pith. sign in

arxiv: 2404.19566 · v3 · submitted 2024-04-30 · ⚛️ physics.class-ph · physics.hist-ph

Relativity with or without light and Maxwell

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 01:44 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.class-ph physics.hist-ph
keywords special relativityIgnatowski approachprinciple of relativityEinstein second postulateMaxwell equationslight speed constancyLorentz transformations
0
0 comments X

The pith

The main results of special relativity follow from the principle of relativity alone, without light speed constancy or Maxwell equations.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper gives a simple deduction of the central results obtained in the Ignatowski approach to relativity. This deduction starts only from the principle of relativity and does not use Einstein's second postulate or Maxwell's equations. It also clarifies the relationship between that postulate and electromagnetic theory, and shows the distinctive role the relativity principle played for those who worked with Maxwell's equations. A sympathetic reader sees that the structure of spacetime transformations can be reached by a shorter route than the usual one.

Core claim

A simple deduction yields the main results of the Ignatowski approach to the theory of relativity. These results are obtained from the principle of relativity without invoking the constancy of the speed of light or Maxwell electromagnetic theory as starting points. The paper further elucidates the complex relationship between Einstein's second postulate and Maxwell theory, and illustrates the peculiar status of the principle of relativity among the Maxwellians.

What carries the argument

The Ignatowski approach, a deduction of spacetime transformations that begins solely from the principle of relativity and spatial isotropy.

If this is right

  • The Lorentz transformations follow directly from the principle of relativity and isotropy.
  • Einstein's second postulate is not required to establish the kinematic structure of special relativity.
  • Maxwell's equations are not needed as a foundation for deriving the transformations between inertial frames.
  • The principle of relativity occupies an independent foundational position even within electromagnetic theory.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same style of deduction might be tested against other coordinate transformations that preserve the relativity principle.
  • Historical accounts of how Maxwellians viewed the relativity principle could be re-examined in light of the distinction drawn here.
  • Pedagogical presentations of special relativity could begin with this route before introducing light signals.

Load-bearing premise

That the main results of relativity can be reached by a simple deduction that never starts from the constancy of light speed or from Maxwell's equations.

What would settle it

If the deduction presented in the paper fails to produce the Lorentz transformations or equivalent results while remaining free of any assumption about light speed or Maxwell equations, the central claim would be refuted.

read the original abstract

The complex relationship between Einstein's second postulate and the Maxwell electromagnetic theory is elucidated. A simple deduction of the main results of the Ignatowski approach to the theory of relativity is given. The peculiar status of the principle of relativity among the Maxwellians is illustrated.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript elucidates the relationship between Einstein's second postulate and Maxwell electromagnetic theory, provides a simple deduction of the main results of the Ignatowski approach to relativity (deriving key transformations without assuming constant light speed or Maxwell equations), and illustrates the status of the relativity principle among Maxwellians through historical and conceptual analysis.

Significance. If the claimed simple deduction holds without circularity, the paper contributes to foundational discussions in special relativity by offering an alternative route to Ignatowski-type results and clarifying interpretive links to Maxwell theory; such non-standard derivations can aid pedagogy and historical understanding even if they do not alter empirical predictions.

minor comments (2)
  1. The abstract asserts a 'simple deduction' of Ignatowski results; expanding the introduction or a dedicated section to outline the logical steps explicitly (even if conceptual) would strengthen verifiability for readers.
  2. Clarify the precise sense in which the deduction avoids Maxwell equations and light-speed constancy, perhaps by referencing specific Ignatowski postulates or transformations in a dedicated paragraph.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the supportive assessment of the manuscript and the recommendation for minor revision. No specific major comments were provided in the report.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation presented as independent historical reconstruction

full rationale

The paper claims a simple deduction of Ignatowski results without light-speed constancy or Maxwell equations as primitives. No equations, fitted parameters, or self-citations are exhibited in the abstract or description that reduce the claimed deduction to its own inputs by construction. The work is interpretive and historical; the central premise does not invoke a uniqueness theorem from the same authors or smuggle an ansatz via citation. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks and receives the default non-finding.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper is a historical analysis relying on standard assumptions from physics history and philosophy; no free parameters, invented entities, or ad-hoc axioms are introduced in the abstract. Axioms are background historical facts about Maxwellians and Ignatowski's work.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Ignatowski's approach yields the main results of special relativity via a deduction independent of light speed constancy.
    Invoked in the abstract as the basis for the simple deduction provided.
  • domain assumption Einstein's second postulate has a complex but elucidable relationship with Maxwell electromagnetic theory.
    Stated directly as the first task of the paper.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5549 in / 1377 out tokens · 17996 ms · 2026-05-24T01:44:39.082043+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Aguirregabiria J M, Hernandez A and Rivas M 2022 Maxwell’s equations and Lorentz transformationsEur. J. Phys.43035603

