Talk:Theory of relativity

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Theory of relativity article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 4 months

This article was nominated for deletion on 22 September 2011. The result of the discussion was Snow Keep.

Physics: Relativity Top‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the relativity task force.

Time Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Time, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Time on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TimeWikipedia:WikiProject TimeTemplate:WikiProject TimeTime
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Astronomy Top‑importance

	Astronomy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mathematics High‑priority

	Mathematics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics
High	This article has been rated as High-priority on the project's priority scale.

'Relativity introduced concepts including 4-Dimensional Spacetime'

MODERATOR The following sentence in the introduction needs to be tweaked to, "It introduced concepts including 4-dimensional spacetime." 73.84.223.105 (talk) 16:47, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Partly done: thanks for the suggestion, but that would be problematic. The wikilink 4-dimensional points to a disambiguation page, and when properly resolved, it would necessarily point to spacetime again. In that article the 4-dimensionality is adequately covered. I have done it this way: "It introduced concepts including 4-dimensional spacetime." - DVdm (talk) 17:23, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Asymptotic symmetries

What is an asymptotic symmetry? What is spacetime symmetry group? I see this section as more technical than the rest of the article. I believe a brief explanation of the concepts and links to further explanations would make it better understandable for the majority of the less knowledgeable people in the subject like me.

Physicist — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brunoff (talk • contribs) 23:42, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: 4A Wikipedia Assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 August 2023 and 16 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Johann Estrada (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Spaige1500, Patthestar12.

— Assignment last updated by Kmijares (talk) 22:40, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relativity "superseding" classical mechanics

By saying that one of these theoretical frameworks "supersedes" the other, you are appealing to a philosophy of science that many disagree with. A broader, more neutral word that allows for but does not necessarily imply replacement should be used. Meowmir (talk) 18:44, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Who disagrees with it? Why? What position(s) do we need to treat with neutrality here? MrOllie (talk) 18:55, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See, for example, Imre Lakatos and the research programme model of science. "Supersede" may seem like too strong of a word for people of this doctrine, especially when classical mechanics is still widely used and is a limiting case. Would be more appropriate if classical mechanics was abandoned. Meowmir (talk) 19:33, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It has been superseded, though. Relativity covers everything classical mechanics does and more besides. That classical mechanics gives 'good enough' results in common situations doesn't mean that it hasn't been superseded.

Ohm's law still works and is widely used as well, but nonetheless Ohm's understanding of electricity was superseded by Maxwell's electromagnetism a few decades later. MrOllie (talk) 19:49, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How can you be certain relativity truly covers all classical mechanics, even if classical mechanics is a limiting case? What if, for example, a new theory appears in which classical mechanics is also a limiting case, but relativity is not fully included? You are making a questionable assumption about the finality of science. Meowmir (talk) 20:38, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If a new theory comes along and supersedes relativity, we'll have a lot of articles to change. But if your position here is actually some version of 'maybe relativity is wrong', that's a fringe position and not one that really needs to be taken into account in terms of the phrasing at issue. MrOllie (talk) 20:42, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a fringe position to consider these theories as mere tools rather than absolute truths. Meowmir (talk) 10:30, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In Michelson–Morley experiment, observer and light source have exact same speed, it not related to Theory of relativity.

In Michelson–Morley experiment, observer and light source have exact same speed, it not related to Theory of relativity. " The speed of light in vacuum is the same for all observers, regardless of their relative motion or of the motion of the light source. The resultant theory copes with experiment better than classical mechanics. For instance, postulate 2 explains the results of the Michelson–Morley experiment. " 212.164.38.114 (talk) 08:38, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]