts Lesson
A-1 Use a Loop, a Counter, and an Accumulator
A Different Version of the Projected Sales Application
A-2 Add a List Box to a Form
Using the String Collection Editor to Add Items to a List Box
The Sorted Property
The SelectedItem and SelectedIndex Properties
The SelectedValueChanged and SelectedIndexChanged Events
A-3 Use the Methods and a Property of the Items Collection
Count Property
Clearing the Items from a List Box
A-4 Calculate a Periodic Payment
ListBox, Loop, and Financial.Pmt Example: Monthly Payment Application
A-5 Nest Repetition Structures
Nested Repetition Structure Example: Savings Account Application
A Caution About Real Numbers
A-6 Professionalize Your Application’s Interface
Summary
Key Terms
Review Questions
Exercises
CHAPTER 6: Sub and Function Procedures
FOCUS ON THE CONCEPTS LESSON
F-1 Event-Handling Sub Procedures
F-2 Independent Sub Procedures
No Parameters/Arguments Example: History Grade Application
F-3 Passing Information to a Procedure
Passing Variables by Value Example: Gross Pay Application
Passing Variables by Reference Example: Concert Tickets Application
F-4 Rounding Numbers
F-5 Function Procedures
Apply the Concepts Lesson
A-1 Add a Combo Box to the Form
A-2 Add Items to a Combo Box and Select a Default Item
A-3 Code a Combo Box’s KeyPress Event Procedure
A-4 Create an Event-Handling Sub Procedure
A-5 Calculate Federal Withholding Tax
A-6 Invoke an Independent Sub Procedure and a Function
A-7 Create an Independent Sub Procedure
A-8 Create a Function
A-9 Validate an Application’s Code
A-10 Professionalize Your Application’s Interface
Summary
Key Terms
Review Questions
Exercises
CHAPTER 7: String Manipulation
FOCUS ON THE CONCEPTS LESSON
F-1 Length Property
The Product ID Application
F-2 Insert Method
F-3 PadLeft and PadRight Methods
The Net Pay Application
F-4 Contains and IndexOf Methods
The City and State Application
F-5 Substring Method
The Rearrange Name Application
F-6 Character Array
The First Name Application
F-7 Remove Method
F-8 Trim, TrimStart, and TrimEnd Methods
The Tax Calculator Application
F-9 Replace Method
F-10 Like Operator
Inventory Application
Apply the Concepts Lesson
A-1 Code the Check Digit Application
A-2 Code the Password Application
A-3 Generate Random Integers
A-4 Code the Guess a Letter Application
Use the Enabled Property and Focus Method
A-5 Code the Guess the Word Game Application
Coding the btnNewWord_Click Procedure
Coding the btnTryLetter_Click Procedure
Summary
Key Terms
Review Questions
Exercises
CHAPTER 8: Arrays
FOCUS ON THE CONCEPTS LESSON
F-1 Arrays
F-2 Declaring One-Dimensional Arrays
Storing Data in a One-Dimensional Array
Determining the Number of Elements in a One-Dimensional Array
Determining the Highest Subscript in a One-Dimensional Array
Traversing a One-Dimensional Array
F-3 For Each...Next Statement
F-4 Calculating the Average Array Value
F-5 Finding the Highest Array Value
F-6 Sorting a One-Dimensional Array
F-7 Two-Dimensional Arrays
Declaring a Two-Dimensional Array
Storing Data in a Two-Dimensional Array
Determining the Highest Subscript in a Two-Dimensional Array
Traversing a Two-Dimensional Array
Totaling the Values Stored in a Two-Dimensional Array
Apply the Concepts Lesson
A-1 Associate an Array with a Collection
A-2 Create Accumulator and Counter Arrays
A-3 Create Parallel One-Dimensional Arrays
A-4 Search a Two-Dimensional Array
Summary
Key Terms
Review Questions
Exercises
CHAPTER 9: Sequential Access Files and Menus
FOCUS ON THE CONCEPTS LESSON
F-1 Sequential Access Files
F-2 Sequential Access Output Files
Output File Example: Game Show Application
F-3 Sequential Access Input Files
ReadToEnd Method Example: Game Show Application
ReadLine Method Example: Game Show Application
Apply the Concepts Lesson
A-1 Add a Menu to a Form
GUI Guidelines for Menus
Menu Example: Continents Application
A-2 Code the Items on a Menu
A-3 Modify a Menu
A-4 Accumulate the Values Stored in a File
A-5 Sort the Data Contained in a File
A-6 Professionalize Your Application’s Interface
Summary
Key Terms
Review Questions
Exercises
CHAPTER 10: Classes and Objects
FOCUS ON THE CONCEPTS LESSON
F-1 Object-Oriented Programming
F-2 Creating a Class
F-3 Instantiating an Object
F-4 Attributes Section of a Class
Attributes Section Example: Franklin Decks Application
F-5 Behaviors Section of a Class
Constructors
Methods Other than Constructors
Behaviors Section Example: Franklin Decks Application
Using the Rectangle Class: Franklin Decks Application
F-6 Adding a Parameterized Constructor to a Class
F-7 Reusing a Class
Apply the Concepts Lesson
A-1 Use a ReadOnly Property
A-2 Create Auto-Implemented Properties
A-3 Overload Methods
Summary
Key Terms
Review Questions
Exercises
CHAPTER 11: SQL Server Databases
FOCUS ON THE CONCEPTS LESSON
F-1 Basic Database Terminology
F-2 Creating a SQL Server Database
F-3 Adding a Table to a Database
F-4 Adding Records to a Table
F-5 Data Source Configuration Wizard
F-6 Binding the Objects in a Dataset
Having the Computer Create a Bound Control
F-7 DataGridView Control
F-8 Copy to Output Directory Property
F-9 Try...Catch Statement
F-10 Two-Table Databases
Relating the Tables
Creating a Database Query
Displaying the Query Information
Apply the Concepts Lesson
A-1 Create a Data Form
A-2 Bind Field Objects to Existing Controls
A-3 Perform Calculations on the Fields in a Dataset
Summary
Key Terms
Review Questions
Exercises
CHAPTER 12: Database Queries with SQL
FOCUS ON THE CONCEPTS LESSON
F-1 SELECT Statement
F-2 Creating a Query
F-3 Parameter Queries
F-4 Saving a Query
F-5 Invoking a Query from Code
Apply the Concepts Lesson
A-1 Add a Calculated Field to a Dataset
A-2 Use the SQL Aggregate Functions
A-3 Professionalize Your Application’s Interface
Summary
Key Terms
Review Questions
Exercises
CHAPTER 13: Web Site Applications
FOCUS ON THE CONCEPTS LESSON
F-1 Basic Web Terminology
F-2 Creating a Web Site Application
F-3 Starting a Web Application
F-4 Modifying the Site.master Page
F-5 Personalizing the Default.aspx Page
F-6 Personalizing the About.aspx Page
F-7 Testing with Different Browsers
F-8 Closing and Opening a Web Site Application
Apply the Concepts Lesson
A-1 Repurpose an Existing Web Page
A-2 Add a Table and Controls to a Web Page
A-3 Code a Control on a Web Page
A-4 Use a Validation Control
Summary
Key Terms
Review Questions
Exercises
APPENDIX A: GUI Design Guidelines
APPENDIX B: Additional Topics
APPENDIX C: Finding and Fixing Program Errors
APPENDIX D: Visual Basic 2017 Cheat Sheet
APPENDIX E: Case Projects
Index
Discovering Diverse Content Through
Random Scribd Documents
 * * *

