Jump to content

Michelson Morley experiment


ravell
 Share

Recommended Posts

“The negative result of the Michelson–Morley experiment is generally considered to be the strong evidence against the aether theory, and initiated a line of research that eventually led to special relativity, which rules out a stationary aether. The experiment has been referred to as "the moving-off point for the theoretical aspects of the Second Scientific Revolution".

Michelson–Morley type experiments have been repeated many times with steadily increasing sensitivity and confirmed the absence of any aether wind .“Michelson–Morley type experiments form one of the fundamental tests of special relativity theory.”

 

In connection with the foregoing, and in light of the calculations presented in the link: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/26262175/VerificationTheoryRelativity.xlsx clearly proving that the negative results of the Michelson- Morley experiment are due to the Doppler effect, and not from the Lorentz contraction, the question arises where the truth lies? Does the stationary aether in fact exist, contrary to current views, or whether it does not exist?

 

As others already mentioned, there is not Doppler effect involved in MMX. MMX type experiments did not support the ether theory of that time, which was an inconsistent mixture of Maxwell's theory and Newton's mechanics.

Inversely MMX type experiments cannot tell us that an ether does not exist - compare https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent .

Note that this fallacy of the converse is often encountered, even in scientific discussions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dropbox on March 15, 2017 changed the current URL address of the VETER program, to verify the theory of relativity, to the new address: https://www.dropbox.com/s/9ljwu5wwsi0v9up/VerificationTheoryRelativity.xlsx?dl=0.

 

 

There is no Doppler effect in Michelson-Morley. The source of light and the receiver move as one single body, so , there is no relative motion between them. Hence, no Doppler.

 

In the light of the calculations presented on the link; https://www.dropbox.com/s/9ljwu5wwsi0v9up/VerificationTheoryRelativity.xlsx?dl=0.

clearly demonstrating that the zero results of the MM experiment and other similar experiments are unambiguously derived from the Doppler effect, and not from the controversial Lorentz shortening, the claim that the MM experiment does not have Doppler effect is fundamentally wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dropbox on March 15, 2017 changed the current URL address of the VETER program, to verify the theory of relativity, to the new address: https://www.dropbox.com/s/9ljwu5wwsi0v9up/VerificationTheoryRelativity.xlsx?dl=0.

 

 

 

In the light of the calculations presented on the link; https://www.dropbox.com/s/9ljwu5wwsi0v9up/VerificationTheoryRelativity.xlsx?dl=0.

clearly demonstrating that the zero results of the MM experiment and other similar experiments are unambiguously derived from the Doppler effect, and not from the controversial Lorentz shortening, the claim that the MM experiment does not have Doppler effect is fundamentally wrong.

This is a mainstream forum, not one for pushing crackpot theories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the claim that the MM experiment does not have Doppler effect is fundamentally wrong.

 

 

As there is nothing moving, how can it be Doppler effect?

Dropbox on March 15, 2017 changed the current URL address of the VETER program, to verify the theory of relativity, to the new address:

 

The address may have changed, but it is still nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[...]

 

In the light of the calculations presented on the link; https://www.dropbox.com/s/9ljwu5wwsi0v9up/VerificationTheoryRelativity.xlsx?dl=0.

clearly demonstrating that the zero results of the MM experiment and other similar experiments are unambiguously derived from the Doppler effect, and not from the controversial Lorentz shortening, the claim that the MM experiment does not have Doppler effect is fundamentally wrong.

 

It may be useful to clarify the other answers. Basically, the Doppler effect is the change in frequency of a wave for a detector that is moving relative to the source - see for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_effect

 

Addendum: that article ignores acceleration effects - a Doppler effect can be produced when the system as a whole accelerates.

 

In MMX, source and detector are at rest with respect to each other; effects of acceleration are assumed to be negligible. MMX has therefore no significant Doppler effect; your statement here above is fundamentally wrong.

Note that you can of course apply Doppler calculations for theoretical analysis, for example by calculating the frequency in the solar rest frame upon light emission, and then again back to the instrument's rest frame upon detection (I don't know if you did, as the link doesn't work for me). A correct calculation must result in zero frequency shift, as the second transformation is the inverse of the first. That's the most basic consideration of Doppler: no wave cycles crests are created or destroyed "in flight".

Edited by Tim88
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It may be useful to clarify the other answers. Basically, the Doppler effect is the change in frequency of a wave for a detector that is moving relative to the source - see for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_effect

 

Addendum: that article ignores acceleration effects - a Doppler effect can be produced when the system as a whole accelerates.

