Is this good answer for "Discuss relationship between thought and reality"? (1 Viewer)

[darkfenrir]

I found it in a past exam, worth 8 marks, how much /8 would this get?

When Einstein was forming his theories on light and relativity, many of his postulates stemmed not from physical observations, but from thought experiments. One of these thought experiments involves a person travelling at the speed of light and looking at their reflection in a mirror.

Einstein’s question was whether the person would be able to see their own reflection. Under the aether model, light would travel at the same speed as the train and would never reach the mirror; hence the person would see no reflection. But this would violate the principle of relativity, as then it would be possible to detect the motion of the train within the inertial frame.

If the principle of relativity held, the person would be able to see their reflection, and hence the light in the frame would be travelling at the normal speed of light. But under Galilean relativity, an observer at rest outside the train would see light travelling at twice the speed of light.

Einstein believed that this would not occur, and instead both people would see light travel at the speed of light (3x108ms-1). Thus he postulated that the speed of light is constant in all frames of reference.

This postulate was based on logical thought, as the technological limitations of the time meant that Einstein had no way to physically measure his postulates. His thought experiments however allowed him to analyse and demonstrate his theory of relativity, even though they could not be tested in reality. From these thought experiments, Einstein was able to make deductions based on logic and fact to develop new theories, many of which have been proven physically correct since. Thus thought allows us to conduct hypothetical experiments using logic to gain a deeper scientific understanding, even if such experiments cannot be easily reproduced in reality.

 

[someth1ng]

I don't feel that you really answered the question.

You should be talking about how thought is a virtual way to experimenting but is based on an individual's common sense while reality is a physical way of experimenting.

You should also talk about the advantages/disadvantages of each one (discuss question) and as such, you should be talking about how thought allows a drawing board for limitless experiment and is not limited by reality's boundaries of cost, time and practicality but a thought experiment is not valid on its own and ideas that are based on thought experiments must be tested in reality to gain any credibility.

On the other hand, reality physically tests phenomena and ideas to give a true result that is not affected by an individuals common sense and thus, it is not biased in any way (assuming it was fairly tested) however testing in reality is not often viable due to limits of real life such as time and cost of the experiment.

In your answer, you CAN and probably should refer to Einstein's experiments and how they were not viable due to needing to travel at the speed of light to truly test.

 

[darkfenrir]

what about this:
thought experiments depend on inuition and experience to come to a result whilst realitistic experiments provide factual conclusions. Einstein's theory of SR utilised thought experiments as technology was not advanced enough to provide experimental evidence. Einstein posed a thought experiment, involving a person on a train holding a mirror. *blah blah blah* light would never reach mirror through aether model, which violates relativity as person can detect motion of their frame. If the principle of relativity held, then the person would be able to see their reflection. But under galilean relativity, the person outside would see light travelling at twice the speed of light. Einstein believed this would not occur, rather, light would have the same speed in both frames of reference, and each person would simply experience different times and distances of observation in their frames of reference. Without experimental evidence, not many people supported einstein. Michaelson morley experiment led to people thinking more favourably about einsteins special relativity model.