Outside matter, as has been explained, the law of gravitation restricts the
curvature of time-space. Inside continuous matter the curvature can be of
any arbitrary kind or amount; the law of gravitation then connects this
curvature with measurable properties of the matter, such as density,
velocity, stress, etc. Thus these properties define the curvature, or, if
preferred, the curvature defines the properties of matter, i.e. matter itself.

From these definitions the laws of conservation of energy, and of

conservation of momentum, can be deduced by a purely mathematical
process. Thus these laws, which at one time used to be considered as the
most fundamental ones of mechanics, now appear as simple corollaries
from the law of gravitation. It must be pointed out that such things as
length, velocity, energy, momentum, are not absolute, but relative, i.e. they
are not attributes of the physical reality, but relations between this reality
and the observer. Consequently the laws of conservation are not laws of the
real world, like the law of gravitation, but of the observed phenomena.
There is, however one law which, already before the days of relativity, had
come to be considered as the most fundamental of all, viz: the principle of
least action. Now action is absolute. Accordingly this principle retains its
central position in Einstein’s theory. It is even more fundamental than the
law of gravitation, since both this law, and the law of motion, can be
derived from it. The principle of least action, so far as we can see at present,
appears to be the law of the real world.
XI
 THE PRINCIPLE OF GENERAL RELATIVITY

How Einstein, to a Degree Never Before Equalled, Isolates the External

Reality from the Observer’s Contribution

BY E. T. BELL
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON
SEATTLE

Einstein’s general relativity is of such vast compass, being coextensive with

the realm of physical events, that in any brief account a strict selection from
its numerous aspects is prescribed. The old, restricted principle being
contained in the general, we shall treat the latter, its close relations with
gravitation, and the significance of both for our knowledge of space and
time. The essence of Einstein’s generalization is its final disentanglement of
that part of any physical event which is contributed by the observer from
that which is inherent in the nature of things and independent of all
observers.

The argument turns upon the fact that an observer must describe any event
with reference to some framework from which he makes measurements of
time and distance. Thus, suppose that at nine o’clock a ball is tossed across
the room. At one second past nine the ball occupies a definite position
which we can specify by giving the three distances from the centre of the
ball to the north and west walls and the floor. In this way, refining our
measurements, we can give a precise description of the entire motion of the
ball. Our final description will consist of innumerable separate statements,
each of which contains four numbers corresponding to four measurements,
and of these one will be for time and three for distances at the time
indicated.

