Michelson-Morley Research Articles

Experimental replication of the anomalous signal residuals in historical Michelson–Morley experiments with gas-filled interferometers indicates a celestial vector matching the predicted dark matter wind

Experimental replication of the anomalous signal residuals in historical Michelson–Morley experiments with gas-filled interferometers indicates a celestial vector matching the predicted dark matter wind

Cosmological consequences of the Lorentz and Doppler transformations

The common opinion that the Lorentz transformation distorts the Minkowski spacetime arises from a mathematically incorrect neglect of its non-diagonal terms. When the non-diagonal Lorentz transformation is properly treated, the time dilation and the space distortion disappear. Consequently, the Lorentz metric produced by the Lorentz transformation is identical to the Minkowski metric. The spacetime distortion in moving inertial frames is properly described by the so-called Doppler metric produced by the Doppler transformation. This transformation assumes the existence of a preferred frame and depicts the Doppler shift of light for a moving light source and/or observer. The Doppler metric is Lorentz invariant and leaves the Maxwell’s equations unchanged from their form in the Minkowski spacetime. Moreover, the Doppler metric is experimentally confirmed because it yields the null result in the Michelson–Morley experiment and other interferometric experiments. The suitability of the Doppler metric for describing light properties in Special and General Relativity is supported by recent cosmological observations of the cosmic microwave background.

Superfluid Space Dragging Effect Detection and Re-examination of the Michelson-Morley Experiment

Superfluid Space Dragging Effect Detection and Re-examination of the Michelson-Morley Experiment

Michelson–Morley experiments: At the crossroads of relativity, cosmology and quantum physics

Today, the original Michelson–Morley experiment and its early repetitions at the beginning of the 20th century are considered as a venerable historical chapter for which, at least from a physical point of view, there is nothing more to refine or clarify. The emphasis is now on the modern versions of these experiments, with lasers stabilized by optical cavities, that, apparently, have improved by many orders of magnitude on the limits placed by those original measurements. Though, in those old experiments light was propagating in gaseous systems (air or helium at atmospheric pressure) while now, in modern experiments, light propagates in a high vacuum or inside solid dielectrics. Therefore, in principle, the difference might not depend on the technological progress only but also on the different media that are tested by preventing a straightforward comparison. Starting from this observation, one can formulate a new theoretical scheme where the tiny, irregular residuals observed so far, from Michelson–Morley to the present experiments with optical resonators, point consistently toward the long sought preferred reference frame tight to the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB). The existence of this scheme, while challenging the traditional ‘null interpretation’, presented in all textbooks and specialized reviews as a self-evident scientific truth, further emphasizes the central role of these experiments for Relativity, Cosmology and Quantum Physics.

The Rejection of Aether in Physics

Eelco Runia’s view of historical time is that the now and the past exert an alternating influence on each other. The most prominent expression of this is a dialogue between the historian and the historical actors in which the historian creates metonyms, replacement terms, for how historical actors are defined, which affects the description of the past. In this paper, Runia’s conception of historical time has been tested through an empirical investigation into the changing descriptions of the process of rejecting the aether hypothesis, 1858-2022. After the process of phasing the aether out of physics had previously been explained as being caused by the gradual acceptance of the theory of relativity, the cause was suddenly superseded in the 1990s by the Michelson-Morley experiment conducted in the 1880s. During the 21st century, however, the aether once again returned as a concept. The reason for the changes, is the conclusion, could possibly be due to the ambition to give a rational picture of the development of natural science at every point in time

The Truth of the Experiments of Invariable Speed of Light in Special Relativity

It is pointed out that the most experiments on the invariant speed of light in special relativity proves the round-trip invariant speed of light, not one-way invariant. This paper makes a distinction between them. The Michelson-Morley experiment and the experiment of high-energy particles emitting photons and so on are the round-trip experiment of light’s speed, showing that the average speed of light is a constant. But the Sagnac effect experiment, the Michelson-Gale's experiment that the earth's rotation effects the speed of light, and the satellite signal propagation between China and Japan are the one-way experiments of light’s speed, showing that the speed of light is variable, satisfying the Galilean velocity addition rule. The orbit shape changes of binary stars and the phenomenon of charm stars cannot be observed due to that the calculated observing directions are different from the practical observing direction for the observers on the Earth. The Fizeau water flow experiment and the Sagnac experiment are combined to prove that the rotation of optical fiber would affects the speed of light. The problem that the Sagnac effect is independent of the refractive index of optical fiber is explained well. It is proved that the Sagnac effect formula derived from special relativity is consistent with that derived from classical mechanics when the optical fiber’s refractive index . When , there is no the Sagnac effect according to special relativity. While according to classical mechanics, there is the Sagnac effect. The original experiment of Sagnac effect in 1913 was carried out in atmosphere with . Therefore, the original Sagnac experiment became a judgment experiment. It certainly jugated that the velocity of light satisfied the Galilean addition rule rather than the Lorentz transformation formula.

