Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2 views

    ProofOfTheEther3

    Uploaded by

    roxanne Fernandes

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    ProofOfTheEther3

    Uploaded by

    roxanne Fernandes
    2 views8 pages

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    2 views8 pages

    ProofOfTheEther3

    Uploaded by

    roxanne Fernandes

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 8

    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

    net/publication/332556237

    Proof that the Ether exists and that the speed of light is anisotropic

    Preprint · April 2019

    CITATIONS READS

    0 4,722

    1 author:

    Declan Traill

    57 PUBLICATIONS 61 CITATIONS

    SEE PROFILE

    All content following this page was uploaded by Declan Traill on 12 June 2022.

    The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


    Proof that the Ether exists and that the speed
    of light is anisotropic
    © 21/2/2019 Declan Traill
    Updated 12/06/2022
    The null result of the Michelson Morley interferometer experiment in 1887
    has been widely regarded as proof that the aether does not exist, and that
    Relativity’s assertion that the speed of light is isotropic is all reference
    frames is the correct model.
    However, a number of experiments have detected anisotropy in the speed
    of light by exploiting the effect known as Fresnel Dragging to reveal the
    different travel times by light in each direction of a round trip.

    The null result of the Michelson Morley interferometer experiment in 1887


    has been widely regarded as proof that the aether does not exist, and that
    Relativity’s assertion that the speed of light is isotropic is all reference frames is
    the correct model. However, Lorentz contraction was devised in order to explain
    the null result, thus causing the round-trip time of light in any direction within a
    moving reference frame to be consistent with a constant speed of light [4,5].
    Lorentz contraction should have been recognized as the step required to save
    the aether theory, rather than supporting evidence for Relativity, which is what
    actually happened.
    There have been many experiments conducted over the years since the
    Michelson Morley experiment, all conducted with the aim of settling the
    argument about the existence of the aether once-and-for-all [7], but most of
    these seem to assume that the supposed anistropy of the speed of light would
    be of the same order as was presumed to be the case prior to the Michelson
    Morley experiment (with no Lorentz contraction occurring to the moving
    reference frame). Some of the others are not capable of detecting the amount
    of difference in travel times of light beams to reveal the anistropy, or are only
    able to detect phase differences rather than total travel time differences; thus
    can only detect a very small apparent difference in travel times – up to a phase
    difference of 2𝜋 radians, but not multiples of 2𝜋.
    However, despite the effect of Lorentz contraction making the detection of
    light speed anisotropy in a vacuum impossible, a number of experiments have
    detected an anisotropy in the speed of light for the Earth’s frame in its motion
    through interstellar space. This is able to be done by making use of the Fresnel
    Dragging effect that occurs when light travels through a moving optical medium
    such as water or glass. This effect can be explained purely by Classical Physics
    [3] despite the claims by Relativity that it is another of the affects attributable
    to Special Relativity. The amount of the effect depends on the refractive index
    of the medium the light is propagating through, as well as the distance it travels
    through the medium. Therefore, for the Michelson Morley experiment (and
    many of the other experiments conducted since), the refractive index was too
    low (in air it is approximately 1.00029, compared to the vacuum where it is 1
    and no Fresnel Dragging occurs), and the distance that the light traveled was
    very small – only meters, rather than the kilometers required to detect light
    speed anisotropy by this method.
    Some of the experiments that have been able to detect the light speed
    anisotropy, and all agree of the direction and magnitude of the detected speed
    of the Earth through the aether are Miller (1933), Torr (1984), Krisher (1990),
    DeWitte (1991), Cahill (2006,2009) [1,2,8].

    Perhaps the best of these experimental results was the experiment conducted
    by De Witte in 1991 over 178 days using 1.5 km of coaxial cable running
    North/South in Brussels. The refractive index of the cable was 1.5 and the
    following modelling of both the Fresnel Dragging of the light and Lorentz
    contraction of the apparatus in the Earth’s reference frame (shown below)
    matches the De Witte data (see Figure 8 on page 14 in Ref [1]). Also, to be noted
    is that the detected speed through the aether showed diurnal effects that
    tracked sidereal time and not solar time, and that orbital effects were also
    apparent, confirming the interstellar origin of the space flow.

    UPDATE – Latest published proof:


    Please read this peer-reviewed, published paper (2022) for the latest evidence
    of the aether and a complete explanation of the experimental results obtained
    in both the Michelson-Morley and Miller (Mt Wilson) experiments [9].