Imagine now that a man in an automobile looks in and observes the moving
ball. Suppose he records the motion. To do so, he must refer to a timepiece
and some body of reference. Say he selects his wrist-watch, the floor of his
auto and two sides meeting in a corner. Fancy that just as he begins his
series of observations his auto starts bucking and the main-spring of his
watch breaks, so that he must measure “seconds” by the crazy running-
down of his watch, and distances with reference to the sides of his erratic
auto. Despite these handicaps he completes a set of observations, each of
which consists of a time measured by his mad watch and three distances
reckoned from the sides of his bucking machine. Let us assume him to have
been so absorbed in his experiment that he noticed neither the disorders of
his watch nor the motion of his auto. He gives us his sets of measurements.
We remark that his seconds are only small fractions of ours, also his norths
and wests are badly mixed. If we interpret his sets in terms of our stationary
walls and sober clock we find the curious paradox that the ball zigzagged
across the room like an intoxicated bee. He obstinately argues that we know
no more than he about how the ball actually moved. For we got a smooth
description, he asserts, by choosing an artificially simple reference
framework, having no necessary relations whatever to the ball. The crooked
path plotted from his observations proves, he declares, that the ball was
subject to varying forces of which we in the room suspected nothing. He
contends that our room was being jarred by a system of forces which
exactly compensated and smoothed out the real jaggedness of path observed
by himself. But if we know all about his watch and auto we can easily apply
necessary corrections to his measurements, and, fitting the corrected set to
our reference-framework of walls and clock, recover our own smooth
description.

For consistency we must carry our readjustments farther. The path mapped
from our measurements is a curve. Perhaps the curvature was introduced by
some peculiarity of our reference framework? Possibly our own room is
being accelerated upward, so that it makes the ball’s true path—whatever
that may be—appear curved downward, just as the autoist’s zigzags made
the path he mapped appear jagged. Tradition attributes the downward
curving to the tug of gravity. This force we say accelerates the ball
downward, producing the curved path. Is this the only possible explanation?
Let us see.
Gravitation and Acceleration

Imagine a man in a room out of which he cannot see. He notices that when
he releases anything it falls to the floor with a constant acceleration. Further
he observes that all his objects, independently of their chemical and
physical properties, are affected in precisely the same way. Now, he
previously has experimented with magnets, and has remarked that they
attract certain bodies in essentially the same way that the things which he
drops are “attracted” to whatever is beneath the floor. Having explained
magnetic attraction in terms of “forces,” he makes his first hypothesis: (A)
He and his room are in a strong “field of force,” which he designates
gravitational. This force pulls all things downward with a constant
acceleration. Here he notes a singular distinction between magnetic and
gravitational “forces”: magnets attract only a few kinds of matter, notably
iron; the novel “force,” if indeed a force at all, acts similarly upon all kinds
of matter. He makes another hypothesis: (B) His room and he are being
accelerated upward.

* * *

Either (A) or (B) describes the facts perfectly. By no experiment can he

discriminate between them. So he takes the great step, and formulates the
Equivalence Hypothesis:

A gravitational field of force is precisely equivalent in its effects to an artificial

field of force introduced by accelerating the framework of reference, so that in
any small region it is impossible to distinguish between them by any experiment
whatever.

Next reconsidering his magnetic “forces,” he extends the equivalence

hypothesis to cover all manifestations of force: The effects attributed to
forces of any kind whatever can be described equally well by saying that
our reference frameworks are accelerated; and moreover there is possible
no experiment which will discriminate between the descriptions.

If the accelerations are null, the frameworks are at rest or in uniform motion
relatively to one another. This special case is the “restricted” principle of
relativity, which asserts that it is impossible experimentally to detect a
uniform motion through the ether. Being thus superfluous for descriptions
of natural phenomena, the ether may be abandoned, at least temporarily.
The older physics sought this absolute ether framework to which all
motions could be unambiguously referred, and failed to find it. The most
exacting experiments, notably that of Michelson-Morley, revealed no trace
of the earth’s supposed motion through the ether. Fitzgerald accounted for
the failure by assuming that such motion would remain undetected if every
moving body contracted by an amount depending upon its velocity in the
direction of motion. The contraction for ordinary velocities is
imperceptible. Only when as in the case of the beta particles, the velocity is
an appreciable fraction of the velocity of light, is the contraction revealed.
This contraction follows immediately from Einstein’s generalization
constructed upon the equivalence hypothesis and the restricted relativity
principle. We shall see that the contraction inevitably follows from the
actual geometry of the universe.1

Let us return for a moment to the moving ball. Four measures, three of
distances and one of time, are required in specifying its position with
reference to some framework at each point and at each instant. All of these
measures can be summed up in one compendious statement—the equations
of motion showed how in changing from our room to his accelerated auto
we found a new summary, “transformed equations,” which seemed to
indicate that the ball had traversed a strong, variable field of force. Is there
then in the chaos of observational disagreements anything which is
independent of all observers? There is, but it is hidden at the very heart of
nature.
Paths Through the World of Four Dimensions

To exhibit this, we must recall a familiar proposition of geometry: the

square on the longest side of a right-angled triangle is equal to the sum of
the squares on the other two sides. It has long been known that from this
alone all the metrical properties of Euclidean space—the space in which for
2,000 years we have imagined we were living—can be deduced. Metrical
properties are those depending upon measurement. Now, in the geometry of
any space, Euclidean or not, there is a single proposition of a similar sort
which tells us how to find the most direct distance between any two points
that are very close together. This small distance is expressed in terms of the
two sets of distance measurements by which the end-points are located, just
as two neighboring positions of our ball were located by two sets of four
measurements each. We say by analogy that two consecutive positions of
the ball are separated by a small interval of time-space. From the formula
for the very small interval of time-space we can calculate mathematically
all the metrical properties of the time and space in which measurements for
the ball’s motion must be made. So in any geometry mathematical analysis
predicts infallibly the truth about all facts depending upon measurements
from the simple formula of the interval between neighboring points. Thus,
on a sphere the sum of the angles of any triangle formed by arcs of great
circles exceeds 180°, and this follows from the formula for the shortest
(“geodesic”) distance between neighboring points on the spherical surface.

