1922.] The Ninth Indian Science Congress. 1.8.C. 7 
t easy to ee without symbols why earth-bound 
cet -ahonid appear to go slow —_ ane aviator and an aviator’s 
clock appear to go rey to the man on the ground. The ‘deing 
approach and slow during ROTH ; but the meaning is n 
a Nor i3 
anything physical or real of id sort The argument appears 
patina ; which though not repugnant to common-sense is con- 
trary to the basic Principle of Relativity.’ 
You will notice in this quotation that Oliver Lodge is 
Sompated to conclude that Einstein does not mean what he 
says about clocks under these coed of relative move- 
ment, but intends it as an inference, a conclusion or result of 
the mystery of the s supposed antfeent velocity of light when 
measured under any conditions. But it seems equally clear 
that, even as an inference, the statement as made, or the 
premises on which it is based, must be defective, else the 
statement could not be reduced to an absurdity as shown in 
my illustration of the car at Broo S. 
ain critics or apologists Sa ventured to say that no 
phy sitet difference between the clocks is contemplated by 
Einstein in his statement. Thus ‘‘ Aurelius’? (Dr. Francis D. 
Murnaghan of Baltimore) in the Scientific American of Feb. 
1921, writes, page 198, footnote :— 
‘Thus when it is said _ a body contracts or that a clock 
runs skiw when it is put in motion, no actual age pet is 
mplied. The judgment of different strats gt at with 
sorbet to the body and one not—are different.’ 
This I cannot grant. Einstein at the beginning set Bentign 
XIII, page 38, of his book expressly remarks as follow 
e we can move clocks and measuring 
only with —— that are small c wnigiseds ars the — 
of light ; hence we shall hardly be be able to compare the res 
of the previous scottae with the reality. 
A statement that clearly mip ge that experiment ade 
show a physical difference if we e able to move these 
objects sufficiently rapidly If he vate not mean this the 
sentence hee no object. 
Oliver Lodge, further on in the Relativity number of 
Nature, near the end of what one cannot but regard as a 
brilliant piece of satire on [= whole Relativity question, re- 
lieves himself as follow 
- pies attention may be paid to the mere re- 
ception of information ; and what is spoken of asa ‘* warping” 
is limi to space alo: 
“ speak 
if the duration of an event could be extended by merely delay- 
“- the reception 0 of the news of its end as if one could prolong 
man e by evading the tidings of his death, and might 
be pro es say without absurdity, that a man who died at 
