B. Newtonian Micheslon-Morley vs SR-cult fraud and corruption (Rev A)

From: eleaticus (eleaticus_at_bellsouth.net)
Date: 10/21/04 

Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 16:56:37 -0500

Michelson-Morley Experiment versus Newtonian-Galilean Physics
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 'Intrinsic' Energy Model of Light
--------------------------------------------------------
Absolute Motion?
---------------------------
Preamble
--------------
Could you trust the Ku Klux Klan to conduct an honest investigation of
the NAACP? No matter how sincere the investigators might be, their
biases and learned distortions and misrepresentation of the NAACP and
blacks in general would make honesty impossible.

Just so, less than insightful opinion and later True Believer
blindness has resulted in a number of fraudulent claims by Relativity
cultists against aspects of Newtonian-Galilean physics.

True Believer cultists have proved time and again that their treatment
of the 'discredited' Newtonian-Galilean physics is based on
misrepresentation and bogus logic.

And in all cases in these newsgrouos the True Believers respond with
viciousness and irrelevancy. Except when they deign to actually try a
relevant respone and prove themselves Brain Dead. Hopefully, this
version of this post of the series will be contain at least one
example.

Whether or not any of modern physical fact fits Newton is not material
to the question of these bogus claims of the cult. We are here to do
"anything and everything that requires or encourages systematic
examination of premises and logic", of Special Relativity. No premises
are more basic than those involved in the three frauds named herein,
and discussed in this series.

Among the frauds are the twin original claims that Special Relativity
is necessary: (a) the Newtonian-Galilean coordinate transformations do
not work invariantly on Maxwell's electrodynamics equations and (b)
the famous Michelson-Morley experiment does not fit the classical
Newtonian-Galilean model and only fits Special Relativity.

Another, very serious fraud is (c) the implied claim that the
Lorentz-Einstein coordinate transformations of Special Relativity
actually are applied to Maxwell, completing the fraudulent claims
against the Newton-consistent Galilean transformations.

There are many more rotten fruit from the SR-tree to be buried before
you know the nature of their whole orchard. Look for other posts in
this series.

By the way, look up the word 'corrupt' in your dictionary if you think
it only describes policemen and politicians who take bribes.
..........................................................................................
..........................................................................................

Michelson-Morley Experiment versus Newtonian-Galilean Physics
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It was the Michelson-Morley Experiment(s) that 'discredited'
Newtonian-Galilean physics, once the results were scrutinized with
sufficiently opaque lenses.

In the idealized experiment light from a single source enters the
apparatus at one 'corner', to be split into two directions at right
angles to each other, to travel to reflectors and then back to a
common location where the interference pattern of the two light
trails is noted.

Then, the whole device is rotated and the interference pattern once
again examined.

The experiment was motivated by aether (ether) theory that said that
light was a wave, like sound, and must have a medium through which it
travels. That medium was the supposed ether.

If the universe is filled with this ether, as it must be since light
seems to go, come from, everywhere (so to speak) then if the light is
travelling in what is much like across-a-river before the apparatus
rotation, it must be travelling up-and-down-river after the rotation,
with an unavoidable effect on the interference pattern.

The idea being that the whole earth is moving through the ether and so
too the apparatus.

The faulty, opaque lens with which MMX (as it is referred to) was
analyzed needs to be examined in terms of Special Relativity's and
Newtonian-Galilean ideas about light velocity.

Special Relativity's viewpoint is that no emitter, no reflector, no
refractor, no observer has any effect on the speed of light. In the
extreme this is obviously wrong, of course, even to them, else no
thing could reduce light's velocity to zero.

This SRian view of light contrasts with the customary view of, say, a
bullet fired from a gun. If the gun is moving toward you, or if you
are moving toward the bullet as it approaches, the net relative
velocity will/can differ substantially with the velocity of the bullet
relative to the muzzle.

Too, if you are the Man of Steel, the velocity with which the bullet
bounces off you will depend on those relative velocities. This is what
we will call the 'kinetic' or 'bounce' Newtonian-Galilean model.

That model depends on the idea that the kinetic energy of the bullet
relative to an object it hits depends on the relative velocities. And
that concept depends on the mass of the bullet.

But does light have a mass? The question is important in examining MMX
in Newtonian-Galilean terms because the thesis is that light moves at
not just c, but c+v, where v is a sum of the
emitter/reflector/refractor and observer/target velocities plus c, the
velocity of light relative to the object.