 

In MMX, source and detector are at rest with respect to each other; effects of acceleration are assumed to be negligible. MMX has therefore no significant Doppler effect; your statement here above is fundamentally wrong.

Note that you can of course apply Doppler calculations for theoretical analysis, for example by calculating the frequency in the solar rest frame upon light emission, and then again back to the instrument's rest frame upon detection (I don't know if you did, as the link doesn't work for me). A correct calculation must result in zero frequency shift, as the second transformation is the inverse of the first. That's the most basic consideration of Doppler: no wave cycles crests are created or destroyed "in flight".

Doppler effect can only exist in the case of relative motion between source and detector, in MMX the source and the detector are at the SAME location. So, there is no way that there is any Doppler in MMX, the acceleration is irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doppler effect can only exist in the case of relative motion between source and detector, in MMX the source and the detector are at the SAME location. So, there is no way that there is any Doppler in MMX, the acceleration is irrelevant.

Nonsense - what matters is the velocity at time of emission compared with the velocity at time of detection, and in case of acceleration there IS relative motion between those events. As a matter of fact, GR originated from a study of the Doppler effect from acceleration. But in MMX acceleration is negligible; during a measurement the velocity is assumed to be constant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nonsense - what matters is the velocity at time of emission compared with the velocity at time of detection, and in case of acceleration there IS relative motion between those events.

Actually, this is nullified by TWO reasons:

 

1. In MMX the source ant the receiver are in the same place, as explained.

2. Even if you assumed that the source and the mirror have different velocities, their distance remains constant, hence no Doppler effect . You may want to study the Mossbauer experiment where the source and receptor are placed diametrically opposite (hence they have different velocities), yet there is absolutely no Doppler effect.

 

 

 

As a matter of fact, GR originated from a study of the Doppler effect from acceleration. But in MMX acceleration is negligible; during a measurement the velocity is assumed to be constant.

 

You are co-mingling Doppler with gravitational redshift. These are different effects.

Edited by zztop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, this is nullified by TWO reasons:

 

1. In MMX the source ant the receiver are in the same place, as explained.

2. Even if you assumed that the source and the mirror have different velocities, their distance remains constant, hence no Doppler effect . You may want to study the Mossbauer experiment where the source and receptor are placed diametrically opposite (hence they have different velocities), yet there is absolutely no Doppler effect.

 

You are co-mingling Doppler with gravitational redshift. These are different effects.

 

OOPS I wasn't co-mingling anything and we had a mutual misunderstanding about Doppler, but you are right that I overlooked the main reason why there is no Doppler effect involved in MMX. :doh:

As a matter of fact, MMX doesn't even compare the frequency of the emitter with the frequency of the detector.

Edited by Tim88
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

OOPS I wasn't co-mingling anything and we had a mutual misunderstanding about Doppler, but you are right that I overlooked the main reason why there is no Doppler effect involved in MMX. :doh:

As a matter of fact, MMX doesn't even compare the frequency of the emitter with the frequency of the detector.

For good reason, the frequencies are equal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Doppler effect can only exist in the case of relative motion between source and detector, in MMX the source and the detector are at the SAME location. So, there is no way that there is any Doppler in MMX, the acceleration is irrelevant.

Due to the Doppler effect, the light waves in the arms of MM interferometer, generated by the light source, are shortened in the direction of the source movement and elongated in the opposite direction.

These speed-dependent changes of the wavelengths in the arms of the interferometer, give in effect the null results of the MM experiment, and this is only when the light source and mirrors are not moving relative to each other.

This is in my opinion, clearly shown in the previously given link:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/9ljwu5wwsi0v9up/VerificationTheoryRelativity.xlsx?dl=0.

The claims that in the MM interferometer there is no the Doppler effect, testify only to the misunderstanding of this phenomenon.

Edited by ravell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Due to the Doppler effect, the light waves in the arms of MM interferometer, generated by the light source, are shortened in the direction of the source movement and elongated in the opposite direction.

These speed-dependent changes of the wavelengths in the arms of the interferometer, give in effect the null results of the MM experiment, and this is only when the light source and mirrors are not moving relative to each other.

This is in my opinion, clearly shown in the previously given link:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/9ljwu5wwsi0v9up/VerificationTheoryRelativity.xlsx?dl=0.

The claims that in the MM interferometer there is no the Doppler effect, testify only to the misunderstanding of this phenomenon.

repeating the same crank claims doesn't make them true

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.