Special Relativity: Scientific or Philosophical Theory?

TL;DR

This paper argues that Einstein's special relativity is primarily a philosophical framework, with its scientific core rooted in Lorentz transformations, which should be distinguished from its interpretative aspects.

Contribution

It clarifies the distinction between the formalism of relativistic mechanics and Einstein's philosophical interpretation, advocating for a focus on experimentally supported formalism.

Findings

Relativistic mechanics is supported by experimental and observational evidence.

Einstein's interpretative postulates lack direct experimental support.

Lorentz transformations form the core scientific content of special relativity.

Abstract

In this article, we argue that the theory of special relativity, as formulated by Einstein, is a philosophical rather than a scientific theory. What is scientific and experimentally supported is the formalism of the relativistic mechanics embedded in the Lorentz transformations and their direct mathematical, experimental and observational consequences. This is in parallel with the quantum mechanics where the scientific content and experimental support of this branch of physics is embedded in the formalism of quantum mechanics and not in its philosophical interpretations such as the Copenhagen school or the parallel worlds explanations. Einstein theory of special relativity gets unduly credit from the success of the relativistic mechanics of Lorentz transformations. Hence, all the postulates and consequences of Einstein interpretation which have no direct experimental or observational support should be reexamined and the relativistic mechanics of Lorentz transformations should be treated in education, academia and research in a similar fashion to that of quantum mechanics.