Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 56 references

Teaching special relativity in elementary physics or upper high school courses

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Special relativity can be taught in high school as the answer to Newtonian infinities, using exchanges of light flashes of null duration to derive time dilation, length contraction, Doppler effect, relativity of simultaneity, and Lorentz…

desk verdict Sound derivations and a useful new packaging of Bondi's method, but the teaching-effectiveness claim is only pilot-level and the trials did not cover the full sequence. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.07872 v1 pith:2LO23PF6 submitted 2025-06-09 physics.ed-ph

Maria Grazia Blumetti , Biagio Buonaura , Giuseppe Giuliani , Marco Litterio This is my paper
classification physics.ed-ph PACS 01.40.-d03.30.+p
keywords specialrelativityteachinglight-flashthoughtexperimentsk-factormethodtimedilationlengthcontractionofsimultaneityDopplereffectLorentztransformations
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper tries to establish a teaching route: special relativity need not wait for advanced mathematics. It claims that presenting relativity as the solution to the infinities of Newtonian uniformly accelerated motion gives students a compelling reason to accept a universal speed limit. Then, thought experiments with the exchange of light flashes of null duration between two inertial frames can derive the main kinematic effects with only simple algebra. If correct, this sequence gives teachers a concrete, low-mathematical-barrier way to bring special relativity into elementary physics and upper high school courses.

What carries the argument

The central device is the k-factor (or k-calculus) method: two inertial clocks in relative motion exchange light flashes of null duration, and homogeneity and isotropy force the received time interval to be T' = kT, with the return interval $k^{2}$ T. Comparing the flash round-trip with the relative motion of the clocks gives $k^{2}$ = (1 + V/c)/(1 - V/c), hence k = Gamma(1 + V/c), and Gamma = 1/$\sqrt$(1 - $V^{2}$/$c^{2}$) emerges as the time dilation factor. From this single factor the paper derives the Doppler formulas, length contraction, the Lorentz transformations, and the relativity of simultaneity, all through algebra that introductory students can follow.

What would settle it

A controlled classroom experiment: two comparable groups, same teacher hours, one taught with this light-flash sequence and the other with a standard textbook treatment, then a standardized test on time dilation, length contraction, simultaneity, and Lorentz transformations. If the light-flash group does not at least match the standard group on the test, the claim that this sequence is a suitable teaching tool is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that the k-factor method—exchanging light flashes of null duration between two ideal clocks in relative motion—lets students derive time dilation, length contraction, the relativistic Doppler effect, relativity of simultaneity, and the Lorentz transformations using only homogeneous time, homogeneous and isotropic space, the relativity principle, and the constancy of light speed. The same approach frames special relativity as the cure for the infinite velocity and infinite kinetic energy that Newtonian uniformly accelerated motion produces. The paper further shows that treating the Doppler effect as photon emission or absorption with energy and linear momentum conservation brings out the rest energy $mc^{2}$, and that experimental evidence such as time-dilation measurements, muon lifetimes, and around-the-world atomic clock flights can be presented at this level.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the proposed light-flash sequence actually helps students learn special relativity, a claim that currently rests on only two small classroom trials with no control group and no standardized assessment.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • High-school students can reach the Lorentz transformations through simple algebra on light-flash timings, without calculus or four-vectors.
  • Special relativity appears as the fix for a genuine Newtonian failure—infinite velocity and energy under a constant force—giving students a concrete reason to accept a universal speed limit.
  • The Doppler effect for light can be taught as a conservation-law problem in photon emission and absorption, and the same calculation exposes the rest energy mc^2.
  • Experimental corroborations (Doppler-shift time dilation, muon lifetimes, circumnavigating atomic clocks) can be presented at this level, including the gravitational correction to clock periods.
  • Teachers can choose subsets of the material, so the approach adapts to different curricula and student backgrounds.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If this teaching sequence proves effective, special relativity could be introduced before electromagnetic waves are covered, since the derivation needs only the constancy of light speed, not Maxwell's equations.
  • A controlled comparison between this light-flash method and Minkowski-diagram approaches would test which route better cures the documented simultaneity misconception; the paper's two small trials do not settle that.
  • The same k-factor algebra could naturally extend to relativistic velocity addition or to a later derivation of the relativistic energy-momentum relation, because the paper already uses photon momentum conservation to expose mc^2.
  • The authors' own call for a wider study with standardized evaluation implies the immediate next step is a multi-class controlled trial, not adoption as proven curriculum.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a teaching approach to special relativity for high school and introductory university courses. It motivates the theory through the apparent infinities of Newtonian uniformly accelerated motion, then uses Bondi-style k-calculus thought experiments, in which null-duration light flashes are exchanged between two inertial observers, to derive time dilation, length contraction, the Doppler effect, relativity of simultaneity, and the Lorentz transformations. It further discusses experimental confirmations (Ives-Stilwell, muon lifetime, Hafele-Keating), derives the photon Doppler formula and the appearance of mc^2 from conservation laws, and reports two small classroom trials conducted by two of the authors. The kinematic and dynamical derivations are internally consistent and standard; the main weakness is that the pedagogical claim of suitability rests on two short, uncontrolled pilot trials that did not implement the full proposed sequence.