We saw that it takes four measurements, one for time and three for
distances, to fix an elementary event, viz., the position of the centre of our
ball at any instant. A system of all possible such sets of four measurements
each, constitutes what mathematicians call a four-dimensional space. The
study of the four-dimensional time-space geometry, once its shortest-
distance proposition is known, reveals all those relations in nature which
can be ascertained by measurements, that is, experimentally. We have then
to find this indispensable proposition.

Imagine the path taken by a particle moving solely under the influence of
gravitation. This being the simplest possible motion of an actual particle in
the real world, it is natural to guess that its path will be such that the particle
moves from one point of time-space to another by the most direct route.
This in fact is verified by forming the equations of the free particle’s
motion, which turn out to be precisely those that specify a geodesic (most
direct line) joining the two points. On the (two-dimensional) surface of a
sphere such a line is the position taken by a string stretched between two
points on the surface, and this is the shortest distance on the surface
between them. But in the time-space geometry we find a remarkable
distinction: the interval between any two points of the path taken is the
longest possible, and between any two points there is only one longest path.
Translated into ordinary space and time this merely asserts that the time
taken between any two points on the natural path is the longest possible.

Recall now that when the line-formula for any kind of space is known all
the metrical properties of that space are completely determined, and
combine with this what we have just found, namely, the equations of
motion of a particle subject only to gravitation are the same equations as
those which fix the line-formula for the four-dimensional time-space. Since
gravitation alone determines the motion of the particle, and since this
motion is completely described by the very equations which fix all the
metrical properties of time-space, it follows that the metrical
(experimentally determinable) properties of time-space are equivalent to
those of gravitation, in the sense that each set of properties implies the
other.

The Universe of Space-Time

We have found the thing in nature which is independent of all observers,

and it turns out to be the very structure of time-space itself. The motion of
the free particle obviously is a thing unconditioned by accidents of
observation; the particle under the influence of gravitation alone must go a
way of its own. And if some observer in an artificial field of force produced
by the acceleration of his reference framework describes the path as
knotted, he merely is foisting eccentricities of his own motion upon the
direct path of the particle. The conclusion is rational, for we believe that
time-space exists independently of any man’s way of perceiving it.

Incidentally note that this space is that of the physical world. For only by
measurements of distances and times can we become aware of our
extension in time and space. If beyond this time-space geometry of
measurements there is some “absolute geometry,” science can have no
concern with it, for never can it be revealed by the one exploring device we
possess—measurement.

We have followed a single particle. Let us now form a picture of several.

Any event can be analyzed into a multitude of coincidences in time-space.
For consider two moving particles—say electrons. If they collide they both
are in very approximately one place at the same time. We imagine the path
of an electron through time-space plotted by a line (in four-dimensional
space), which will deviate from a “most direct” (geodesic) path if the
electron is subjected to forces. This is the “world-line” of the electron. If the
world lines of several electrons intersect at one point in time-space, the
intersection pictures the fact of their coincidence somewhere and
somewhen; for all their world-lines having a time-space point in common,
at some instant they must have been in collision. Each point of a world-line
pictures the position at a certain place at a certain time; and it is the
intersections of world-lines which correspond to physical events. Of what
lies between the intersections we have no experimental knowledge.

Imagine the world-lines of all the electrons in the universe threading time-
space like threads in a jelly. The intersections of the tangle are a complete
history of all physical events. Now distort the jelly. Clearly the mutual
order of the intersections will be unchanged, but the distances between
them will be shortened or lengthened. To a distortion of the jelly
corresponds a special choice (by some observer) of a reference framework
for describing the order of events. He cannot change the natural sequence of
events. Again we have found something which is independent of all
observers.
We can now recapitulate our conclusions and state the principle of relativity
in its most general form.

(1) Observers describe events by measures of times and distances made

with regard to their frameworks of reference.

(2) The complete history of any event is summarized in a set of equations

giving the positions of all the particles involved at every instant.

(3) Two possibilities arise. (A) Either these equations are the same in form
for all space-time reference frameworks, persisting formally unchanged for
all shifts of the reference scheme; or (B), they subsist only when some
special framework is used, altering their form as they are referred to
different frameworks. If (B) holds, we naturally assume that the equations,
and the phenomena which they profess to represent, owe their existence to
some peculiarity of the reference framework. They do not, therefore,
describe anything which is inherent in the nature of things, but merely some
idiosyncrasy of the observer’s way of regarding nature. If (A) holds, then
obviously the equations describe some real relation in nature which is
independent of all possible ways of observing and recording it.

(4) In its most general form the principle of relativity states that those
relations, and those alone, which persist unchanged in form for all possible
space-time reference frameworks are the inherent laws of nature.

To find such relations Einstein has applied a mathematical method of great

power—the calculus of tensors—with extraordinary success. This calculus
threshes out the laws of nature, separating the observer’s eccentricities from
what is independent of him, with the superb efficiency of a modern
harvester. The residue is a physical geometry—or geometrical physics—of
time-space, in which it appears that the times and spaces contributed by the
several observers’ reference frameworks are shadows of their own
contrivings; while the real, enduring universe is a fourfold order of time and
space indissolubly bound together. One observer separates this time-space
into his own “time” and “space” in one way, determined by his path through
the world of events; another, moving relatively to the first, separates it
differently, and what for one is time shades into space for another.

