Visar inlägg med etikett Michelson-Morley. Visa alla inlägg
Visar inlägg med etikett Michelson-Morley. Visa alla inlägg

torsdag 8 augusti 2019

Why the Speed of Light Can Be Independent of Translation of Source-Receiver

To see that it is most natural that the speed of light between a source and receiver is independent of translation with constant velocity of both source and receiver, as if the "aether" was moving along with the same velocity, consider the following mechanical analog: 

Connect a source to a receiver by waves carried by a stretched rope with the source at one end and the receiver at the other end, and assume that the whole system source-rope-receiver is subject to a translation with constant velocity. We would then make the observation that the speed of propagation of the waves from source to receiver through the rope would be independent of the translation. 

This is because the rope as the medium for wave propagation moves along with the source/receiver. The analog would be an "aether" as an immaterial medium for propagation of light waves, which moves along with the source/receiver. The idea is that the light source and receiver establishes a connection like a rope which is moving along with the source/receiver.  This would be compatible with the null result of the Michelson-Morely experiment.

There is thus no common background aether, but a multitude of aethers connecting and moving along with a multitude of sources/receivers.  The immaterial quality of aethers would then allow a multitude without conflict. This is the idea of Many-Minds Relativity. Think of that.

PS If the source and receiver move with respect to each other they could still share a common aether (connected to either source or receiver) with still  he same speed of light, while light frequencies would be subject to Doppler effects. 


onsdag 19 februari 2014

Physics Illusion 3: Explanation of Michelson-Morley Null Result


In the previous post we considered a system of two distant resonators E and R connected by electromagnetic waves in a vacuum between the resonators, which can take the following form
  • E = radio mast - vacuum - R = radio receiver
  • E = mobile phone mast - vacuum -  R = mobile phone
  • E = radio star - vacuum - R = radio telescope
  • E = visible star - vaccum - R = telescope/eye.  
The velocity of the  E-vacuum-R system is here irrelevant as the system acts like one unity with E and R being connected by standing waves carried by an immaterial vacuum, which can be assumed to "move along with" E and R. 

The Michelson-Morely experiment was set up to detect possible motion of the Earth through an "ether medium" carrying electromagnetic waves, by comparing the travel time of light signals in two perpendicular directions using a system of mirrors: 


But no motion could be detected as if the "ether medium" was "dragged along" by the Earth. This was viewed as a contradiction to classical electromagnetics described by Maxwell's equations. To handle the illusion of contradiction, relativity theory was developed seeking to explain the Michelson-Morely null result by entirely new phenomena of length contraction and time dilation, which sent modern physics into a nightmare of mysteries.

However, it is possible to explain the Michelson-Morley null result without resort to mysteries of relativity: If we consider each pair of mirrors as a rigid system connected by standing electromagnetic waves in a vaccuum, then the orientation and velocity of the system will not affect the inner working of the system. The system acts like a clock ticking at the same rate independent of orientation and velocity. 

The key is that electromagnetic waves are carried by a vacuum which by its immaterial nature can be viewed to move along with the pair of mirrors. The immaterial nature makes it possible to envision many different vacuui. We cannot eat the same piece of food, but we can share the same immaterial ideas with any number of people.  

This is developed further in Many-Minds Relativity based on the principle that each observer is fixed to the origin of a Euclidean coordinate and relies on Maxwell's equations in this coordinate as a representation of the vacuum carrying electromagnetic waves. Different observers moving with respect to each other thereby use different coordinate systems or vacuui. Different observers will then have the same experiences inside their respective systems as a reflection of the Michelson-Morley null result. Different observers will be able fully agree about certain observations such as Michelson-Morley and the speed of light, but not fully about all observations. Full coordination is not possible but nor necessary. 

Einstein's special relativity seeks to establish full coordination by a dicate, but as any dictate against natural order, it is destructive.

Note that the resonators communicating by electromagnetic waves in a vaccum, connects to the New View of Motion under Gravitation without Classical Mysteries, where large scale material motion is an illusion created by real small scale circular wave motion. Energy is thus transferred from one resonator to the other by transversal electromagnetic wave motion in a vaccum, but there is no stream of "particles as packets of energy" through the vacuum connecting the resonators.

onsdag 14 september 2011

Many-Minds Explanation of Michelson-Morley Null Result


Einstein's 1905 special theory of relativity came out from a necessity to explain the null result of the 1887 Michelson-Morley experiment designed to detect the motion of the Earth through a luminiferous aether as a space-filling medium carrying electromagnetic waves.

In the experiment, light was reflected along the two perpendicular arms of an interferometer and it was expected that a phase or fringe shift would occur if there was an aether medium through which the Earth was plowing on its lonely journey around the Sun. But no fringe shift was detected as an observation of a negation to the following statement:
  • There is a unique aether medium carrying electromagnetics waves.
Logic says that the negation takes the form
  • (i) there is no aether whatsoever or (ii) there are more than one different aethers.
Einstein, who was not trained in logic, concluded that the negation was (i), and in the absence of any medium he was led into his special theory with space and time being strangely distorted by uniform motion. Einstein thus explained the null result by simply eliminating any form of aether: If there was no aether, no experiment seeking to detect motion through the aether could be meaningful. Einstein dismissed the Michelson-Morley experiment by simply denying it, and thus did not explain the null result.

In Many-Minds Relativity I explore instead (ii), which offers the following explanation of the Michelson-Morley null result:

Each arm of the interferometer has an aether carrying electromagnetic waves described by Maxwell's equations in a coordinate system tied to the arm. Since there are two arms, there are two coordinate systems and thus two aethers. Maxwell's equations take the same form in both systems, and because there is no way to distinguish one coordinate system from the other, there will be no fringe shift.

An aether in many-minds relativity can be seen as a standard Euclidean coordinate system in which electromagnetic waves propagate according to Maxwell's equations. An observer is assumed to be tied to rest in his coordinate system. Two observers moving with respect to each other thus will use different coordinate systems and thus different aethers. Many-minds relativity explores to what degree different observers moving with respect to each other, can agree in their observations.

Note that since an aether is a non-material medium, like a coordinate system, there is no inherent contradiction in the idea of many aethers, or many minds with different aethers. There is no contradiction in two observers using two different coordinate systems. There is only a contradiction of two different full owners of the same material house.

The punchline is that Einstein did not explain the Michelson-Morley null result, just made it devoid of meaning, while many-minds relativity offers an explanation. What do you think is most constructive, to claim something is meaningless or to carefully explain it in scientific rational terms?

PS The idea of many aethers was suggested by Ebenezer Cunningham, but did not survive under Einstein's simplistic no-aether dogmatism. Maybe it is now time for a revival...in fact the late Einstein reintroduced the aether eliminated by the young one.

This post was stimulated by reading Questioning Einstein, Is Relativity Necessary? by Tom Bethell. No relativity is neither necessary nor sufficient...

There is a connection to my new derivation of Planck's radiation law describing the radiative heat exchange between two (black) bodies carried by electromagnetic waves described by Maxwell's equations in a coordinate system fixed to the bodies, assuming the bodies are moving with the same velocity.