Conclusions of the Theory of Relativity. 819 



the signals and if XY can be measured both by A and B. 

 It is hardly correct for Einstein to state that A and B will 

 each consider his measurements to be of equal weight. The 

 observer, as stated before, must compare all results to a 

 frame of reference fixed to himself and he must, to obtain 

 comparable or even intelligible results, be able to refer the 

 frame of reference of any other observer to his own frame. 

 In case this equation of transformation is lacking, then com- 

 parison or concordance is impossible. 



In classical mechanics it is well known that all its equations 

 express static relations. Time is an independent variable 

 which can always be cancelled out. If the variable, time, 

 is left in the equation, we gain no knowledge of the history 

 of the event because the equation introduces the supposition 

 that the conditions were not different in the past and will not 

 change in the future. This is a serious limitation because 

 past history always affects the present and the future: to 

 obviate this difficulty Einstein makes use of Minkowski's co- 

 ordinates in which time is introduced as a fourth dimension ; 

 he assumes that this method will give us a world-line or the 

 history of an event. As it is quite evident that time has no 

 relation to either a position or to a length but is a factor of 

 velocity, he is introducing a kinetic system of coordinates 

 of velocities in three real directions and an imaginary 

 velocity for his fourth or so-called time dimension. His 

 standard of measurement is the absolutely constant velocity 

 of light. Thus the length of any body is different to all 

 observers whose motions are different with respect to the 

 body. By using the Lorentz-FitzGerald transformation the 

 length of the body becomes the same for all these observers, 

 but only because the standard of measure is the same for all 

 and its frame of reference is rigidly attached either to a fixed 

 star or to the immovable aether. Thus to have any concordant 

 results a fixed frame of reference must again be assumed, as 

 was the case in classical mechanics. It is merely a question 

 whether one by temperament prefers a fixed static or a fixed 

 kinetic frame of reference. 



When we consider Einstein's definitions of time, we are 

 forced to believe that he is labouring under the delusion that 

 time is the same as our mechanical measurement of it by a 

 clock or other periodically moving body. It would seem 

 hardly necessary to point out that time is a purely subjective 

 sequence of events by which we obtain cognisance o\' objective 

 phenomena and arrange them in our minds. Time has no 

 meaning in an inorganic world and can have no significance 