Significance. If the proposed light-flash sequence is teachable, it would offer a valuable self-contained, algebra-based route to the main kinematic effects of special relativity, avoiding the spacetime-diagram formalism that is often considered too abstract for this level. The photon-based treatment of the Doppler effect and the emergence of mc^2 from a Newtonian absorption calculation are attractive and are backed by correct physics. The paper is also honest in conceding that its classroom evidence is preliminary. However, at present the significance is limited: the central claim that the sequence is suitable for the target population is not established by the reported trials, which are small, uncontrolled, author-led, and incomplete relative to the full sequence. The paper is therefore best viewed as a promising teaching proposal whose empirical validation remains to be supplied.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 6, first trial] The claim that the light-flash approach 'is suitable' is not supported by the reported ten-hour author-led trial, which had no control group, no standardized assessment, and, by the authors' own description, gave the Lorentz transformations without proof. The manuscript should either report a trial that implements the full derivation chain (Sections 4.1-4.5) with a defined learning assessment, or explicitly restrict the conclusion to a feasibility pilot for the specific sub-topics actually taught.
  2. [Section 6, second trial] This eleven-hour trial concentrated on (x,ct) plane representations and on inertial versus non-inertial frames; it did not test the k-factor derivation of time dilation, length contraction, or the Lorentz transformations that form the core of the proposal. As a result, the paper's statement that thought experiments with light flashes allow us to derive all the kinematic effects is not backed by any classroom evidence for those derivations. The paper should clearly state which components of the proposal have been piloted and which remain hypothetical.
  3. [Section 6 and abstract] The abstract and Section 6 acknowledge that the preliminary tests need 'a wider one, including standard evaluation procedures of students' learning.' This concession is appropriate, but it also means the central pedagogical claim is currently underevidenced. The authors should either add a more rigorous pilot (pre/post concept inventory, a comparison group or at least clear learning criteria, and full sequence coverage) or change the framing of the paper from a demonstrated teaching tool to a proposal with anecdotal feasibility evidence.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 4.1, page 11] The text refers to the 'κ factor' although the symbol used throughout the derivation is k; please unify the notation to avoid confusion with the κ of Section 6.
  2. [Figure 5] The figure contains a garbled label ('O/UNIa78c'); please redraw the figure.
  3. [Throughout] Several instances of Italian 'e' appear in place of 'and' (e.g., Section 3.2 'e v′x = 0' and Figure 8 caption 'Red e Blue'); a careful proofread is needed.
  4. [Section 6] The GeoGebra simulation links appear as placeholders ('here'); these should be replaced with actual URLs or provided as supplementary material.
  5. [Section 5.1, Eq. (87)] The emission formula is stated without derivation; since the paper aims at teachers, a short derivation outline or a precise pointer to the steps in Ref. [26] would make the result self-contained.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the Bondi-style light-flash derivations are self-contained, and the few self-citations are peripheral.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation chain (Sections 4.1–4.6) is self-contained. The k-factor is not fitted to any output; it is determined from the constancy of c, the relative-velocity geometry (Eqs. 19–26), isotropy, and the relativity principle. Time dilation (Eq. 34), Doppler (Eqs. 35–39), length contraction (Eq. 44), Lorentz transformations (Eqs. 51–52), and simultaneity (Eq. 64) are algebraic consequences of this single parameter, not restatements of the postulates. The photon Doppler formula (Eq. 87) is introduced with 'It turns out that' and nearby references include the authors' own work ([26,42,43,44]), but the conservation equations (84–86) are stated and the formula is a standard consequence of those equations plus relativistic energy-momentum; it is not used to derive the kinematic effects. The E=mc^2 section explicitly disclaims a full derivation ('in high school, it is not possible to derive...') and only exhibits the mc^2 term emerging from photon momentum, so no result is renamed as a prediction. The classroom tests in Section 6 are small and author-led, but that is an evidential limitation, not circular reasoning. Thus no load-bearing circular step is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new particles, forces, or conserved quantities. It relies on standard postulates and idealizations of special relativity, plus imported relativistic dynamics formulas that are stated without classroom-level derivation. No free parameters are fitted to data; the parameters that appear (Delta E, m, R, Omega, v) are physical inputs from the experimental context.

assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption An ideal clock's fundamental period is unaffected by any physical interaction (Section 2).
    Underpins the comparison of clocks in different inertial frames and the statement that a moving clock does not 'run slower' in a naive sense; all derivations assume ideal clocks.
  • domain assumption The four postulates: homogeneity of time, homogeneity and isotropy of space, relativity principle, and constancy of the speed of light in vacuum (Section 4).
    These are the starting point for all kinematic derivations; no derivation within the paper proves them.
  • domain assumption Operative definition of inertial frames: a reference system is inertial if its measured acceleration is zero (Section 3).
    Used to classify frames and to identify a free-falling laboratory as locally inertial.
  • domain assumption Weak equivalence principle, gravitational mass equals inertial mass (Section 3.1).
    Inferred from accelerometer behavior and used in the gravitational red shift derivation in Appendix C.
  • domain assumption Relativistic dynamics equations E = gamma mc^2, p = gamma mv, F = d(m gamma v)/dt are assumed without proof (Sections 3.2, 5.1).
    The photon Doppler derivation and the constant-force motion analysis use these formulas; the paper states that a full derivation is beyond high school.
  • domain assumption Light flashes are of null duration and are reflected instantaneously (Section 4).
    The k-method and Lorentz transformation derivations assume instantaneous emission and reflection, an idealization standard in relativity pedagogy.
  • domain assumption The atom-photon absorption is treated with Newtonian kinetic energy for the atom and relativistic photon momentum Eph/c (Section 5.2).
    This mixed treatment is used to bring out the mc^2 term; it is valid only for v much less than c and Delta E much less than mc^2.
  • domain assumption The rest energy of an atom in Earth's gravitational field is E0(r) = Mc^2 + (mc^2 + Delta E_infinity) - (GM/r)(m + Delta E_infinity/c^2) (Appendix C).
    This Newtonian-potential formula, justified by the equivalence principle, is the basis for the gravitational red shift and the Hafele-Keating calculation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Teaching special relativity in elementary physics or upper high school courses." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2LO23PF6

@misc{pith2026250607872,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Teaching special relativity in elementary physics or upper high school courses},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2LO23PF6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.07872}
}
read the original abstract

