Home 
Science Science | Natural Main error Michelson
Science Science | Natural Main error Michelson
| Main error Michelson |
|
|
| Written by Валерий Петров | |
| Friday, 06 June 2008 | |
|
The text of the original in Russian The article reviews the progress of rays in the Michelson-Morley experiment, as well as Shamir and Fox experiment with the use of laser as a source of light. Showing errors Michelson in describing the progress of the rays in the experiment. Substantiate the conclusion that the null result of Michelson-Morley experiment, as Shamir and Fox experiment due to lack of movement of the interferometer on the environment in which the spread of light rays in these experiments. The so-called explanation and proof of the theorem in a particular input material is somewhat tautological, some distortion of the truth, in part, this was a distortion to cover up deception learning experiences are matched, so it just might have to get their simple definition and osnovopolozheniya and objection, drawn from experience, it eliminates that understands and interprets the experience in its concrete reality, but as an example, and even favorable to the hypotheses and theories of the parties. In this particular experience predposlannym under the definitions of the theory darken and show l ish on the side of supporting the theory. G.V.Fr.Gegel. Science of Logic Introduction In his work "On the electrodynamics of moving media" A. Einstein pointed out that the principle of relativity in electrodynamics and optics facilitated and unsuccessful attempts to detect the movement of the Earth on "svetonosnoy environment." Einstein never said what experiences he had in mind. The advent of special relativity theory (SRT) was seen by many physicists as an attempt to explain the negative result is the experience of the Michelson-Morley experiment, which is believed to be the question on the motion of the Earth relative to the ether was placed in the most direct form. It is rooted in the literature, particularly in the training: it is very convenient methodically remove service from the experience of the Michelson-Morley experiment. As is known, the goal of the Michelson-Morley experience was to determine the velocity «ether wind», due to movement of the Earth relative to the ether - a hypothetical environment, fills, according to Michelson, the global space and freely passing through any substance, and environment: solids, liquids, and certainly gases. Let's see, the extent to which this view Michelson untrue. Investigation and analysis of beams in the experiment Michelson-Morley A general view of the interferometer, as depicted in the report of the Michelson on the outcome of his experiment, conducted in 1881, presented in Figure 1  It describes a Michelson, a source of light in his experience was a small lamp placed in a, provided with a lens in such a way that the flame of a lamp turned the focus of the lens. This lamp is visible in the picture. Through this lens the rays of light emitted from a lamp, are almost parallel. In the experiments carried out in 1881, interferometer was mounted on a metal crosspiece in experiments in 1887 - at the massive concrete slabs, floating in a pool of mercury. The essence of the experience is as follows. Monochromatic beam of light passing through a narrow slit opaque screen, falls on a semitransparent mirror in, inclination angle of 45 degrees, which is divided into two beams, one of which is moving perpendicular to the direction of the expected traffic device relative to the ether, the other - in parallel to this movement. At the same distance L from the mirror B has two flat mirrors - C and D. Rays of light reflected from these mirrors, again falling on the mirror B, partially reflected, partially penetrate through it and get to the screen (or in the visual tube) E, as shown in Fig.2.  In the absence of movement interferometer relative to the ether motion of each of the rays will be the same and equal to 2L / c, with a perpendicular beam gets to the point C in the same mirror, as shown in Fig.3.  We know that in the setting of the Michelson experiment based on the assumption of a stationary ether, is not entrained movement of Earth. Then the motion of rays in the interferometer can be viewed in two different coordinate systems, one of which is connected with a fixed air (let's call it fixed), the other - with a moving interferometer (let's call it moving). It is clear that in both and in the other case, shall be obtained the same result. Consider the course of rays in the interferometer at a fixed coordinate system, on which the interferometer is moving with velocity v, ie coordinate system associated with the fixed ether. In this coordinate system the velocity of light is constant and equal to the value of. Suppose that the interferometer is moving with velocity v in the direction indicated by arrow in Fig.4.  Over time, during which the light beam path will be L, D mirror shift by the amount of vt. Then the path, which passes a beam of light to meet with the mirror B, is equal to ct1 = L + vt1, where should