  2. [2]

    Aguirregabiria J M, Hernandez A and Rivas M 2020 Law of inertia, clock synchronization, speed limit and Lorentz transformationsEur. J. Phys.41045601

  3. [3]

    Duarte S E S and Lima N W 2020 Special relativity from classical gedanken experiments involving electromagnetic forces: a contribution to relativity without lightEur. J. Phys.41 045602

  4. [4]

    Browne K M 2018 Classical and special relativity in four stepsEur. J. Phys.39025601

  5. [5]

    Moylan P 2022 Velocity reciprocity and the relativity principleAm. J. Phys.90126–34

  6. [6]

    Mathews Jr W N 2020 Seven formulations of the kinematics of special relativityAm. J. Phys. 88269–78

  7. [7]

    Galilean transformation

    Browne K M 2020 Galilei proposed the principle of relativity, but not the “Galilean transformation”Am. J. Phys.88207–13

  8. [8]

    Educ.57023009

    Russo I, Iuele G, Iovane G and Benedetto E 2022 Tell me how long it takes for light to travel and I will tell you how fast you goPhys. Educ.57023009

  9. [9]

    Benedetto E and Iovane G 2022 The speed of light or the speeds of lightRev. Bras. Ens. Fis. 44e20210421

  10. [10]

    Einstein A 1905 Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter K¨ orperAnn. Phys. Lpz.17891–921 English translation in Einstein A 1989The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Vol 2: The Swiss Years: Writings, 1900–1909 (Engl. Transl. Suppl.)(Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press) (translated by A Beck)

  11. [11]

    Einstein A 1905 Ist die Tr¨ agheit eines K¨ orpers von seinem Energieinhalt abh¨ angig?Ann. Phys. Lpz.18639–41 English translation in Einstein A 1989

  12. [12]

    Maxwell’s equations and Lorentz transformations

    Redˇ zi´ c D V 2022 Comment on “Maxwell’s equations and Lorentz transformations”Eur. J. Phys.43068002

  13. [13]

    Trans.155459–512

    Maxwell J C 1865 A dynamical theory of the electromagnetic fieldPhil. Trans.155459–512

  14. [14]

    7 IOP PublishingJournalvv(yyyy) aaaaaa Authoret al

    Newton I 1687PhilosophiæNaturalis Principia Mathematica(London: Typis J Streater) 9Probably echoing the first two verses of the fable by Jean de La Fontaine, Le Laboureur et ses enfants:Travaillez, prenez de la peine: C’est le fonds qui manque le moins. 7 IOP PublishingJournalvv(yyyy) aaaaaa Authoret al

  15. [15]

    Rindler W 1970 Einstein’s priority in recognizing time dilation physicallyAm. J. Phys.38, 1111–5

  16. [16]

    Kittel C 1974 Larmor and the prehistory of the Lorentz transformationsAm. J. Phys.42 726–9

  17. [17]

    Phys.39211–30

    Ernst A and Hsu J P 2001 First proposal of the universal speed of light by Voigt in 1887 Chinese J. Phys.39211–30

  18. [18]

    Brown H R 2005Physical Relativity: Space-time Structure from a Dynamical Perspective (Oxford: Clarendon)

  19. [19]

    Mart´ ınez A A 2004 Kinematic subtleties in Einstein’s first derivation of the Lorentz transformationsAm. J. Phys.72, 790–8

  20. [20]

    Einstein A 1910 Le principe de relativit´ e et ses cons´ equences dans la physique moderneArch. Sci. Phys. Nat.295–28, 125–44 English translation in Einstein A 1993The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Vol 3: The Swiss Years: Writings, 1909–1911 (Engl. Transl. Suppl.) (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press) (translated by A Beck)

  21. [21]

    Einstein A 1935 Elementary derivation of the equivalence of mass and energyAm. Math. Soc. Bull41223–30

  22. [22]

    Redˇ zi´ c D V 2006 Does ∆m= ∆Erest/c2?Eur. J. Phys.27147–57

  23. [23]

    Redˇ zi´ c D V 2008 Towards disentangling the meaning of relativistic length contractionEur. J. Phys.29191–201

  24. [24]

    Silberstein L 1924The Theory of Relativity2nd edn, enlarged (London: MacMillan) Chapter 1

  25. [25]

    Lorentz H A 1904 Electromagnetic phenomena in a system moving with any velocity less than that of lightProc. R. Acad. Amsterdam6809–31

  26. [26]

    Poincar´ e H 1905 Sur la dynamique de l’´ electronC. R. Acad. Sci.1401504–8

  27. [27]

    Larmor J 1900Aether and Matter(Cambridge: Cambridge UP) pp 167–77

  28. [28]

    Einige allgemeine Bemerkungen zum Relativit¨ atsprinzip

    v Ignatowsky W 1910 Einige allgemeine Bemerkungen zum Relativit¨ atsprinzipPhys. Z.11 972–6 v Ignatowsky W 1911 Eine Bemerkung zu meiner Arbeit: “Einige allgemeine Bemerkungen zum Relativit¨ atsprinzip”Phys. Z.12779

  29. [29]

    Berzi V and Gorini V 1969 Reciprocity principle and the Lorentz transformationsJ. Math. Phys., 101518–24

  30. [30]

    L´ evy-Leblond J M 1976 One more derivation of the Lorentz transformationsAm. J. Phys.44 271–7

  31. [31]

    Wykstra S 1976 On Einstein’s second postulateBr. J. Philos. Sci.27259–61

  32. [32]

    Redˇ zi´ c D V 2018 On an episode in the life ofEEur. J. Phys.39055206

  33. [33]

    Coleman B 2003 A dual first-postulate basis for special relativityEur. J. Phys.24301–13

  34. [34]

    Pelissetto A and Testa M 2015 Getting the Lorentz transformations without requiring an invariant speedAm. J. Phys.83338–40

  35. [35]

    Gao S 2017 Relativity without light: a further suggestion http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/13220/

  36. [36]

    Maxwell J C 1876Matter and Motion(London: Society for promoting Christian knowledge) art CII

  37. [37]

    Rindler W 1991Introduction to Special Relativity2nd edn (Oxford: Clarendon)

  38. [38]

    Redˇ zi´ c D V, Davidovi´ c D M and Redˇ zi´ c M D 2011 Derivations of relativistic force transformation equationsJ. Electro. Waves Appl.251146–55 8 IOP PublishingJournalvv(yyyy) aaaaaa Authoret al

  39. [39]

    DiSalle R 2002 Space and Time: Inertial FramesStanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2002 edition), E. N. Zalta (ed.) available at http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2002/entries/ spacetime-iframes/

  40. [40]

    Mermin N D 1984 Relativity without lightAm. J. Phys.52119–24

  41. [41]

    Einstein A 1967The Meaning of Relativity6th edn, revised (London: Chapman and Hall)

  42. [42]

    Naturforsch.53a977–82

    Jefimenko O D 1998 On the experimental proofs of relativistic length contraction and time dilationZ. Naturforsch.53a977–82

  43. [43]

    Redˇ zi´ c D V 2015 Subtleties of the clock retardationEur. J. Phys.36, 065035

  44. [44]

    Petrov V A 2023 Relativity theory: genesis and completionPhys. Part. Nuclei54977–83

  45. [45]

    Budde E A 1880 Das Clausius’sche Gesetz und die Bewegung der Erde im RaumeAnn. Phys. 10553–60 Budde E A 1881 Das Clausius’sche Gesetz und die Bewegung der Erde im Raume, IIAnn. Phys.12, 644–7

  46. [46]

    FitzGerald G F 1882 On electromagnetic effects due to the motion of the EarthTrans. R. Dublin Soc.1319–24

  47. [47]

    Lorentz H A 1895Versuch einer Theorie der electrischen und optischen Erscheinungen in bewegten K¨ orpern(Leiden: Brill)

  48. [48]

    O’Rahilly A 1965Electromagnetic Theoryvol 2 (New York: Dover)

  49. [49]

    Miller A I 1981Albert Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity: Emergence (1905) and Early Interpretation (1905-1911)(Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley)

  50. [50]

    Redˇ zi´ c D V 2014 Force exerted by a moving electric current on a stationary or co-moving charge: Maxwell’s theory versus relativistic electrodynamicsEur.J.Phys.35045011 9