But light is presumably massless and to suppose it would impose
different kinetic energies on a target object depending on relative
velocity is nonsensical.

This is the 'intrinsic' energy model of light and leads to the
'catch-and-throw' model for reflection/etc.

Light from a single source with a single wave length relative to that
source can provide only that energy upon impact that was implicit in
the energy of emission relative to that source.

Hence, light will not 'bounce' at different velocities depending on
the relative velocities of a source and a target object. Instead, it
will be as if a baseball is thrown at a given energy level from one
player to another, who catches it and throws it back at the same
energy level.

Hence, Michelson-Morley is thoroughly and exactly explained by the
non-SRian, intrinsic energy, catch-and-throw model.

Let the origin be at the 'corner' where light enters the MMX device
and is split.

Let A be the location vector of the end of an arbitrary arm of the
device. Let V be the velocity vector of the device relative to
whatever observer you wish.

In time t the arm end at which the light must be located at that time
has moved from A to A+tV.

According to Newtonian-Galilean physics the speed of light is c+v,
where v is the velocity of the emitter/refractor/etc. In vector terms
that is C+V, an expression that not only specifies the velocity but
the direction. The velocity of light relative to the emitter is added
to the velocity of the emitter.

The experimenter may have an infinite number of observers so couldn't
'point' the light to oblige a given observer even if she wanted to.
Hence, the light is aimed in the direction of A, which is A/|A|, and
C=cA/|A|.

Hence, in time t light travels to t(C+V) = tC+tV.

Thus, at time t both the end of the arm and the light reach the same
location, and we have:

A+tV = tC + tV.

The V terms drop out:

A = tC

This result in no way depends on the length of the arm and certainly
not on the velocity of the experimental apparatus relative to anyone
or anything in the universe.

Thus, the exact same derivation applies to both the return trip of the
light, back from the arm-end reflector to the interferometer, and to
the out- and inward bound trips of the light on the other arm of the
device.

The Michelson-Morley Experiment must thus NOT show an effect in an
etherless, Newtonian-Galilean universe.

Absolute Motion?
---------------------------
An interesting sidebar to this result is that if there is an absolute
frame of reference for velocity you wouldn't be able to show it with
an MMX or similar method.
 

True Believer SR-cult responses
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Focus well on negative 'responses'. Are they vicious ranting?

If not, are the replies actually responsive?

"How dare you say my soups suck!" exclaimed the angry chef, "my peach
pies are perfect"

Do they rant about gravity, or how Relativity is proved correct a
million times each day, or some other 'we are proved right' rave that
doesn't deal in details about the debunking done here? It is typically
General Relativity or items about the energy and mass of moving
objects that are being waved at you, and such items are completely
irrelevant to coordinate transformations and invariance..

Just ask them for a list of all the observations that have been made
of the shortening (contraction) of moving objects that Special
Relativity says always occurs.

Rarely, there is actually a response that has some relevance to the
material posted, and those are proofs of their Brain Death.

eleaticus

Relevant Pages

  • B SR-cult fraud and corruption (rev a)
    ... Michelson-Morley Experiment versus Newtonian-Galilean Physics ... The 'Intrinsic' Energy Model of Light ... of Special Relativity. ... Newtonian-Galilean ideas about light velocity. ...
    (sci.math)
  • B SR-cult fraud and corruption (rev a)
    ... Michelson-Morley Experiment versus Newtonian-Galilean Physics ... The 'Intrinsic' Energy Model of Light ... of Special Relativity. ... Newtonian-Galilean ideas about light velocity. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • B SR-cult fraud and corruption (rev a)
    ... Michelson-Morley Experiment versus Newtonian-Galilean Physics ... The 'Intrinsic' Energy Model of Light ... of Special Relativity. ... Newtonian-Galilean ideas about light velocity. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Pioneer Anomoly
    ... Relativity is a trap: look at the sort of papers being written in Phys ... Our velocity is at c on the 4th dimension ... This same diagram solves general relativity ... a mass at infinity gets "free energy" ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Article: A Century of Einstein
    ... >> By thesame tokem since special relativity reduces to newtonian ... 2AB/= c to be a universal constant- the velocity of light in empty ... > interesting to hear why in physics things are what they are, ... > constant c and their dependence of Aether energy density u. ...
    (sci.physics)