A Way to Understanding Michelson-Morley Experiment and its Consequence Regarding Luminiferous Aether / Ether (LE)

A Way to Understanding Michelson-Morley Experiment and its Consequence Regarding Luminiferous Aether / Ether (LE)

The cracks of classical mechanics and the Birth of quantum mechanics

At the end of the 19th century, with the development of Newton's classical mechanics and Maxwell's electromagnetism, a great number of individuals believed that the laws of physics had reached the point of perfection. Physicists like Pierre-Simon Laplace even thought that Newtonian mechanics could be used to calculate the future. However, the "dark clouds" such as the Michelson-Morley experiment and black body radiation demonstrated the flaws of the classical theory. With the efforts of quantum mechanics pioneers such as Planck, Einstein, Schrodinger, and Heisenberg, the discipline of quantum mechanics has gradually developed and has become the key to opening the door to the microscopic world. This paper demonstrates the cracks that occurred in classical physics at the end of the 19th century, and then illustrates the birth of the quantum mechanics and some of the most important concepts of it. Finally, some cutting-edge technologies related to quantum are introduced.

Modeling Clock Comparison Experiments to Test Special Relativity

The clock comparison experiments to test special relativity mainly include the Michelson–Morley experiment, Kennedy–Thorndike experiment, Ives–Stilwell experiment and the comparison experiment of atomic clocks in two locations. These experiments can be roughly classified as the comparison of two types of clocks: optical clocks and atomic clocks. Through the comparison of such clocks, Lorentz invariance breaking parameters in the RMS framework can be tested. However, in such experiments, the structural effects of optical clocks have been fully considered, yet the structural effects of atomic clocks have not been carefully studied. Based on this, this paper analyzes the structural effects of atomic clocks in detail and divides the experiments into six types: the comparison of two atomic clocks, two optical clocks, and atomic clocks and optical clocks placed in different and the same locations. Finally, correction parameters for the experimental measurements are given.

A Re-understanding of the Zero Result of the Michelson-Morley Experiment

As well-known that in order to explain the zero result of the Michelson-Morley experiments (M-M experiments), Lorentz proposed the Lorentz formula of coordinate transformation and led to the birth of Einstein's special relativity. The authors carefully re-examine the M-M experiment and find a serious problem. The premise of the M-M experimental calculations was that the light source was fixed on the absolutely stationary reference frame of the universe (or the ether stationary reference frame). However, in the actual experiments, the light source was fixed on the earth motion reference frame, moving and rotating with the interferometers, which lead to the invalid calculation result of the M-M experiment. In this paper, the correct calculation method is used to prove that the zero result of the M-M experiment can be well explained by using the Galilean relativity principle and the Galilean velocity addition rule. Therefore, the most important experimental foundation of special relativity does not exist. The Lorentz coordinate transformation formulas become unnecessary, and the principles of special relativity and the invariant speed of light are unnecessary too. The experimental tests of special relativity are also discussed briefly. It points out that these experiments are either wrong or have other explanations, and the explanations of special relativity are not unique ones. Physics should give up the Lorentz transformation formula and the Einstein's special relativity completely, introduce the cosmic absolute stationary reference frame, and establish the kinetic theory based on the mass-velocity formula which should be considered as an empirical formula, to solve the fundamental problems in astrophysics and cosmology thoroughly.