t1 = L / (c - v) In a reverse movement of the mirror D ray of light moves toward the mirror B, as shown in Fig.5.  Now, before meeting with the B mirror the light beam passes the path equal to ct2 = L - vt2 where should t2 = L / (c + v) Thus, the time during which the light beam passes the path of the mirror B to D and back mirror, in a fixed coordinate system is equal to: T = t1 + t2 = L / (c - v) + L / (c + v) = 2Lc / (c2 - v2) Dividing the numerator and denominator for c2, we obtain: T = (2L / c) / (1 - v2 / c2) In a moving coordinate system, ie coordinate system associated with the moving interferometer, air moves in a direction opposite the actual movement of the interferometer in the same way as in the coordinate system associated with a moving car, the air is moving in a direction opposite the actual motion of the car. Therefore, the speed of light in accordance with dorelyativistskimi representations is equal to c - v in the movement of a light beam from the source to the reflector and c + v, with a beam of light moving in the opposite direction. Consequently, t1 = L / (c - v) t2 = L / (c + v) T = t1 + t2 = (2L / c) / (1 - v2 / c2) Thus, in one, and another system will get the same result. Consider now the motion of a light beam from the mirror B to C is also a mirror in two different coordinate systems. In the coordinate system moving together with the interferometer, ie coordinate system in which the interferometer motionless, air moves in a direction opposite the actual movement of the interferometer. Therefore, the light beam deviates in the same direction, which in this coordinate system moves «ethereal wind» just as the flag on the mast was rejected by a moving ship in a direction opposite the movement of the vessel. Therefore, the light beam passes through the point C ', separated from the point C at a distance of vt (Fig. 6). Then the speed of light, moving in the direction of BC ', as measured in system coordinates associated with the moving interferometer, is equal to c2 + v2.  Over time t, this light beam passes the path equal to L2 + (vt) 2. Since t (c2 + v2) = L2 + (vt) 2, we get t = L / c, where should T = 2t = 2L / c Consider now the course of rays in the device in a fixed coordinate system, ie coordinate system associated with the fixed ether. Let the single pulse of light is emitted when the semitransparent mirror is at some point B space. Over time, t, during which the light beam will be the path L, the mirror C shift at a distance vt in the direction of motion of the device, resulting in a beam of light gets to the point C ', separated from the point C at a distance of vt in the direction opposite the movement of the device (Figure .8). Then the path L from the point B, which was a mirror of B at the time of radiation (reflected) pulse of light to them, to point C 'is equal to T = 2t = 2L / c Thus, in one, and in other coordinate systems we get the same result: if the movement of the interferometer relative to the ether really exists, perpendicular to the light beam deviates in a direction opposite the actual movement of the interferometer, the value of CC '= vL / c. Taking v = 30 km / s and L = 11 m = 11000 mm, as in the experiment in 1887, we get: 30 • 11000 / 30000 = 1.1 mm. In reality, however, no deviations were observed for perpendicular beam: a beam of light enters perpendicular to the same point on the reflector, in which he would have had to get and there is no traffic on the air. In a moving coordinate system of the beam falling perpendicular to the point C is, obviously, the lack of movement of the ether on the interferometer. In this case, T is equal to 2L / c. Since in this experiment T is equal to T , then T also is equal to 2L / c. Thus, to explain the zero result of the Michelson-Morley experiment, Lorentz hypothesis of reducing the length of a side arm of the interferometer is completely unnecessary! This is, however, that examined the progress of the Michelson interferometer rays from the viewpoint of an observer stationary relative to the ether, which is in itself surprising, since the Michelson interferometer, Michelson and myself are in the coordinate system moving relative to the ether. It looks the same, according to Michelson, the course of the rays from the viewpoint of an observer fixed? Thus, as explained, for example, Nobel laureate in physics by R. Feynman in [2]. "... For the time t3 mirror C shifted to the right at a distance ut3 (to the position P '), and light will be on the hypotenuse of the Armed Forces' distance ct3 (Fig.8).  From the rectangular triangle should (ct3) 2 = L 2 + (ut3) 2, or L2 = (ct3) 2 - (ut3) 2 = (c2 - u2) (t3) 2 where t3 = L / (c2 - u2) 1 / 2. When you walk backward from the point C 'accounts for the light to go the same distance, it is clear from the symmetry of the figure. So, and return the same time (t3), a total time equal to 2t3. We write it as 2t3 = 2L / (c2-u2) 1 / 2 = 2L / c / (1 - u2/c2) 1 / 2 ". Applying the previous symbol, write this result as T = (2L / c) / There is, however, the question of why the light beam deviates after shifting mirrors, if the interferometer is moving about a fixed observer? The only correct answer is that the deviation perpendicular beam, observed from a fixed coordinate system, due to the fact that the speed of light, moving in the environment surrounding the interferometer, is at a speed of movement of the environment on the stationary observer. In this case, as shown above, T = 2t = 2L / c. Sam Michelson explains motion perpendicular beam case. Luch sa reflected in AB (Fig. 9), with the angle bab1 is the aberration angle α, returns to ba1 (aba1 = 2α) θ falls in the visual focus of the pipe, the direction which does not change »[1].  