Test to measure for moving space-time across the earth

trevor borocz johnson

trevor borocz johnson

Registered Senior Member
Femto photography allows for a trillion frames per second and can capture light as it moves across the room. http://www.highpants.net/femto-photography-capturing-individual-photons-in-motion/

My experiment to detect for the aether would involve taking a picture with a femto camera of a split light beam along a 180 degree axis, and measuring with a ruler in the picture if the light travels outward faster in one direction then the other. One would only expect the light to travel slower or faster by a a fraction of a percent because the movement of the earth through the universe is a tiny fraction of the speed of light.

In the Michelson and Moorley experiment that originally measured for the aether moving across earth, the light bouncing back on the same path it was sent out on would cancel any momentum gained or lost from traveling with or against space-time on its initial path, and cause all light beams to return at the same time. That's why it didn't work.
 
trevor borocz johnson said:
In the Michelson and Moorley experiment that originally measured for the aether moving across earth, the light bouncing back on the same path it was sent out on would cancel any momentum gained or lost from traveling with or against space-time on its initial path, and cause all light beams to return at the same time. That's why it didn't work.
Click to expand...

This is wrong. The time gained from travelling with the flow of aether would be less than the time lost travelling against the flow. More here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson–Morley_experiment

Michelson and Morley were not such fools as to set up an experiment incapable of distinguishing, and nor was the rest of the world, who accepted the results of their determination.
 
trevor borocz johnson said:
Femto photography allows for a trillion frames per second and can capture light as it moves across the room. http://www.highpants.net/femto-photography-capturing-individual-photons-in-motion/

My experiment to detect for the aether would involve taking a picture with a femto camera of a split light beam along a 180 degree axis, and measuring with a ruler in the picture if the light travels outward faster in one direction then the other. One would only expect the light to travel slower or faster by a a fraction of a percent because the movement of the earth through the universe is a tiny fraction of the speed of light.
Click to expand...
Why do you need to limit it to a room?
Why not send a beam across 50 miles, measure its delay, then send a beam in the other direction and measure that?
That way, any potential difference will be a thousand times more detectable than over a mere dozen feet.
 
exchemist said:
This is wrong. The time gained from travelling with the flow of aether would be less than the time lost travelling against the flow. More here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson–Morley_experiment
Click to expand...

Hello exchemist. long time no see.

How are you going to gain or lose momentum when the distance travelled in both directions is the same and the movement of the aether is constant? Evidentaly the M-M experiment did show some movement of the aether just not what they expected. There experiment was predicting the earth's movement around the sun which is much slower then the suns movement around the galaxy and then even slower then the galaxy's movement through the universe!
 
NotEinstein said:
Are you using the data from the actual M-M experiment? If so, please look up more modern executions of the experiment of it: they have much better accuracy.
Click to expand...

I'm saying it doesn't work the way they predicted. If they're still doing the same experiment then it still isn't going to work. What's wrong with the experiment I detailed in the OP?
 
trevor borocz johnson said:
I'm saying it doesn't work the way they predicted. If they're still doing the same experiment then it still isn't going to work. What's wrong with the experiment I detailed in the OP?
Click to expand...
You are aware that the experiment has been repeated many times, with much higher accuracy? While it is true the original M-M experiment didn't fully yield the expected result, its repeats have done so.

Please stop using old, obsolete data.
 
trevor borocz johnson said:
Hello exchemist. long time no see.

How are you going to gain or lose momentum when the distance travelled in both directions is the same and the movement of the aether is constant? Evidentaly the M-M experiment did show some movement of the aether just not what they expected. There experiment was predicting the earth's movement around the sun which is much slower then the suns movement around the galaxy and then even slower then the galaxy's movement through the universe!
Click to expand...
If you have a water wave travelling in still water, at speed w, and reflecting off a wall a distance d away, the time taken for it to get out and back , T = 2d/w.

If there is a current of speed c towards the wall, the speed of a wave travelling with the current will be w+c and that when it is going against the current will be w-c.

If it travels the same distance d, hits the reflecting wall and comes back, the time it takes to get to the wall is d/(w+c). The time for the return journey is d/(w-c). So the total time T for out and back is now d/(w+c) + d/(w-c) = 2dw/(w² - c²). You can see that when c=0, i.e. still water, this becomes 2d/w, as it should. BUT, as c increases, the denominator gets smaller, so T gets larger. Indeed when c=w, the denominator vanishes and the time becomes infinite. This makes sense when you think about it because the time taken to get back increases faster than the outward time and when c=w the wave can't get back at all

The above is the principle Michelson and Morley would have used.

Asking about momentum is a distraction. A wave does not have a mean momentum. It is a travelling disturbance, not a material object. What is the mass of a wave, after all? It does not make sense.
 
Last edited:
trevor borocz johnson said:
I'm saying it doesn't work the way they predicted. If they're still doing the same experiment then it still isn't going to work. What's wrong with the experiment I detailed in the OP?
Click to expand...

There is nothing wrong with the experiment, to me the expectation/assumption that the ether is in matter form, creates problem. If we hypothesize that the space/ether is something but that something is neither matter nor energy but some other state then the Physics changes drastically.
 
Einstein ruled out a particulate luminiferous aether.

However, in A Different Universe, Robert Laughlin writes:

"The similarities between the vacuum of space and low-temperature phases of matter are legendary in physics."
 
Daecon said:
Yes. The ether is not made of energy or matter, it's made of magic.
Click to expand...

Pl do not soil the thread.
Fyi even in prevalent theory, we talk of expansion of space/spacetime. We even associate this expansion (accelerated aspect) with Dark Energy, but we do not know if whatever is increasingly expanding with the influence of DE is matter or energy (or your magic).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top