Classical Physics

   

Mistakes and Contradictions in the Michelson Morley Experiment

Authors: Walter Ruh

In the following, it is shown that the Michelson & Morley experiment is subject to heavy mistakes. All considerations are based on the original publication, »AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, ARTICLE XXXVI On the Relative Motion of the Earth and the Luminiferous Ether, by ALBERT A. MICHELSON and EDWARD W. MORLEY". 1. The experiment presents measurements and expects results in the evening at around 18:00. This is wrong! Anyone with a knowledge of the earth's rotation and the course around the sun can see that the Michelson and Morley experiment makes sense only at the high noon and at midnight. The "ether wind" is only at this time in the measurable direction to the measuring device. In the evening and in the morning, the ether wind is in any case perpendicular (from top to bottom or from bottom to top) to the horizontal measuring device. 2. The light path, as described, cannot be correct. The perpendicular deflected light path can never be against the "ether wind". 3. Intellectual bases for the experiment are incomplete and therefore incorrect. The assumptions and conditions do not correspond with the mathematics for this experiment. At the end is only one conclusion possible: The Michelson and Morley experiment is very roughly mistaken and therefore the results must be considered irrelevant.

Comments: 7 Pages. language is German, for copyright see: ruhwalter47@gmail.com

Download: PDF

Submission history

[v1] 2017-10-19 09:46:07

Unique-IP document downloads: 23 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