My views on this Einstein's convention

STEM Chat
1

We can detect two supernova’s light waves and gravitational waves seperately and note down the specific time difference in their detection.

If light was instantaneous both waves would come at a specific time difference, but if C is not constant in different directions the specific time difference reffered above would be different. We can detect two supernovas in opposite directions to check if there is any difference in speed of light.

2 Likes
2

I am not commenting on your suggestion since we have no instrument or theory to connect light and gravitation, saving Einstein’s insight that space and gravitation may not be two different things. Since this is an open question, we may not speak about it with confidence at the moment. However:

The argument made in Veritasium https://youtu.be/pTn6Ewhb27k?si=TT5NFTYJoEcaF6FF tells us two things.

  1. We have no instrument to measure the speed of light in one direction; we can only measure it based on the forward and return directions together.
  2. The constancy of C, the speed of light, is a convention. In other words it is an assumption based on which we conduct most physics.

It may appear that how can we trust science if it is based on assumptions or conventions? Though we may limit our thought based on that, the various experiments and the results from them have not made us to question those assumptions. Therefore we are on good ground to trust.

Another such assumption or convention is the conservation of matter and energy. Since we do not consider non-physical (neither matter nor energy) as a cause or effect of the phenomena for study under science, our experimental sources are closed. Just like the speed of light, we also have experimental evidence for the principle of conservation. But this is also because our instruments are also physical manifestations. How do we break its epistemic circle? Immanuel Kant, a famous German philosopher, declared that we can only know of phenomena, not noumena.

1 Like