This time-space geometry is non-Euclidean. It is “warped” (curved), the

amount of warping at any place being determined by the intensity of the
gravitational field there. Thus again gravitation is rooted in the nature of
things. In this sense it is not a force, but a property of space. Wherever there
is matter there is a gravitational field, and hence a warping of space.
Conversely, as long ago imagined by Clifford, wherever there is a warping
of space, there is matter; and matter is resolved ultimately into wrinkles in
time-space.

To visualize a warped space, consider a simple analogy. A man walks away

from a polished globe; his image recedes into the mirror-space, shortening
and thinning as it goes, and thinning (in the direction of motion) faster than
it shortens. Everything around him experiences a like effect. If he tries to
discover this by a footrule it automatically shortens faster as he turns it into
the horizontal position, so his purpose eludes him. The mirror-space is
warped in the direction of the image’s motion. So is our own. For all bodies,
as evidenced by the Fitzgerald contraction, shorten in the direction of
motion. And just as the image can never penetrate the mirror-space a greater
distance than half its radius, so probably time-space is curved in such a way
that our universe, like the surface of a sphere, is finite in extent, but
unbounded.

1 The author here comes perilously close to ascribing to this “contraction” the sort of
physical reality which it does not possess. See page 96.—Editor. ↑
XII
 FORCE VS. GEOMETRY

How Einstein Has Substituted the Second for the First in Connection
With the Cause of Gravitation

BY SAUL DUSHMAN
GENERAL ELECTRIC LABORATORIES SCHENECTADY, N. Y.

The theory of relativity represents a most strikingly original conception of

time and space, which was suggested by Einstein in order to correlate with
all our past experience certain observations made in recent years. It is
therefore extremely comprehensive in its scope; it demands from us a
radical revision in our notions of time and space; it throws new light on the
nature of mass and energy, and finally, it furnishes a totally new conception
of the old problem of gravitation.

The starting point of the theory is the familiar observation that motion is
always relative: that is, to define the motion of any object we must always
use some point of reference. Thus we speak of the velocity of a train as 40
miles per hour with respect to the earth’s surface, but would find it
impossible to determine its absolute speed, or motion in space, since we
know of no star whose position can be spoken of as absolutely fixed. These
and similar considerations have led to the conclusion, pointed out by
Newton and others, that it is impossible by any mechanical experiments on
the earth to measure its velocity in space.

However, the results of observations on the phenomena of light and

electricity led to the revival of the same problem under another form. As
well known, there was evolved from these discoveries, the theory that light
and electrical energy are of the same nature, and are in each case
manifestations of wave-disturbances propagated through a hypothetical
medium, the ether, with a velocity of 186,000 miles per second.
The problem therefore arose as to whether the earth and all stellar bodies
move through this ether. In that case it ought to be possible to measure the
velocity of the earth with respect to this medium, and under these
conditions we could speak, in a sense, of absolute motion.

A large number of experiments has been tried with this end in view. The
most famous of these, and the one which stimulated the subsequent
development of the theory of relativity, was that carried out by Michelson
and Morley in 1887. To understand the significance of this experiment we
shall refer briefly to an analogous observation which is quite familiar.

Does it take longer to swim to a point 1 mile up a stream and back or to a

point 1 mile across stream and back? The experienced swimmer will answer
that the up-and-down journey takes longer. If we assume that the swimmer
has a speed of 5 miles an hour in still water and that the current is 3 miles
an hour, we find that, while it requires five-eighths hour to make the up-
and-down journey, it takes only one-half hour for the trip across stream and
back. The ratio between the times required for the two journeys is thus five-
fourths, and if this is written in the form

it shows how the result depends upon the square of the ratio of the speeds of
the swimmer and the current.

Now the earth is moving in its orbit about the sun with a velocity of 18
miles per second. If the earth moves through the ether and a light-beam
passes from one mirror to another and back again, the time taken for this
journey ought to be longer when the light-path is in the direction of the
earth’s motion than when it is at right angles to this direction. For we can
consider the light as a swimmer having a speed of 186,000 miles per second
and travelling in a stream whose current is 18 miles per second.
When Michelson and Morley tried the experiment they could not observe
any difference in the velocity of light in the two directions. The experiment
has since been repeated under various conditions, but always with negative
results.

Einstein’s contribution to science consists in interpreting this result as being

in accord with Newton’s ideas on mechanical relativity in that it
demonstrates the impossibility of measuring absolute motion, not only by
mechanical, but also by optical or electrical experiments. Consequently the
velocity of light must be regarded as constant and independent of the
motion of either source or observer.

The Relativity of Uniform Motion

Let us consider some of the consequences which follow from this principle.
An observer travelling with say one-half the velocity of light in the same
direction as a ray of light would find that the latter has the usual velocity of
186,000 miles per second. Similarly an observer travelling in the opposite
direction to that of the light-ray, with one-half the velocity of light, would
obtain the same result.