This paper aims to provide teachers with a tool to teach the essential features of special relativity, considering the students' difficulties highlighted by numerous studies. Our proposal presents special relativity as the solution to the troubles of Newtonian dynamics, exemplified by the infinities of Newtonian uniformly accelerated motion. The paper's main section uses thought experiments with the exchange of flashes of light of null duration between two inertial reference frames to derive the kinematics effect of special relativity (time dilation, length contraction, Doppler effect, relativity of simultaneity, and Lorentz transformations). Simulations illustrate the results of the simple calculations. The discussion of experimental corroborations of the kinematics effects of special relativity complements the theoretical treatments. The Doppler effect, typically treated within the wave description of light, is addressed as an application of energy and linear momentum conservation during the emission or absorption of a photon by an atom (or a nucleus). When opportune, the paper suggests implementing teaching practices in the topics developed for teachers. Two of us' preliminary tests in the classroom ask for a wider one, including standard evaluation procedures of students' learning.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.07872 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Working principle of an accelerometer. See the text. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Velocity of a particle under a constant force according to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Acceleration of a particle under a constant force. We hav [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (10 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: See the text. 4.1 The ‘k’ method We consider two inertial frames, denoted as K and K′ . These frames are in relative motion, moving away from each other along the x ≡ x ′ axis with a positive relative velocity V . Let O and O′ be the origins of K and K′ . O and O′ are …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The clock O′ and the stick OB approach in relative, head-on inertial motion with relative velocity V . Both reference frames consider the relative velocity V as positive in their calculations. This phenomenon occurs at the same point O′ . Therefore, its duration is the…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Thought experiment for deriving Lorentz transformatio [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: A light flash sent by O′ along the y ′ axis is reflected by the mirror M′ . The dashed lines represent the flash’s path according to O. O′ 1 , O′ 2 , O′ 3 are the successive positions of O′ in the reference frame of O. We have: O′ 1O′ 2 = O′ 2O′ 3 = V ∆t/2, where ∆t is…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The train A ′B ′ of proper length l0 is in inertial motion with velocity V along the positive direction of the x ≡ x ′ axis. The train is coming from negative values of x. When O ′ (center of the train) meets O (center of the station’s platform), their clocks are synch…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Graphic representation in the plane (x, ct) of the thought experiment of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Equatorial circumference seen by the North Pole. The p [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Emission of a photon by an atom or nucleus [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Nucleon average binding energy as a function of the mass [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_12.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: O ′ is the center of a train A ′B ′ (not shown in the figure), which is moving with velocity V along the positive direction of the axis x ≡ x ′ . The train is coming from the negative values of x. A and B are the extreme points of the station’s platform, O its center,…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 56 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Einstein A 1905 Zur Electrodynamik bewegter K¨ orper Ann. Phys. 17 891 - 921 Engl. transl. in The collected papers of Albert Einstein vol 2 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press) 140 - 171

    work page 1905

  2. [2]

    Einstein A 1905 ¨Uber einen Erzeugung und Verwandlung des Lichtes betreffenden h euristichen Gesichtpunkt Ann. Phys. 17 132 Engl. transl. in The collected papers of Albert Einstein vol 2 (Princeton, Princeton University Press) 86

    work page 1905

  3. [3]

    Alstein P, Krijtenburg-Lewerissa K, and van Joolingen W, 2021, T eaching and learning special relativity theory in secondary and lower undergraduate education: A literature revie w, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. , 17 023101

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    Shabajee P and Postlethwaite K, 2000, What happened to moder n physics?, School Science Review , 81, 51-56

    work page 2000

  5. [5]

    Kaur T et al., 2020, Determining the Intelligibility of Einsteinian Conce pts with Middle School Students, Res. Sci. Ed., 50 2505-2532

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    Baltic Sci

    Tanel Z, 2014, Student difficulties in solving problems concerning s pecial relativity and possible reasons for these difficulties, J. Baltic Sci. Educ. 13, 573

    work page 2014

  7. [7]

    Barve J S, and Kumar A, 1996, Alternative concep tions in Galilean relativity: Inertial and non- inertial observers, Int

    Ramadas J, S. Barve J S, and Kumar A, 1996, Alternative concep tions in Galilean relativity: Inertial and non- inertial observers, Int. J. Sci. Educ . 18, 615

    work page 1996

  8. [8]

    Villani A and Pacca J L, 1987, Students’ spontaneous ideas abou t the speed of light, Int. J. Sci. Educ , 9, 55

    work page 1987

Show all 56 references
  1. [9]

    Kamphorst F, Vollebregt M.J, Savelsbergh E R and van Joolingen W R , 2019, Students’ preinstructional reasoning with the speed of light in relativistic situations, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res . 15, 020123

