EINSTEIN'S THEORY

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIX, Issue 11246, 26 June 1922, Page 4

EINSTEIN'S THEORY

MR J. TAYLOR AS CRITIC ■ INVERSION 0E RATIONAL PRINCIPLES.” “HE TRIES—ANO FAILS.'’ An intiTesling interview with Alt ,)o;i ph Tiylor, a well-known authority on- solar physics, astronomy, etc., was published in the “New Zealand Times,” and in consequence of Mr Taylor’s contention that Einstein and his theory of relativity are somewhat amiss, our representative sought Mr Taylor re guiding tho particular points wherein lie asserts Einstein differs from himcelf, or rather his opinions. “Emdein's general theory of relativity,” said Mr Taylor, ''is an incoherent pile of heterogeneous mathematical formulae based upon purely hypothetical relatiois, which, in no way, seriously affect either Newton’s astronomy or ’Euclidean geometry. It is as though he asked, ‘lf so-and-so is so-and-so, then what would be the result supposing this and supposing thatt’ Jt mixes up physics with metaphysics : n endless confusion, but makes no contribution t(®>ither science or philosophy. It is a neap of verbal jargon, and only a. ,-chasli of agnostic relations. It contains no proposition of a positive and creative nature, hut is wholly concerned with abstruse hypothetical factors relating to geometry atnj, the higher mathematics.” “CART BEFORE THE HORSE.” “It puts the cart before the horse,” continued Air Taylor, ‘ ‘proceeding 111 a manner which is crocked and involved, and landing you nowhere in particular, except in a maze of assumptions and self-contradictions. . Einstein crows, over the demolition of Newtonian astronomy and yet never disturbs it at all, or even touches its most vulnerable points. His strongest point is an attack on Euclid, but even* this is only quibble. IL is based on a confusion of terms and issues, and everywhere muddies np empirical speculations with > antologioal science. Einstein argues that because there is no fixed ’body of reference’ to be found in physics, there is no source or possibility of certainty of any sort. He says we can find a regularly curved line, but denies the possibility of producing or finding a line that is continuously or perfectly straight. , THE DOOR. OF IDEALISM. “He fails utterly to see that circular lines and motions are as purely ideal and hypothetical faotors as are 'the straight for which we have no irreducible point, Or fixed and final basis of measurement is finite phenomena. At times he partly opens the door of idealism, hut never himself enters therein. He unfolds the false, hut fails to fasten upon the true.” “In short,” continued Mr Taylor, “he tries and fails (as many others have tried and failed) to affirm tho relative at? the expense of the absolute.” “Einstein’s teaching,” he said, “found rts natural fruition in Lord Haldane’s recent book entitled 'The Region of Relativity,’ which tried to rule the absolute tut of court with a view to establishing the kingdom of empirical confuuon. Metaphorically speaking, it undermined all certainty, and endeavoured fo make the absolute play ‘second fiddle’ to the finite and phenomena).” “It is an inversion of all rational principles,” said Mr Taylor, “and regards erroneously light as if it were a material body amenable to the influence of gravity. It denies that a straight line is tho shortest distance between two given points, and it affirm? that abstract space has a curved configuration, and that two parallel lines, if sufficient!v prolonged, will meet.” NO SUPPORT IN ASTRONOMY. “They who swallow such teaching as this at-:, welcome to all the satisfaction they can get out of it. . . , it finds no valid support either in, astronomy or general physics,” concluded Mr Taylor.