    Traill. D. A, “The Light Timing Calculations of the Interferometer in the Quest to Detect Light
    Speed Anisotropy and a Case Study of the Michelson-Morley and Miller Mt Wilson
    Experiments”, Journal of Applied Mathematics and Physics Vol.10 No.3，March 17, 2022
    DOI: 10.4236/jamp.2022.103055
    >

    >
    Once it is realized that space is a medium that can flow, and that light (and
    matter) are waves that flow with respect to this medium, there are other
    important consequences that follow from this. There is the supposed existence
    of Dark Matter, theorized primarily from the unexplained rotation rates of
    Galaxies, which appear to rotate at an orbital speed too high for the calculated
    amount of Baryonic matter within the Galaxy. However, if one realizes that
    space is filled with a field which has its own energy, then Black Holes would
    consume this field in the same way that they consume normal Baryonic matter
    from stars/planets [6].
    Thus, when the large Black Holes at the center of Galaxies consume the aether
    field of space in this way, they cause the space surrounding them to flow
    inwards, much like water flowing down a plughole. This causes the orbiting stars
    to be carried with the space, and causes them to attain a higher orbital speed in
    order to remain orbiting around the central Black Hole. Therefore, there is no
    need to invoke an enormous amount of extra matter within Galaxies (which has
    evaded all detection, except for the gravitational effect attributed to it), and it
    can be explained by a flowing aether/space field.

    CORRECTION:
    I have been thinking about the light travel time calculations for a signal moving
    through a cable (or optical fiber, or glass block) which is itself moving through
    space at a fixed speed v. I think I (we) have been misled by De Witte/Cahill's
    suggestion that Fresnel Dragging is involved. My analysis of Fresnel Dragging [3]
    shows that the reason for the travel times being the way they are is the Fizeau
    experiment is due to:
    (1) The increased/decreased optical path length that the light must travel due
    to it being carried by the moving water molecules, and
    (2) The increased/decreased number of water molecules encountered by the
    light due to the water's motion (and the changed time of propagation due
    to (1)).
    However, in a cable which is moving through space, the number of molecules in
    the cable is fixed (doesn’t change), so the effect of (2) is not present. Also, when
    the light is carried by the molecules in the cable (effect (1)), the cable ends
    themself also move by the same amount and in the same direction - so there is
    no change to the optical path length.
    So, neither effect that results in Fresnel's formula actually apply to this situation.
    If we were a stationary observer observing a signal moving through an endless
    cable that is moving past us, then the Fresnel Dragging effect would apply - but
    that is not the situation we are seeking to analyze and explain.
    Therefore, the analysis for a cable moving through space should not be an
    application of the Fresnel Dragging formula, but simply treat the cable as if it is
    at rest, but the light is moving through it anisotropically, at (c - v) in one direction
    and (c + v) in the opposite direction through the cable. This simplifies the
    calculation somewhat, and slightly changes the calculation. Based on De Witte’s
    measured time difference it now looks like he measured a speed through space
    of ~300km/s. See the calculation on the following page:
    >

    >
    References
    [1] Cahill. Reginald T. “A New Light-Speed Anisotropy Experiment: Absolute Motion and
    Gravitational Waves Detected”, Progress in Physics, 4, 73-92, 2006.
    https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0610076.pdf
    [2] Cahill. Reginald T, Brotherton. David. “Experimental Investigation of the Fresnel Drag
    Effect in RF Coaxial Cables”, Progress in Physics, 2011
    http://www.ptep-online.com/2011/PP-24-04.PDF
    [3] Traill. Declan. “Fresnel dragging explained by a classical model of light transmission in
    optical media”, 2017
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326647333_Fresnel_dragging_explained_by_a_
    classical_model_of_light_transmission_in_optical_media
    [4] Traill. Declan. “A Classical Reconstruction of Relativity”, 2012
    http://vixra.org/abs/1507.0055
    [5] Traill. Declan. “Relatively Simple? An Introduction to Energy Field Theory”, 2001
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228368645_Relatively_Simple_An_Introduction
    _to_Energy_Field_Theory
    [6] Traill. Declan. “An Explanation for Galaxy Rotation Rates without Requiring Dark Matter”,
    2018
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326988843_An_Explanation_for_Galaxy_Rotatio
    n_Rates_without_Requiring_Dark_Matter

    [7] Dlugozs. J.M. “What is the experimental basis of Special Relativity?”, 2007
    http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html#modern-laser

    [8] Cahill. Reginald T. “Combining NASA/JPL One-Way Optical-Fiber Light-Speed Data


    withSpacecraft Earth-Flyby Doppler-Shift Data to Characterise 3-Space Flow”, Progress in
    Physics, 4, 50-64, 2009
    http://www.ptep-online.com/2009/PP-19-05.PDF
    [9] Traill. D. A, “The Light Timing Calculations of the Interferometer in the Quest to Detect
    Light Speed Anisotropy and a Case Study of the Michelson-Morley and Miller Mt Wilson
    Experiments”, Journal of Applied Mathematics and Physics Vol.10 No.3，March 17, 2022
    DOI: 10.4236/jamp.2022.103055

    View publication stats

    You might also like