Einstein has shown that these conclusions can be valid only if the units of
time and space used by the two observers depend upon their relative
motions. A careful calculation shows that the unit of length used by either
observer appears to the other observer contracted when placed in the
direction of their relative motion (but not, when placed at right angles to
this direction), and the unit of time used by either observer appears to the
other too great. Moreover, the ratio of the units of length or of time varies
with the square of the relative speed of the two observers, according to a
relation which is similar to that mentioned above for the swimmer in the
current. This relation shows that as the relative speed approaches that of
light the discrepancy between the units increases.
Thus, for an observer moving past our earth with a velocity which is nine-
tenths that of light, a meter stick on the earth would be 44 centimeters as
measured by him, while a second on our clocks would be about two and a
half seconds as marked by his clock. Similarly, what he calls a meter length
would, for us, be only 44 centimeters and he would appear to us to be living
about two and a half times slower than we are. Each observer is perfectly
consistent in his measurements of time and space as long as he confines his
observations to his own system, but when he tries to make observations on
another system moving past his, he finds that the results which he obtains
do not agree with those obtained by the other observer.

It is not surprising that in accordance with this conclusion it also follows

that the mass of a body must increase with its velocity. For low velocities
the increase is so small that we cannot ever hope to measure it, but as the
velocity of light is approached the difference becomes more and more
appreciable and a body having the velocity of light would possess infinite
mass, which simply means that such a velocity cannot be attained by any
material object. This conclusion has been experimentally confirmed by
observations on the mass of the extremely small negatively charged
particles which are emitted by radioactive elements. Some of these particles
are ejected with velocities which are over nine-tenths that of light, and
measurements show that the increase in mass is in accord with this theory.

The relativity theory also throws new light on the nature of mass itself.
According to this view, mass and energy are equivalent. The absolute
destruction of 1 gram of any substance, if possible, would yield an amount
of energy which is one hundred million times as much as that obtained by
burning the same mass of coal. Conversely, energy changes are
accompanied by changes in mass. The latter are ordinarily so inappreciably
small as to escape our most refined methods of measurements, but in the
case of the radioactive elements we actually observe this phenomenon.
From this standpoint, also, the laws of conservation of energy and of mass
are shown to be intimately related.
Universal Relativity

So far we have dealt with what has been designated as the special theory of
relativity. This, as we have seen, applies to uniform motion only. In
extending the theory to include non-uniform or accelerated motion, Einstein
has at the same time deduced a law of gravitation which is much more
general than that of Newton.

A body falling towards the earth increases in velocity as it falls. The motion
is said to be accelerated. We ascribe this increase in velocity to a
gravitational force exerted by the earth on all objects. As shown by Newton,
this force acts between all particles of matter in the universe, and varies
inversely as the square of the distance, and directly as the product of the
masses.

Of course, we have had a number of theories of gravitation, and none of

them have proven successful. Einstein, however, was the first one to
suggest a conception of gravitation which has proven extremely significant.
He points out that a gravitational force is non-existent for a person falling
freely with the acceleration due to gravity. For this person there is no
sensation of weight, and if he were in a closed box which is also falling
with the same acceleration, he would be unable to decide as to whether his
system were falling or situated in interplanetary space where there is no
gravitational field. Furthermore, if he were to carry out any optical or
electrical experiments in this box he would observe the same results as an
experimenter on the earth. A ray of light would travel in a straight line so
far as this observer can perceive, while an external observer would, of
course, judge differently.

Einstein shows that this is equally true for all kinds of acceleration
including that due to rotation. In the case of a rotating body there exists a
centrifugal force which tends to make objects on the surface fly outwards,
but for an external observer this force does not exist any more than gravity
exists for the observer falling freely.
Thus we can draw the general conclusion that a gravitational field or any
other field of force may be eliminated by choosing an observer moving with
the proper acceleration. For this observer, however, the laws of optics and
electricity must be just as valid as for an observer on the earth.

In postulating this equivalence hypothesis Einstein merely makes use of the

very familiar observation that, independently of the nature of the material,
all bodies possess the same acceleration in a given field of force.

The problem which Einstein now sets out to solve is that of determining the
law which shall describe the motion of any system in a field of force in such
a general manner as to leave unaltered the fundamental relations of
electricity and optics.

In connection with the solution of this problem he finds it necessary to

discard the limitations placed on us by ordinary or Euclidean geometry. In
this manner geometrical concepts as well as those of force are completely
robbed of all notions of absoluteness, and the goal of a general theory of
relativity is attained.

The Geometry of Gravitation

Let us consider a circular disc rotating with a uniform peripheral speed.

According to the deductions from the “special theory” of relativity, an
observer situated near the edge of this disc, but not rotating with it, will
observe that units of length measured along the circumference of the disc
are contracted. On the other hand, measurements along the diameter, which
is at right angles to the direction of motion of the circumference, will show
no contraction whatever, and, consequently the observer will find that the
ratio of circumference to diameter has not the well known value 3.14159 …
but exceeds this value, the difference being greater and greater as the
peripheral speed approaches that of light. That is, the laws of ordinary
geometry no longer hold true.
However, we know other cases in which the ordinary or Euclidean
geometry is not applicable. Thus suppose that on the surface of a sphere we
describe a series of concentric circles. Since the surface is curved, we are
not surprised at finding that the circumference of any one of these circles is
less than 3.14159 … times the distance across the circle as measured on the
surface of the sphere. What this means, therefore, is that we cannot use
Euclidean geometry to describe measurements on the surface of a sphere,
and every schoolboy knows this from comparing Mercator’s projection of
the earth’s surface with the actual representation on a globe.