A novel Michelson–Morley experiment testing for anisotropic light propagation in gas without violation of local Lorentz invariance

A novel Michelson–Morley experiment testing for anisotropic light propagation in gas without violation of local Lorentz invariance

Coexistence of Relativity between Observers and the Absoluteness of Inertial Systems

Einstein derived the Lorentz and its inverse transformations based on the principles of the relativity of the laws of physics and the constancy of light’s speed. However, only the principle of the constancy of light’s speed can induce the Lorentz and its inverse transformations, indicating that the relativity of the laws of physics arises from the constancy of light’s speed. Einstein also assumed that the relativity of inertial systems further establishes the relativity of the laws of physics. However, using light and rigid rulers together enables distinguishing between rest and constant-velocity systems (called the absoluteness of inertial systems): if the lengths measured by the rigid and light rulers are the same, it is a rest system; otherwise, it is a constant-velocity system. This study presents new interpretations of the twin paradox and Michelson–Morley experiment to explain the coexistence of the relativity between observers and the absoluteness of inertial systems.

The concept of a mechanical system for measuring the one-way speed of light

The work presents the concept of a device for the measurement of the one-way speed of light. The minimum parameters of this device have also been determined based on the Special Theory of Ether without transverse contraction. The Special Theory of Ether is a relativistic theory of kinemat-ics with a universal frame of reference in which light propagates and is an alternative explanation for the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment. An experiment based on the proposed device can be one of the ways to falsify the Special Theory of Relativity and Special Theory of Ether.

Guide to Personal Knowledge: The Philosophy of Michael Polanyi: Tacit Knowledge, Emergence and the Fiduciary Program by Dániel Paksi and Mihály Héder

Reviewed by: Guide to Personal Knowledge: The Philosophy of Michael Polanyi: Tacit Knowledge, Emergence and the Fiduciary Program by Dániel Paksi and Mihály Héder Alessio Tartaro PAKSI, Dániel and Mihály Héder. Guide to Personal Knowledge: The Philosophy of Michael Polanyi: Tacit Knowledge, Emergence and the Fiduciary Program. Wilmington, Del.: Vernon Press, 2022. xxiii + 209 pp. Cloth, $65.00 Famous for the concept of "tacit knowledge," Polanyi is a figure who looms over twentieth-century philosophy without ever establishing himself as one of its major protagonists. Yet, Polanyi tackled central problems in twentieth-century Western philosophy and offered [End Page 358] insightful and original analyses thereof. In Personal Knowledge, Polanyi articulates ideas about metaphysics, mathematics, evolution, philosophy and sociology of science, epistemology, philosophy of language, political theory, theology, and more. The richness of the contents, but also their deep unity, make Polanyi's work a unique piece in the philosophical landscape of his time, full of fruitful insights that are still relevant nowadays. Guide to Personal Knowledge, written by two of the leading experts on Polanyi's philosophy, deserves the merit of providing an accessible introduction to this complex work. The book is divided into thirteen chapters, each corresponding to the respective chapter of Personal Knowledge. In each chapter, Paksi and Héder clearly explain Polanyi's main ideas, presenting them in the same order as they appear in Personal Knowledge. The chapters are introduced by a "Goals of the chapter" section that provides a series of key points, where the authors summarize Polanyi's objectives in the corresponding chapter of Personal Knowledge. The Guide is interspersed with many direct quotations from Personal Knowledge that allow the reader to link the Guide to the original text. The use of figures and tables illuminates even the most complex concepts, such as "tacit integration" and the difference between "random and ordered systems." The Guide is enriched by twenty-five boxes that provide information on ideas, authors, and concepts directly or indirectly referenced by Polanyi in Personal Knowledge. These boxes are a valuable supplement. In some cases, they offer insight into contemporary events, theories, and scholars to which Polanyi alludes but that he does not elaborate on, for example, about the role of the Michelson-Morley experiments in Einstein's development of the theory of relativity. In other cases, boxes develop a comparison between Polanyi's ideas and related philosophical figures, such as Thomas Kuhn and Samuel Alexander. Thanks to the boxes, the reader gains a richer and more complete view of Polanyi's thought. In the preface, Paksi and Héder preliminarily introduce some key concepts for understanding Polanyi's work, including "objectivity," "trust" and "fiduciary program," "tacit knowledge," "intellectual passions," "deceptive substitution," "moral inversion," "operational principles," "logic of achievement," and "emergence." Their analysis always proves faithful to Polanyi's thought, and the authors show how these concepts are interrelated and constitute the pillars of Personal Knowledge's argumentative structure. Other equally crucial concepts in Polanyi's work, for example, "commitment," "indwelling," "tradition," "conviviality," "anthropogenesis," "ultrabiology," are not introduced in the preface, but they are explored in depth in the respective chapters. The thirteen chapters of the book recapitulate in detail the main thematic segments of Personal Knowledge. The critique of objectivism and positivist views of science is explained and analyzed in chapters 1 to 4. This critique is articulated on several levels. Polanyi first criticizes [End Page 359] objectivism because it attempts to remove the personal element from scientific knowledge in order to pursue ever higher degrees of formalism, neutrality, and impersonality. Polanyi asserts, however, that the personal element is irreducible, and then proceeds to demonstrate how it operates: in the evaluation of probability statements (chapter 2), in the appreciation of ordered patterns (chapter 3), and in the practice of skills (chapter 4). The ineliminability of the personal element shows that objectivism is false. Paksi and Héder brilliantly retrace the train of thought that leads Polanyi to this conclusion. The second theme that runs across Personal Knowledge concerns the tacit foundation of human intellectual abilities and, consequently, of science and society. In chapter 6, the authors follow Polanyi's disparate arguments about animal intelligence, human...