It is, however, that aberration occurs when light traffic receiver to the source. However, the Michelson-Morley experiment, the receiver motionless on the light source during the whole experiment. Thus, the deviation perpendicular beam, following the displacement of the interferometer can not be explained by aberrations. So why, in this case, perpendicular to the beam was rejected after shifting interferometer, a moving, let's relatively stationary observer? So, suppose to start that, strictly along the meridian of Earth at a speed of, say, u, moving modern supersonic aircraft. It looks like the trajectory of the aircraft from the viewpoint of an observer fixed on the Sun? As in the moving coordinate system, the plane flies strictly along the meridian, but the circle is moving perpendicular to the plane with the orbital motion of the Earth's velocity v. In this case, according to the laws of mechanics of Galileo, Newton trajectory of the aircraft represents the hypotenuse right triangle with sides u and v, as shown in Fig.10:  Over time, t, during which in the moving coordinate system the plane pass the distance L between two points a and b, lying on the meridian, in the fixed system for the same time, the plane pass the path ab, equal  .As follows from the triangle of distances, in a fixed coordinate system path length is equal to ab  , откуда следует: =  L = ut t = L / u Thus, the time during which the flight path L drop between points a and b, lying on the meridian, is the same and equal to t = L / u as in the moving, and in the fixed coordinate systems. Suppose further that, strictly along the meridian runs linear accelerator of elementary particles in which particles move with a velocity u. As in the previous case, particles move strictly along the accelerator, but in a fixed coordinate system is shifted from the accelerator orbital velocity perpendicular to the direction of motion of particles. And in this case, as shown above, the trajectory of the particles is a hypotenuse right triangle with sides u and v, as shown in Fig.10 Over time, t, during which in the moving coordinate system moving in a particle accelerator pass the distance L, in the fixed system for the same time, the same particle drop path ab, equal. As follows from the triangle of distances, in a fixed coordinate system path length is equal to ab, where should: t = L / u Thus, the time during which the particles pass the path L in the accelerator, is the same and equal to t = L / u as in the moving, and in the fixed coordinate systems. Suppose now that, strictly along the meridian laid glass rod length L, inside of which u are moving at a speed of light pulses, as in the experiment Shamir and Fox [3]. As in the moving coordinate system in the fixed system of light pulses moving strictly along the glass rod, but the glass rod is moving with orbital velocity perpendicular to the direction of movement of light pulses. And in this case, as shown above, the trajectory of each of the light pulse is a hypotenuse right triangle with sides u and v, as shown in Fig.10. Over time, t, during which in the moving coordinate system moving in the rod impulse pass the distance L, in the fixed system for the same time, the same impetus to pass the path ab, equal . Как следует из треугольника расстояний, в неподвижной системе координат длина пути ab равна , where should: t = L / u Thus, the time during which a pulse of light pass the path L in the rod, is the same and equal to t = L / u as in the moving, and in the fixed coordinate systems. Suppose, finally, that the light rays are moving in the air at a speed of c is strictly along the meridian, as in the Michelson-Morley experiment. The results of experiment in the moving coordinate system of perpendicular rays are moving strictly between points a and b, one of which (a) rests on a translucent mirror, and another (b) - on the reflector. Obviously, in the moving coordinate system perpendicular to the light beam must also move between the same two points: a and b. Thus, there is as follows: perpendicular to the light beam moves along a line between two points a and b, but this line is shifted relatively stationary observer with the speed of orbital motion of the Earth. Then, if the perpendicular ray really deviates in the direction of orbital motion of the Earth - and so it was really - the reason for the deviation, as in all the above cases, a combination of the speed of the beam perpendicular to the orbital velocity of Earth. Suppose, finally, that the light rays are moving in the air at a speed of c is strictly along the meridian, as in the Michelson-Morley experiment. The results of experiment in