When we come to think of it, the reason we realize all this is because our
sense of three dimensions enables us to differentiate flat surfaces from those
that are curved. Let us, however, imagine a two-dimensional being living on
the surface of a large sphere. So long as his measurements are confined to
relatively small areas he will find it possible to describe all his
measurements in terms of Euclidean geometry. As, however, his area of
operation increases he will begin to observe greater and greater
discrepancies. Being unfamiliar with the existence of such a three-
dimensional object as a sphere, and therefore not realizing that he is on the
surface of one, our intelligent two-dimensional being will conclude that the
disturbance in his geometry is due to the action of a force, and by means of
plausible assumptions on the “law” of this force he will reconcile his
observations with the laws of plane geometry.

Now since an acceleration in a gravitational field is identical with that due

to centrifugal force produced by rotation, we concluded that the geometry
in a gravitational field must also be non-Euclidean. That is, space in the
neighborhood of matter is distorted or curved. The curvature of space bears
the same relation to three dimensions that the curvature of a spherical
surface bears to two dimensions, and that is why we do not perceive it, any
more than the intelligent two-dimensional being would be aware of the
distortion of his space (or surface). Furthermore, like this being, we have
assumed the existence of a gravitational force to account for discrepancies
in our geometrical measurements.
The identification in this manner of gravitational effects with geometrical
curvature of space enables Einstein to derive a general law for the path of
any particle in a gravitational field, with respect both to space and to time.
Furthermore, the law expresses this motion in terms which are independent
of the relative motion and position of the observer, and satisfies the
condition that the fundamental laws of physics be equally valid for all
observers. The solution of the problem involved the use of a new kind of
higher calculus, elaborated by two Italian mathematicians, Ricci and Levi-
Civita. The result is a law of motion which is extremely general in its
validity.

For low velocities it approximates to Newton’s solution, and in the absence

of a gravitational field it leads to the same conclusions as the special theory
of relativity. There are three deductions from this law which have aroused a
great deal of interest, and the confirmation of two of these by actual
observation must be regarded as striking proof of Einstein’s theory.
XIII
 AN INTRODUCTION TO RELATIVITY

A Treatment in Which the Mathematical Connections of Einstein’s Work

are Brought Out More Strongly and More Successfully Than Usual in a
Popular Explanation

BY HAROLD T. DAVIS, UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN, Madison, Wis.

One of the first questions which appears in philosophy is this: What is the
great reality that underlies space and time and the phenomena of the
physical universe? Kant, the philosopher, dismissed it as a subjective
problem, affirming that space and time are “a priori” concepts beyond
which we can say no more.

Then the world came upon some startling facts. In 1905 a paper appeared
by Professor Albert Einstein which asserted that the explanation of certain
remarkable discoveries in physics gave us a new conception of this strange
four-dimensional manifold in which we live. Thus, the great difference
between the space and time of philosophy and the new knowledge is the
objective reality of the latter. It rests upon an amazing sequence of physical
facts, and the generalized theory, which appeared several years later,
founded as it is upon the abstruse differential calculus of Riemann,
Christoffel, Ricci and Levi-Civita, emerges from its maze of formulas with
the prediction of real phenomena to be sought for the in the world of facts.

We shall, therefore, approach the subject from this objective point of view.
Let us go to the realm of actual physical events and see how the ideas of
relativity gradually unfolded themselves from the first crude wonderings of
science to the stately researches that first discovered the great ocean of
ether and then penetrated in such a marvelous manner into some of its most
mysterious properties.
The Electromagnetic Theory of Light

Suppose that we go out on a summer night and look into the dark depths of
the sky. A thousand bright specks are flashing there, blue, red, yellow
against the dark velvet of space. And as we look we must all be impressed
by the fact that such remote objects as the stars can be known to us at all.
How is it that light, that curious thing which falls upon the optic nerve and
transmits its pictures to the brain, can ever reach us through the black
regions of interstellar space? That is the question which has for its answer
the electromagnetic theory of light.

The first theory to be advanced was Newton’s “corpuscular” theory which

supposed that the stars are sending off into space little pellets of matter so
infinitesimally small that they can move at the rate of 186,000 miles a
second without injuring even so delicate a thing as the eye when they strike
against it.

But in 1801, when Thomas Young made the very important discovery of
interference, this had to give way to the wave theory, first proposed by
Huyghens in the 17th century. The first great deduction from this, of course,
was the “luminiferous ether,” because a wave without some medium for its
propagation was quite unthinkable. Certain peculiar properties of the ether
were at once evident, since we deduce that it must fill all space and at the
same time be so extremely tenuous that it will not retard to any noticeable
degree the motion through it of material bodies like the planets.

But how light was propagated through the ether still remained a perplexing
problem and various theories were proposed, most prominent among them
being the “elastic solid” theory which tried to ascribe to ether the properties
of an elastic body. This theory, however, laid itself open to serious objection
on the ground that no longitudinal waves had been detected in the ether, so
that it began to appear that further insight into the nature of light had to be
sought for in another direction.