Sustainable Energy and the Second Law of Thermodynamics: An Introduction to the Special Issue

At the end of the 19th century, the field of physics was considered nearly complete, encouraging triumphal statements by some of the most eminent physicists of the day, for instance, "There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now. All that remains is more and more precise measurement (William Thompson, Baron Kelvin of Largs). Only a few random clouds troubled this bright horizon, for instance, the vexing negative result of the Michelson-Morley experiment, some puzzling aspects to the photoelectric effect, and a the lack of a coherent explanation for the blackbody radiation spectrum. Nothing terribly serious, nothing that wouldn’t be mopped up eventually. In fact, the first would soon be key to Einstein’s revolutionary special theory of relativity, the second would win him the Nobel prize in physics, and the third, in the able hands of Max Planck, would crack open the door to the paradigm-shattering quantum world. Indeed, every moment is the end of physics or its beginning-–depending on one’s curiosity. Viewed through the lens of Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, physics’ sudden turnabout was to be expected. Whenever experts consider a field complete, beware and be amused, for it will likely erupt in revolution. This is because the nature of knowledge itself guarantees scientific paradigms will invariably germinate the seeds of their own destructions. They must. When a paradigm is established, it is encumbent upon scientists to explore it as fully as possible, to extend its domain to the fullest possible extent.

Georg Joos’ Experimentum Crucis in Jena 1930 and the Fall of the Ethereal Aether

AbstractAfter 1910, the triumph of Einstein's theory of relativity almost came to an unexpected end when Dayton Miller published his measurements in 1922 indicating an ether drift in contrast to all former Michelson–Morley experiments. This attack on Einstein's fundamental principle of the constancy of the vacuum speed of light independently of spatial direction was countered by Georg Joos who found no “Aether wind” using the best optical equipment of the company Carl Zeiss in Jena in 1930. His precision record sealed the fate of the “Ethereal Aether,” against all attempts in Nazi Germany and the Communist Soviet Union to save the ether on ideological grounds.

Quantum Gravity If Non-Locality Is Fundamental.