the moving coordinate system of perpendicular rays are moving strictly between points a and b, one of which (a) rests on a translucent mirror, and another (b) - on the reflector. Obviously, in the moving coordinate system perpendicular to the light beam must also move between the same two points: a and b. Thus, there is as follows: perpendicular to the light beam moves along a line between two points a and b, but this line is shifted relatively stationary observer with the speed of orbital motion of the Earth. Then, if the perpendicular ray really deviates in the direction of orbital motion of the Earth - and so it was really - the reason for the deviation, as in all the above cases, a combination of the speed of the beam perpendicular to the orbital velocity of Earth. In this case, according to the laws of mechanics of Galileo, Newton, trajectory perpendicular light beam is a hypotenuse right triangle with sides u and v, as shown in Figure 1 (in this case, u = c). Then for time t, during which in the moving coordinate system perpendicular to the beam will pass the distance L between the points a and b, in the fixed system for the same time, the same impetus to pass the path ab, equal . Как следует из треугольника расстояний, в неподвижной системе координат длина пути ab равна , where should: t = L / c Thus, the time during which a pulse of light pass the path L, is the same and equal to t = L / c in the moving, and in the fixed coordinate system. In the experiment, Shamir and Fox deviation perpendicular beam actually is due to velocity of motion of the beam with a speed of medium - a glass rod, which moves the beam. But this means, contrary to popular belief, that the air inside a glass rod in full, rather than the Fresnel, likes the movement of the rod. In other words, the ether, which is between the molecules of glass, and are these molecules represent a continuous optical medium, the moving on of a coordinate system as a coherent whole. Similarly, in the Michelson-Morley experiment, the deviation perpendicular beam actually due to velocity of motion of the beam with a speed of medium - the Earth's atmosphere, which spreads the beam in this case. This means, contrary to popular belief, that the air inside the Earth's atmosphere completely, rather than Fresnel, likes it (the atmosphere) movement. In other words, the ether, which is between the molecules of gases comprising the atmosphere, and the very molecules of these gases represent a continuous optical medium, the moving on of a coordinate system as a coherent whole. Conclusion Thus, the above considerations allow to conclude: 1. Rejection of perpendicular beam after shifting interferometer, observed in the fixed coordinate system, due to the movement velocity of a light beam perpendicular to the speed of air, moving with the orbital speed of Earth. 2. In turn, the zero result of experiment Michelson-Morley interferometer due to the lack of movement on the environment in which distributed the beams of light in this experiment, ie Earth's atmosphere, which is the only correct and consistent explanation for the zero outcome of the experiment. Consequently, despite the zero result, the Michelson-Morley experiment is not proof, but rather a complete refutation of the fact Lorentz, and Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity. 3. So how about the motion of the interferometer environment in which light is distributed, has no place either in the Michelson-Morley experiment, nor in the experiment Shamir and Fox, the time T is equal to T = 2L / c. Thus, to explain the zero result of the Michelson-Morley experiment, Lorentz hypothesis of reducing the length of a side arm of the interferometer is unnecessary. However, «the vortex experience» Sagnac proves that in the case of the interferometer on the traffic environment, which spreads the light, a change nterferentsionnoy picture, corresponding exactly to the speed of the interferometer on the «svetoprovodyaschey environment», regardless of whether this environment is the air or pure vacuum, or ether. Thus, the zero result of the Michelson-Morley experiment is not proof of the impossibility of detecting any effects due to motion of the observer relative to the ether or the ether on the observer. All that proves the Michelson-Morley experiment, as well as many other experiments, this lack of movement of ether in the Earth's atmosphere - and more! About the author: Valery V. Petrov Prospekt Lenina 30, Apt. 9 Nikolaev 54029 Ukraine Sources of information: 1. Albert A. Michelson, Edward W. Morley. On the Relative Motion of the Earth and the Luminiferous Ether. The American Journal of Science. III series. Vol. XXII, No. 128, P.120 - 129 (a translation of the article in the book «air wind», under the editorship of Doctor of Technical Sciences VA Atsyukovskogo. M. Energoatomizdat, 1992). 2. R. Feynman, R. Leighton, M. Sands. The Feynman Lectures on Physics. M. Mir, 1976. 3. UY Frankfurt. Optics of moving media and the special theory of relativity. Einstein Collection 1977, Moscow, Nauka, 1980. 4. Shamir J., Fox R. A new experimental test of special relativity. Nuov. Cim., 1969, 62B, p.258-264. |