- Prev: Accepting the Authority of the Telephone Book?
- Next: This world a miserable place?
- Index: The Sudarsana Archive -- Date Index
- Thread: The Sudarsana Archive -- Topic Index
Date Index | Topic Index
Sudarsana Home madhudvisa@krishna.org
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!
Sudarsana Home madhudvisa@krishna.org