[CONTACT]

[ABOUT]

[POLICY]

[ADVERTISE]

unix.net.spaceutcsrgv!utzoo!

Found at: gopher.quux.org:70/Archives/usenet-a-news/NET.space/82.01.14_sri-unix.508_net.space.txt

Asri-unix.508
net.space
utcsrgv!utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!menlo70!sri-unix!JGA@MIT-MC
Thu Jan 14 10:27:46 1982
Question on Michelson-Morley experiment
From: John G. Aspinall <JGA MIT-MC AT>
The Michelson-Morely experiment has been repeated many times.  A
summary of a number of these experiments appeared in a review article
by Shankland et al. [1] in 1955.  The best test I could find a
reference to, is one using lasers in 1964 [2].  (I found pointers to
both these references in "Special Relativity", by French.)
In none of these experiments, was there any detected fringe shift
that could be ascribed to ether motion.  Later experiments put
successively lower bounds on any possible motion.
In the laser experiment, "... No change in beat frequency ... was
detectable within the accuracy of the measurement (about +/- 3kHz).
This was less than 1/1000 of the change that one would calculate from
an ether-wind hypothesis...." (Quote from French.)  Now fringe shift
(or beat frequency shift - same thing) is proportional to the square
of the velocity difference, so this means that any motion is down by a
factor of more than 30 from the ether-wind hypothesis.  This is
certainly not the detected motion that Stine claims.
I haven't read the Stine column, and I would be interested to hear if
the letters section in following months had any complaints about this
in it, but I will inject one personal note here.  This is the sort of
thing that gives SF a very bad name - if we (the collective SF
community, editors especially) let this sort of thing go unchallenged,
then we deserve the reputation of not being able to distinguish fact
from fiction.  SF might as well be all fantasy.  Any claims to being
intelligent speculation about "what might happen" go out the window,
in the eyes of many.
Agreed, there is a line to be drawn between stifling creative thought,
and "print everything as fact", but you don't overcome "math anxiety"
by telling the student that all answers are right.  Likewise you don't
encourage intelligent speculation about OUR world, by ignoring what
we know already.
[1] Shankland et al., Rev. Mod. Phys., 27, 167, (1955).
[2] Jaseja et al., Phys. Rev. 133, A1221, (1964).
John Aspinall.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
 gopher://quux.org/ conversion by John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org>
 of http://communication.ucsd.edu/A-News/
This Usenet Oldnews Archive
article may be copied and distributed freely, provided:
1. There is no money collected for the text(s) of the articles.
2. The following notice remains appended to each copy:
The Usenet Oldnews Archive: Compilation Copyright (C) 1981, 1996 
 Bruce Jones, Henry Spencer, David Wiseman.


AD:

NEW PAGES:

[ODDNUGGET]

[GOPHER]