0.1 The Equality of Inertial and Gravitational Mass as an Argument for the General Postulate of
Relativity
From Relativity: The Special and General Theory by Albert Einstein We imagine a large portion of
empty space, so far removed from stars and other appreciable masses, that we have before us
approximately the conditions required by the fundamental law of Galilei. It is then possible
to choose a Galileian reference-body for this part of space (world), relative to which
points at rest remain at rest and points in motion continue permanently in uniform
rectilinear motion. As reference-body let us imagine a spacious chest resembling a room
with an observer inside who is equipped with apparatus. Gravitation naturally does not
exist for this observer. He must fasten himself with strings to the floor, otherwise the
slightest impact against the floor will cause him to rise slowly towards the ceiling of the
room.
To the middle of the lid of the chest is fixed externally a hook with rope attached, and now a
“being” (what kind of a being is immaterial to us) begins pulling at this with a constant force. The
chest together with the observer then begin to move “upwards” with a uniformly accelerated
motion. In course of time their velocity will reach unheard-of values—provided that
we are viewing all this from another reference-body which is not being pulled with a
rope.
But how does the man in the chest regard the Process? The acceleration of the chest will be
transmitted to him by the reaction of the floor of the chest. He must therefore take up this
pressure by means of his legs if he does not wish to be laid out full length on the floor. He is then
standing in the chest in exactly the same way as anyone stands in a room of a home on
our earth. If he releases a body which he previously had in his land, the accelertion of
the chest will no longer be transmitted to this body, and for this reason the body will
approach the floor of the chest with an accelerated relative motion. The observer will
further convince himself that the acceleration of the body towards the floor of the chest is
always of the same magnitude, whatever kind of body he may happen to use for the
experiment.
Relying on his knowledge of the gravitational field (as it was discussed in the preceding section),
the man in the chest will thus come to the conclusion that he and the chest are in a gravitational
field which is constant with regard to time. Of course he will be puzzled for a moment as to why
the chest does not fall in this gravitational field. just then, however, he discovers the
hook in the middle of the lid of the chest and the rope which is attached to it, and he
consequently comes to the conclusion that the chest is suspended at rest in the gravitational
field.
Ought we to smile at the man and say that he errs in his conclusion? I do not believe we ought to
if we wish to remain consistent; we must rather admit that his mode of grasping the
situation violates neither reason nor known mechanical laws. Even though it is being
accelerated with respect to the “Galileian space” first considered, we can nevertheless
regard the chest as being at rest. We have thus good grounds for extending the principle
of relativity to include bodies of reference which are accelerated with respect to each
other, and as a result we have gained a powerful argument for a generalised postulate of
relativity.
We must note carefully that the possibility of this mode of interpretation rests on the fundamental
property of the gravitational field of giving all bodies the same acceleration, or, what comes to the
same thing, on the law of the equality of inertial and gravitational mass. If this natural
law did not exist, the man in the accelerated chest would not be able to interpret the
behaviour of the bodies around him on the supposition of a gravitational field, and he would
not be justified on the grounds of experience in supposing his reference-body to be “at
rest.”
Suppose that the man in the chest fixes a rope to the inner side of the lid, and that he attaches a
body to the free end of the rope. The result of this will be to strech the rope so that it will hang
“vertically” downwards. If we ask for an opinion of the cause of Tension in the rope, the man in the
chest will say: “The suspended body experiences a downward force in The Gravitational Field, and
this is neutralised by the tension of the rope; what determines the magnitude of the tension
of the rope is the gravitational mass of the suspended body.” On the other hand, an
observer who is poised freely in space will interpret the condition of things thus: “The rope
must perforce take part in the accelerated motion of the chest, and it transmits this
motion to the body attached to it. The tension of the rope is just large enough to effect
the acceleration of the body. That which determines the magnitude of the tension of
the rope is the inertial mass of the body.” Guided by this example, we see that our
extension of the principle of relativity implies the necessity of the law of the equality of
inertial and gravitational mass. Thus we have obtained a physical interpretation of this
law.
From our consideration of the accelerated chest we see that a general theory of relativity must
yield important results on the laws of gravitation. In point of fact, the systematic pursuit of the
general idea of relativity has supplied the laws satisfied by the gravitational field. Before
proceeding farther, however, I must warn the reader against a misconception suggested by
these considerations. A gravitational field exists for the man in the chest, despite the
fact that there was no such field for the co-ordinate system first chosen. Now we might
easily suppose that the existence of a gravitational field is always only an apparent
one. We might also think that, regardless of the kind of gravitational field which may
be present, we could always choose another reference-body such that no gravitational
field exists with reference to it. This is by no means true for all gravitational fields, but
only for those of quite special form. It is, for instance, impossible to choose a body of
reference such that, as judged from it, the gravitational field of the earth (in its entirety)
vanishes.
We can now appreciate why that argument is not convincing, which we brought forward
against the general principle of relativity at theend of section 18. It is certainly true
that the observer in the railway carriage experiences a jerk forwards as a result of the
application of the brake, and that he recognises, in this the non-uniformity of motion
(retardation) of the carriage. But he is compelled by nobody to refer this jerk to a “real
“acceleration (retardation) of the carriage. He might also interpret his experience thus:
“My body of reference (the carriage) remains permanently at rest. With reference to it,
however, there exists (during the period of application of the brakes) a gravitational
field which is directed forwards and which is variable with respect to time. Under the
influence of this field, the embankment together with the earth moves non-uniformly in
such a manner that their original velocity in the backwards direction is continuously
reduced.”
0.2 References
This article is derived from the Einstein Reference Archive (marxists.org) 1999, 2002. Einstein
Reference Archive which is under the FDL copyright.