    2019

  2. [10]

    Sel¸ cuk G S, 2011, Addressing pre-service teachers’ unders tandings and difficulties with some core concepts in the special theory of relativity, Eur. J. Phys , 32, 1

    2011

  3. [11]

    Aslanides J S and Savage C M, 2013, Relativity concept inventory : Development, analysis, and results, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res , 9, 010118

    2013

  4. [12]

    Scherr R E, Shaffer P S, and Vokos S, 2001, Student understa nding of time in special relativity: Simultaneity and reference frames, Am. J. Phys ., 69, S24

    2001

  5. [13]

    DiSalle R, 2020, Space and Time: Inertial Frames, Stanford Enciclopedia of Phylosophy

    2020

  6. [14]

    (Wiley, Hoboken, NJ)

    Halliday D, Resnick R and Walker J, 2014, Fundamentals of Physics , X ed. (Wiley, Hoboken, NJ)

    2014

  7. [15]

    Carroll B V, 2019, The delicate dance of orbital rendezvous, Am. J. Phys. , 87, 627-637 . 32

    2019

  8. [16]

    Besson U, 2021, Tidal effects in a spacecraft, Am. J. Phys. , 89, 909-915

    2021

  9. [17]

    Galilei G 1914 Discorsi e dimostrazioni matematiche intorno a due nuove scienze Engl. transl. by Crew H and De Salvo A, (The McMillan Company: New York) here

    1914

  10. [18]

    Galilei G 1638 Discorsi e dimostrazioni matematiche intorno a due nuove scienze, here

  11. [19]

    Buonaura B and Giuliani G, 2023, Teaching Electromagnetism in ele mentary physics or upper high school courses, Gior. Fis. , LXIV, 341

    2023

  12. [20]

    Bertozzi W, 1964, Speed and Kinetic Energy of Relativistic Elect rons, Am. J. Phys. , 32, 551

    1964

  13. [21]

    Einstein A, 1905, Ist die Tr¨ agheit eines K¨ orpers von seinem En ergieinhalt abh¨ angig?,Ann. Phys. 18, 639; Engl. transl. in The collected papers of Albert Einstein vol 2 (Princeton, Princeton University Press) 172

    1905

  14. [22]

    Bondi H 1980 Relativity and common sense: a new approach to Einstein (Dover, New York)

    1980

  15. [23]

    Ugarov V A, 1979, Special Theory of Relativity, (Mir Publishers: Moscow); online here

    1979

  16. [24]

    Dimitriadi K and Halkia K, 2012, Secondary students’ understa nding of basic ideas of special relativity, Int. J. Sci. Educ ., 34, 2565

    2012

  17. [25]

    Frankl D, 1984, General treatment of the doppler effect in sp ecial relativity, Am. J. Phys , 52, 374

    1984

  18. [26]

    Buonaura B and Giuliani G, 2016, Wave and photon descriptions o f light: historical highlights, epistemological aspects and teaching practices, Eur. J. Phys. , 37, 055303 (35pp)

    2016

  19. [27]

    Bachman R A, 1982, Relativistic acoustic Doppler effect, Am. J. Phys. , 50, 816-818

    1982

  20. [28]

    Einstein A and Infeld L, 1966, The Evolution of Physics , (Simon&Schuster, New York)

    1966

  21. [29]

    Einstein A, 1921, Relativity - The special and the general Theory , (Harry Holt & Company, New York), online here

    1921

  22. [30]

    Wortel S, Malin S and Semon M, 2007, Two examples of circular mot ion for introductory courses in relativity, Am. J. Phys. 75 1123

    2007

  23. [31]

    Ives H E and Stilwell G R, 1938, An experimental study of the rat e of a moving atomic clock, J. Opt. Soc. Am. , 28 215

    1938

  24. [32]

    Botermann B, et al., 2014, Test of Time Dilation Using Stored Li+ Ions as Clocks at Relativistic Speed, Phys. Rev. Lett., 113, 120405

    2014

  25. [33]

    Bailey J, et al., 1977, Measurements of relativistic time dilation for positive and negative muons in a circular orbit, Nature 268 301

