Re: MMX Expected Shft.

Tom Roberts wrote:
> vern@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

<snip>

> > But aren't MMXs considered to be in an inerial frame?
>
> Generally, yes, because that simplifies the analysis considerably. An
> accurate analysis that accounts for the rotation of the interferometer
> wrt the lab, and the rotation of the earth, shows that both rotations
> are completely negligible.

Did you notice Franklin's response (Message No. 6 in this thread). He
cites new MM-type experiments that certainly take error analysis into
account. However, they appear to involve rotating devices. Are they
more in the class of Sagnac and M+G?

Thanks,

Vern

.

Loading