# Alternative to Special Relativity

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by Prosoothus, Feb 1, 2003.

1. ### geistkieselValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,471
Zarkov, Z have athought or two on your statement regarding Michelson-Morley and while I have had the question buzzing around for some time it was not until recently that i found some merit to the problem as I see it.

Let us look at nothing but one physical parameter, actually a postulate and then we will casually visit the MM experiment and some answers will come.

The fact is that photon motion is independent of the motion of the source. Some of implicaions are obvious, all of them should be when we recognize that the motion of photons are also assisted by Newton that an object at rest or moving in a straight line will continue in that mode until acted upon by and out side force.

If you shine a light in a direction and the target of that light is a parallel mirror and that any motion of the mirror before the light arrives will always be covered by an appropritaely large mirror. But the first and crucial point here is that a slight shining perpendicular to a parallel surface will reflect directly onto the trajectory the photon took before reflection. There will always be some scatter, but this is due to surface imperfections not a "dragging along force."

All discussions and descriptions of the MM experiment all seem to parrot one aspect of the experiment and that is that the pulse of light directed tranverse to the direction of motion of the interferometer "gets carried away by the mirror moving with the interferometer" If the photon was truly directed perpendicular to the reflecting mirror then how could it be "carried along"? . I would need experimental data for the answet to this one, an experts opinion would not do. If he were an expert why didn't he see the MM flae in the first place?

Can the mirror motion induce a momentum deflection that forces a direction change? Perhaps there is a side impulse, by there are enough light experiments going on that are looking for photon/frame relative motion that it seems farfetched, especially when the totality of the published physics as I far as I have determined is contained in the "dragging along" statement.

There are other similar, almost exact reproductions of this experimental 'flaw". Relativity theory uses the moving frame to drag light pulses along with the moving space ship, but again how does the source, the mirror deflect the photon? One would think that a lateral sideways impulse of momentum would have been discovered as a property of light long before now.

In the case of the space ship experiments the light shining on the mirror is shown bouncing fand reflecting forward with the motion of the vehicle and is this stretchiing or lengthinging of the light beam that gets tranlated into the slowing down of clocks. This doesn't make sense as all one would have to do to erase time dilation from the physics books wouild be to refocus or realign the mirrors in the space ship, which are only thought experiments any way.. Also, when you look at the geometry of the MM experiment I saw a huge increase in apparrent resolution but with one major problem.

If the the interferometer leg transverse to the motion t when the photonjs both reflect and the mirror is adjusted to relect at 90 degrees, the two photon trajectories would be moving paralel after the final reflection and passage through the silvered mirrors. The light beam would be separated by a distance equal to t the earth velocity times the time required for the round trip of the two beams. Miller's, interferometer had 64 meter optical path therefore the time to traverse 64 meters is 2 x 10^ -7 seconds. I have seen references to the earth speed extend from 30 km/sc to 208 km/sec. So ising the 208 km/sec number the interferometer would move 2x 10^-7 x( 208) = 4.16 x 10^-5 km = 4,16 cm or for a 30 km/sec velocity .6 cm. eacj h result well within observation limits. Look at the MM math and see how much the expected results were buried in the math assunming the triangular path length imposed and wgot sucked down the black hole of light reflection.

My guess? The experimentors calculated fringe variations and therefore obtaining an interference fringe pattern was crucial which meant the mirrors got adjusted not by being dragged along but by being deflected during the setup. of the experiment in the search for aan interference pattern
Oh well..

The reason the bouncing light isn't consistent with time dilation is that the extended length of travel is purely a flaw in aligning morrors, but it doesn't explain any time dilation on bilogical bodies and other physical phemomena. The time dilation would be too easy to "repair" and therefore to reset the frequency of the clock mechanisms. Howevre, it is used as an example of time dilation.

This may be bit lengthy, and so I hope I couls be of help.

geistkiesel
10-20-2004