This was soon forthcoming for in 1864 a new theory was proposed by
James Clerk Maxwell which seemed to solve all of the difficulties. Maxwell
had been working with the facts derived from a study of electrical and
magnetic phenomena and had shown that electromagnetic disturbances
were propagated through the ether at a velocity identical with that of light.
This, of course, might have been merely a strange coincidence, but
Maxwell went further and demonstrated the interesting fact that an
oscillating electric charge should give rise to a wave that would behave in a
manner identical with all of the known properties of a light wave. One
particularly impressive assertion was that these waves, consisting of an
alternating electric field accompanied by an alternating magnetic field at
right angles to it, and hence called electromagnetic waves, would advance
in a direction perpendicular to the alternating fields. This satisfied the first
essential property of light rays, i.e., that they must be transverse waves, and
the ease with which it explained all of the fundamental phenomena of optics
and predicted a most striking interrelation between the electrical and optical
properties of material bodies, gave it at once a prominent place among the
various theories.

The electromagnetic theory, however, had to wait until 1888 for verification
when Heinrich Hertz, in a series of brilliant experiments, succeeded in
producing electromagnetic waves in the laboratory and in showing that they
possessed all of the properties predicted by Maxwell. These waves moved
with the velocity of light: they could be reflected, refracted, and polarized:
they exhibited the phenomenon of interference and, in short, could not be
distinguished from light waves except for their difference in wave length.

The Michelson-Morley Experiment

With the final establishment of the electromagnetic theory of light as a fact
of physics, we have at last endowed the ether with an actual substantiality.
The “empty void” is no longer empty, but a great ocean of ether through
which the planets and the suns turn without ever being aware that it is there.

In 1881 A. A. Michelson undertook an experiment, originally suggested by

Maxwell, to determine the relative motion of our earth to the ether ocean
and six years later he repeated it with the assistance of E. W. Morley. The
experiment is now known as the Michelson-Morley experiment and since it
is the great physical fact upon which the theory of relativity rests, it will be
well for us to examine it in detail.

Since we can scarcely think that our earth is privileged in the universe and
that it is at rest with respect to this great ether ocean that fills space, we
propose to discover how fast we are actually moving. But the startling fact
is that the experiment devised for this purpose failed to detect any motion
whatever of the earth relative to the ether.1

The explanation of this very curious fact was given by both H. A. Lorentz
and G. F. Fitzgerald in what is now widely known under the name of the
“contraction hypothesis.” It is nothing more nor less than this:

Every solid body undergoes a slight change in dimensions, of the order of (

), when it moves with a velocity v through the ether.

The reason why the experiment failed, then, was not because the earth was
not moving through the ether, but because the instruments with which the
experiment was being conducted had shrunk just enough to negative the
effect that was being looked for.2

The Lorentz Transformation

We can not at this point forebear introducing a little mathematics to further
emphasize the theory and the very logical nature of this contraction
hypothesis.

Let us suppose that we were on a world that was absolutely motionless with
respect to the ether and were looking at a ray of light. The magnetic and
electric fields which form the ray can be described by means of four
mathematical expressions which have come to bear the name of “Maxwell’s
field equations.” Now suppose that we ask ourselves the question: How
must these equations be changed so that they will apply to a ray of light
which is being observed by people on a world that is moving with a
velocity v through the ether?

The answer is immediate. From the Michelson-Morley experiment we

know that we can not tell how fast or how slowly we are moving with
respect to the ether. This means that no matter what world we may be upon,
the form of the Maxwell field equations will always be the same, even
though the second set of axes (or frame of reference) may be moving with
high velocity with respect to the first.

Starting from this hypothesis (called in technical language the covariance of

the equations with respect to a transformation of coordinates), Lorentz
found that the transformation which leaves the field equations unchanged in
form was the following:

where k is as on page 92.

And what, now, can be deduced from these very simple looking equations?
In the first place we see that the space of x′, y′, z′, t′ is not our ordinary
concept of space at all, but a space in which time is all tangled up with
length. To put it more concretely, we may deduce from them the interesting
fact that whenever an aviator moves with respect to our earth, his shape
changes, and if he were to compare his watch with one on the earth, he
would find that his time had changed also. A sphere would flatten into an
ellipse, a meter stick would shorten up, a watch would slow down and all
because, as H. Minkowski has shown us from these very equations, we are
really living in a physical world quite different from the world of Euclid’s
geometry in which we are accustomed to think we live.

A variety of objections has very naturally been made to this rather radical
hypothesis in an attempt to discredit the entire theory, but it is easily seen
that any result obtained through the field equations must necessarily be in
conformity with the theory of contraction, since this theory is only the
physical interpretation of that transformation which leaves the field
equations unaltered. Indeed, it is even possible to postulate the Lorentz
transformation together with the assumption that each element of charge is
a center of uniformly diverging tubes of strain and derive the Maxwell field
equations from this, which shows from another point of view the truly
fundamental nature of the transformation.

The First Theory of Relativity

The whole question of the ether had arrived at this very interesting point
when Professor Einstein in 1905 stated the theory of relativity. He had
noticed that the equations of dynamics as formulated by Newton did not
admit the Lorentz transformation, but only the simple Galilean
transformation:

Here, indeed, was a curious situation. Two physical principles, that of

dynamics and that of electromagnetism, were coexistent and yet each one
admitted a different transformation when the system of reference was
transferred to axes moving with constant velocity with respect to the ether.
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

testbankmall.com