Srila Prabhupada 100k audio file Sudarsana Button Bar Links FAQ Feedback Text Search Index What's New?

[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Notions of an "ether"




In sci.physics, vanjac@netcom.com (Van) wrote:



>In article <3tslpu$hqf@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com>,

>Paul Stowe <pstowe@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

>>>The concept of the 'ether' is dead.  It was proved incorrect by the

>>famous M.M. experiment.  Special relativity allows for no privileged

>>frames; although this kind of space-time often is counter intuitive it

>>nontheless portrays the correct mysterious workings of our cosmos.  If

>>you continue to view the modern vacuum in terms of the old 'ether'

>>notions you will be in error.  Better to reckognize the M.M. message

>>and realize how the modern vaccum field conforms. 

>>

>>Alas, There are none so blind as those who will not see.  

>>

>>Please explain in detail HOW the M-M experiment PROVED beyond doubt the

>>a ether does not exist.



>The M-M experiment did not, of course, PROVE that the ether does not

>exist. Its not neccesary in physics to prove that things do not exist.

>Aliens could be living underground on Io, and no one can prove they aren't.

>The job of physics is do find and descirbe those things

>which can be shown to exist, or at least for there to be good reason(s)

>bor thinking that they exist.



>The ether was supposed to be the medium thru which light traveled,

>in the same way as sound waves travel in gases and other continua.



>In this case, if the continous medium is moving a velocity v with respect

>to some observer, and the wave at velocity v', the observer will see

>the wave travelling at velocity v + v' (vector addition using Galilean

>spacetime).



>The M-M experiment (I loaned out the book by Kilmister "Special Relativity"

>that has the original papers), showed that the speed of light was the

>same in summer, winter, spring and fall, when the earth was traveling

>in different directions and speeds though the hypothetical ether, and

>did not change when the experiment was rotated. Thus the propagation of

>light in space is not like waves in a continua, and an either for light

>to propagate in isn't required. Things like ether drag and other attempts

>to save the ether were not at all convincing then, any more than they are

>now.

>The experiments showed that the ether was not observable (at least by

>those methods), which is a good indication that something doesn't exist

>(in a physical sense).



>Again, in physics one needs to have evidence that something exists,

>there is no need to prove something doesn't exist, especially in absence

>of any evidence that it exists.



>The conclusion from the experiment was that light in a vacuum travels

>at the same speed in any direction, no matter what the speed of the

>emmiter or observer. This is part of the foundation of special relativity.

>-- 

>Van  --  Email: vanjac@netcom.com





Thank you. Hare Krishna!



Madhudvisa dasa       

(madhudvisa@krishna.org)      http://www.krishna.org

                                

All glories to His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada!








References: