Relativity and Cosmology

   

A Critical and Thorough re-Analysis of the Null Result of the Michelson and Morley Experiment

Authors: Roald C. Maximo

It has happened sometimes in the history of scientific development, that a misinterpretation of a phenomenon or an experiment by a renowned scientist, will spread thereafter under the mantle of his authority without anyone bothering to verify the veracity of those arguments and check for its correctness. With time it becomes so settled that any attempt to deny it will meet with strong opposition. The word of this or that distinguished scientist is irrefutable and only a fool would dare to question it. This kind of attitude has caused serious harm to the scientific development over the centuries and led research in many areas astray. The last century has not been different. I'm coming back again and again to this issue, always in a somewhat different and more explicit mode because this is an emblematic case of what has been said above. In two previous papers1 we got to demystify the phenomenon of stellar aberration and show that there is nothing magic with light and, as has been demonstrated, there is no violation of the constancy of the speed of light in applying Eddington's rain drops analogy. Since there is a straight correlation, as will be readily shown, between the phenomenon of light aberration and the M/M experiment, we shall start making a rapid pass through it.

Comments: 5 pages

Download: PDF

Submission history

[v1] 20 Jul 2011

Unique-IP document downloads: 165 times

Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.

Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.

comments powered by Disqus