I take non-locality to be the Michelson–Morley experiment of the early 21st century, assume its universal validity, and try to derive its consequences. Spacetime, with its locality, cannot be fundamental, but must somehow be emergent from entangled coherent quantum variables and their behaviors. There are, then, two immediate consequences: (i). if we start with non-locality, we need not explain non-locality. We must instead explain an emergence of locality and spacetime. (ii). There can be no emergence of spacetime without matter. These propositions flatly contradict General Relativity, which is foundationally local, can be formulated without matter, and in which there is no “emergence” of spacetime. If these be true, then quantum gravity cannot be a minor alteration of General Relativity but must demand its deep reformulation. This will almost inevitably lead to: matter not only curves spacetime, but “creates” spacetime. We will see independent grounds for the assertion that matter both curves and creates spacetime that may invite a new union of quantum gravity and General Relativity. This quantum creation of spacetime consists of: (i) fully non-local entangled coherent quantum variables. (ii) The onset of locality via decoherence. (iii) A metric in Hilbert space among entangled quantum variables by the sub-additive von Neumann entropy between pairs of variables. (iv) Mapping from metric distances in Hilbert space to metric distances in classical spacetime by episodic actualization events. (v) Discrete spacetime is the relations among these discrete actualization events. (vi) “Now” is the shared moment of actualization of one among the entangled variables when the amplitudes of the remaining entangled variables change instantaneously. (vii) The discrete, successive, episodic, irreversible actualization events constitute a quantum arrow of time. (viii) The arrow of time history of these events is recorded in the very structure of the spacetime constructed. (ix) Actual Time is a succession of two or more actual events. The theory inevitably yields a UV cutoff of a new type. The cutoff is a phase transition between continuous spacetime before the transition and discontinuous spacetime beyond the phase transition. This quantum creation of spacetime modifies General Relativity and may account for Dark Energy, Dark Matter, and the possible elimination of the singularities of General Relativity. Relations to Causal Set Theory, faithful Lorentzian manifolds, and past and future light cones joined at “Actual Now” are discussed. Possible observational and experimental tests based on: (i). the existence of Sub- Planckian photons, (ii). knee and ankle discontinuities in the high-energy gamma ray spectrum, and (iii). possible experiments to detect a creation of spacetime in the Casimir system are discussed. A quantum actualization enhancement of repulsive Casimir effect would be anti-gravitational and of possible practical use. The ideas and concepts discussed here are not yet a theory, but at most the start of a framework that may be useful.

Michelson-Morley experiment explained by means of five methods

The Michelson-Morley experiment (MME) is still important to physics, and not just to the history of physics. The hypothesis of contraction of bodies in the direction of their motion arose as an ad hoc hypothesis about the “contraction” of the Michelson’s interferometer arm in the direction of its motion. Even today this experiment is the “strongest argument” of this hypothesis, and of time dilation too. This work will present the explanation of the MME through five methods. The first method can be called the traditional method, which was applied by Michelson, but not correctly. The other methods are the explanation of the MME with the interferometer located at an acute angle to the direction of Earth’s motion; with the light clock; using Galilean transformation in polar coordinates and using the Doppler effect formula. All these methods give the same solution, and this solution is in accordance with the experiment’s result. Solutions derived from these five methods represent a natural explanation for the result of the MME – without weird terms and without unscientific assumptions.

Examining Modern Mechanics as a Three-System Classical Mechanics-Based Theory of Moving Systems

Supported through a century of investigation, experimental support, and observational evidence, relativity is accepted as being conceptually sound, mathematically correct, and theoretically valid. Because it is believed to be the only theory that quantitatively explains certain experiments and yields 2 E mc = , there is widespread support that any improvement will take the form of an enhancement to, rather than a replacement of the theory. Despite this degree of support, the seminal derivation of special relativity theory found in Section 3 of On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies contains a mathematical contradiction that must be remediated. Specifically, the τ and ξ equations are expressed in terms of x, y, and t, where Einstein derives ξ as ξ τ = c , which is immediately followed by his stating the ξ and τ equations as: 2 vx t c τ β  = −     and ξ β = − (x vt ) , where 2 2 1 1 v c β = − . The contradiction occurs because the mathematical equality of ξ τ = c is not maintained when both equations are evaluated using most combinations of x, y, and t. As a concrete example of the contradiction, when x=1, v=0, and t=0, we find thatξ = 1 and τ = 0 , such that ξ τ ≠ c . Here, we introduce Modern Mechanics, a three–system, classical mechanics–based model of moving systems, that does not contain the contradiction. While Modern Mechanics shares a common mathematical kernel with relativity, it uses different equations that can be viewed as an enhancement, or improvement, to the special relativity mathematics. Experimentally, Modern Mechanics yields 2 E mc = and produces a quantitatively better result for the Michelson-Morley experiment. Conceptually, Modern Mechanics differs from relativity because it removes the contradiction, concepts and restrictions associated with relativity; integrates kinematics and electromagnetism while retaining the translation equation for moving systems; and offers novel insights into Einstein’s two–system relativity theory derivation (including discussing where and how the inequality is introduced).

Can a Michelson-Morley Experiment Designed with Current Solar Velocity Distinguish between Non-Relativistic and Relativistic Theories?

Can a Michelson-Morley Experiment Designed with Current Solar Velocity Distinguish between Non-Relativistic and Relativistic Theories?