Authors: Henok Tadesse
The most straight forward explanation of the Michelson-Morley experiment null result is the emission or ballistic theory of light, according to which the velocity of light is constant c relative to the source. In fact, the Michelson-Morley experiment may be seen as a compelling evidence for the emission hypothesis. The emission theory was abandoned mainly due to moving source experiments which proved the independence of the speed of light from the velocity of the source. It will be shown in this paper that physicists hastened to discard the emission theory which will be shown to be crucial to solve the light speed puzzle. The conventional emission theory is modified intuitively as follows. The speed of light emitted from a light source that is moving with absolute velocity Vabs is equal to c - Vabs relative to the source in the forward direction and c + Vabs relative to the source in the backward direction. Therefore, relative an observer at absolute rest in front of the moving source, the speed of light is equal to the sum of the speed of light relative to the source and the speed of the source: ( c - Vabs )+ Vabs = c . Relative to an observer at absolute rest behind the source, the speed of light is equal to the difference between the speed of light relative to the source and the speed of the source : ( c + Vabs ) - Vabs = c . We can see that this model predicts that the speed of light is independent of the velocity of the source. This model also predicts the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment because the speed of light is c ± Vabs relative to the source., in the forward and backward directions. Change of the speed of light relative to the source doesn’t result in any fringe shift because , intuitively, both the transverse and longitudinal light beams will be delayed or advanced by equal amounts of time. This theory is a modified emission theory, a fusion between ' ether ' theory and emission theory.
Comments: 4 Pages.
[v1] 2017-04-03 07:26:24
Unique-IP document downloads: 21 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.