Re: MMX Expected Shft.
- From: "Martin Hogbin" <goatREMOVETHIS123@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 08:17:09 +0000 (UTC)
"Bill Hobba" <rubbish@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:G9D2f.14525$U51.7555@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> In discussing about the MMX is another post I noticed it and similar
> experiments gave expected fringe shifts based on the sun being stationary
> wrt to an aether. I can not see how such an assumption would be reasonable.
> The result of the experiment of course was that the earth was to a rather
> good degree of accuracy stationary wrt to any supposed aether - which
> strongly suggests it does not exist. But that the sun is stationary wrt to
> a supposed aether seems just as unlikely. Does anyone know the thinking
> behind assuming the sun was stationary wrt to the aether?
I think this option was chosen because it is the simplest case
mathematically and it can be assumed without loss of generality.
In other words if the sun were moving at constant velocity wrt
the aether there would still be an expected fringe shift.
Martin Hogbin
.
- References:
- MMX Expected Shft.
- From: Bill Hobba
- MMX Expected Shft.
- Prev by Date: Re: Androcles' and Henri's Theory of Diffraction Grating Behavior
- Next by Date: Re: How can Orbital Electron Rotate Permanently without Energy Supply?
- Previous by thread: Re: MMX Expected Shft.
- Next by thread: Re: MMX Expected Shft.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