    1977

  26. [34]

    XXXIII Ann

    Alley C 1979 Relativity and clocks Proc. XXXIII Ann. Symp. on Frequency Control 4

    1979

  27. [35]

    Hafele J C, 1972, Relativistic Time for Terrestrial Circumnavigat ions, Am. J. Phys. , 40 81

    1972

  28. [36]

    Hafele J C and Keating R E, 1972, Around-the-World Atomic Clock s: Observed Relativistic Time Gains, Science, 177 168

    1972

  29. [37]

    Pound R V an Rebka jr G A, 1960, Apparent weight of photons, Phys. Rev. Lett. , 4 337

    1960

  30. [38]

    Ashby N, 2002, Relativity and the Global Positioning System, Physics Today, 55, 41-47

    2002

  31. [39]

    Schr¨ odinger E 1922 Dopplerprinzip und bohrsche frequenzbe dingung Phys. Zeits. 23 301

    1922

  32. [40]

    Rev , 54 90

    Davisson C J, 1938, The theory of the transverse Doppler effe ct, Phys. Rev , 54 90

    1938

  33. [41]

    Red˘ zi´ c D, 1990, The Doppler effect and conservation laws revisited, Am. J. Phys. , 58, 1205

    1990

  34. [42]

    Giuliani G, 2013, Experiment and theory: the case of the Dopple r effect for photons, Eur. J. Phys. , 34,1035-1047

    2013

  35. [43]

    Giuliani G, 2014, On the Doppler effect for photons in rotating sy stems, Eur. J. Phys. , 35, 025015 (16pp) . 33

    2014

  36. [44]

    Giuliani G, 2015, Conservation laws and laser cooling of atoms, Eur. J. Phys. , 36, 065008 (19pp)

    2015

  37. [45]

    Jacques V, Wu E, Toury T, Treussart F, Aspect A, Grangier P a nd Roch J F 2005 Single - photon wavefront- splitting interference Eur. Phys. J. D 35 561

    2005

  38. [46]

    Rose A, 1953, Quantum and Noise Limitations of the Visual Proce ss Josa 43 715

    1953

  39. [47]

    Giuliani G, 2019, Elettromagnetismo, relativit` a, quanti - Fisica, storia, epistemologia (Pavia: Pavia University Press)

    2019

  40. [48]

    Fermi E, 1923, Le masse nella teoria della relativit` a in: Kopff A, ed ., I fondamenti della relativit` a einsteniana (Hoepli, Milano), online here

    1923

  41. [49]

    Cattaneo C, 1958, Sui postulati comuni alla cinematica classica e alla cinematica relativistica, Rendiconti dell’Accademia dei Lincei , 24 527, online here

    1958

  42. [50]

    Giuliani G and Bonizzoni I, 2004, Lineamenti di elettromagnetismo , (La Goliardica Pavese, Pavia); online here

    2004

  43. [51]

    Pal P B, 2003, Nothing but relativity, Eur. J. Phys. , 24, 315

    2003

  44. [52]

    Taylor E F and Wheeler J A, 1992, Spacetime Physics - Introduction to Special Relativity , 2 ed., (W. H. Freeman and Company, New York)

    1992

  45. [53]

    De Ambrosis A and Levrini O, 2010, How physics teachers appro ach innovation: An empirical study for recon- structing the appropriation path in the case of special relativity, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res , 6, 020107

    2010

  46. [54]

    Ense˜ nanza Fis., 27, 323

    Cayul E and Arriassecq I, 2015, Utilizaci´ on de los diagramas de M inkowski para la ense˜ nanza de la Teoria Especial de la Relatividad en la escuela secundaria, Rev. Ense˜ nanza Fis., 27, 323

    2015

  47. [55]

    Educ., 57, 045002

    Leonardi A M et al., 2022, A teaching proposal for the didactics of Special Relativity: the spacetime globe, Phys. Educ., 57, 045002

    2022

  48. [56]

    Fabri E, 2005, Insegnare relativit` a nel XXI secolo, La fisica nella Scuola - Quaderno 16 . 34

    2005

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.