michelson-morley dinamic

[CACBCCCU]

The number of wavecycles stays the same on movement through the hypothetical aether, it's a red-shift matching the time dilation. GR put frame-dependence back in to the picture, but if you run inertial frame MM in practically flat space the hypothetical drift presumably, and as shown in this vid, is constant. The upshot of GR seems to be MM's device shows that if there was a drift, light behaves to make a constant drift, and presumably its responsible GR frame, undetectable.

[CACBCCCU]

It's the same thing as tossing a ball back and forth on a moving train, moving faster doesn't slow the air time.

A drift would be like the air of an open car, making the ball veer off sideways, away from where it's aimed. Mirrors and a beamsplitter aren't required to see whether or not in some directions light is veering sideways away from where it's aimed.

[angper]

NEW THEORY OF TIME:  ANGPER

[angper]

I THINK THESE VIDEOS WILL caused a stir in SCIENCE AND THIS IS FOR THE CONTENT that solves many uncertainties that have to date science, IT BECAUSE MY HOBBY IS MAKING ALL THEORIES AND A BOOK TO CONSULT ME WITH RESULT a success of 85% -90% SURE THAT THE SAME HAPPEN NOW, only now not see the answer in any book.

- Antigravity - EXPERIMENT

- ALBERT EINSTEIN & MICHELSON EXPERIMENT

[angper]

I THINK THESE VIDEOS WILL caused a stir in SCIENCE AND THIS IS FOR THE CONTENT that solves many uncertainties that have to date science, IT BECAUSE MY HOBBY IS MAKING ALL THEORIES AND A BOOK TO CONSULT ME WITH RESULT a success of 85% -90% SURE THAT THE SAME HAPPEN NOW, only now not see the answer in any book.

- Antigravity - EXPERIMENT

- ALBERT EINSTEIN & MICHELSON EXPERIMENT

[jreniel]

This is assuming the the ether is a static medium where light travels. But the problem is, there was no reason whatsoever to assume the ether as a static medium. This is comparable as assuming all the water in the ocean is static and has no currents.

[ActiveStorage]

wtf? no reason to assume? it would explain the wave-particle duality

and plz dont try to compare 2 absolutely different forms of matter. ocean with no currents.. wtf.

[jreniel]

This doesn't explain wave-particle duality. It is merely an observation which happens to be in accordance with duality theory, observations are not proofs. Physics is full of analogies. If you can't handle a simple analogy, drop down from the physics department.

[ActiveStorage]

if u assume that there is something apart from void space in between the electrons and the atoms, and even in between the neutrons and protons and other quarks and so on. If u assume that the void space is in fact a form of medium then there's no need for wave-particle duality model.

if observations are not proves then what is prove?

if one rejects any alternative models that differs from one's personal or collective dogmatic beliefs than this person is not a scientist

[jreniel]

why everyone always assumes that when a person rejects a theory is because of a personal "dogmatic" belief? It is because I have well founded reasons to doubt the validity of this "null" result, the first being the erroneous assumption that the ether is necessarily a static medium. Proof is constituted by many experimenting and re-experimenting, but not repeating the same experiments, but designing new ones that can test the limits of our previous investigations.

[jreniel]

Considering that neither General Relativity nor Quantum Mechanics agree with each other in many aspects, we might consider that some initial assumptions we have made might be corrupted. For instance, who is to say that the magnetic permeability and electric permittivity constants are constant across our entire universe. I dare to say that repeating the MM experiment on a different Gravitational field, be it bigger or smaller, will yield different results.

[jreniel]

Consider for a moment the Pioneer 10 and 11 anomalies. I'm not going to speculate as to the nature of this anomaly, but surely it is a valid scientific question with an open field for hypothesis. The observations made in the MM experiment and the observations from the Pioneer anomalies are related to each other. Then again, the observations made from the Pioneer anomalies prove nothing. That's the reason why observations are not necessarily proof of anything.

[ActiveStorage]

yes i agree that a single and even multiple observations don't have to prove anything, the more u observe the higher the chance of these observations being able to prove something.

my point was that observation is all we have. we can not prove shit without any observations.

did u hear about the concept of plasma universe? it might explain the pioneer anomalies

[ActiveStorage]

i said personal or collective dogmatic beliefs

collective is a key word there.

[chuckpcr]

> ActiveStorage

> If one rejects any alternative models that differs from

> one's personal or collective dogmatic beliefs than this

> person is not a scientist

This is not an accurate statement because any alternative model may be rejected for reasons other than dogmatic beliefs or even because they do not explain the data any better than the dogmatic beliefs. This is particularly true when the alternative model interprets the data differently than the dogmatic beliefs do,

[chuckpcr]

First of all this video is just an illustration of the theory behind the michelson-morley experiment. Second the experiment was trying to measure the relative motion between Earth and the ether so it required making no assumptions about ethers absolute motion. They even did the experiment many times over the course of a year to considered possibility that at some point the Earths motion was aligned with that of the ether.

[singh246]

I am Einstein

[imartich]

This is assuming that the particles speed is comparable with the system speed... or very significant distances?¿.. then.. what is it?