The Michelson-Morley experiment was analyzed by E.E. Moon8 in 1993. He found that the null result could be explained by Postulate I* in a stationary coordinate system, but that a contraction of length which was a function of velocity was required in a reference frame which moved at a constant velocity with respect to the laboratory and that a contraction which was a function of both velocity and acceleration was required in an accelerated coordinate system. This is a generalization of the Fitzgerald contraction. On the other hand with Postulate III* a null fringe shift was predicted in stationary coordinate systems as well as coordinate systems moving at a constant velocity relative to the laboratory and also in accelerated coordinate systems, without any need for a Fitzgerald contraction of length.
The Michelson-Gale experiment was analyzed by Moon, Spencer and Moon9 in 1990. The correct fringe shift is predicted by both Postulates I* and III*, if analyzed in a non-rotating coordinate system attached to the axis of the Earth and also in a non-rotating coordinate system attached to the light source. However, the fringe shift originates in different parts of the rectangular path according to Postulates I* and III*.
The Sagnac effect was analyzed by Spencer and Shama10 in 1991. Here again the correct fringe shift was predicted by both Postulates I* and III* but was predicted to originate in different portions of the path.
It was not until Spencer and Shama11 analyzed stellar aberration in 1996 that they found an experiment which discriminated between Postulates I* and III*. In a coordinate system in which the star is stationary, both Postulate I* and Postulate III* predict the correct stellar aberration first observed by Bradley in 1728. But in a coordinate system in which the star is moving and the telescope is stationary, Postulate I* predicts no stellar aberration while Postulate III* predicts the correct result. This is the first proof of the validity of Postulate III* and the failure of Postulate I*.
http://www.physical-congress.spb.ru/...1/spencer1.asp
The Michelson-Gale experiment was analyzed by Moon, Spencer and Moon9 in 1990. The correct fringe shift is predicted by both Postulates I* and III*, if analyzed in a non-rotating coordinate system attached to the axis of the Earth and also in a non-rotating coordinate system attached to the light source. However, the fringe shift originates in different parts of the rectangular path according to Postulates I* and III*.
The Sagnac effect was analyzed by Spencer and Shama10 in 1991. Here again the correct fringe shift was predicted by both Postulates I* and III* but was predicted to originate in different portions of the path.
It was not until Spencer and Shama11 analyzed stellar aberration in 1996 that they found an experiment which discriminated between Postulates I* and III*. In a coordinate system in which the star is stationary, both Postulate I* and Postulate III* predict the correct stellar aberration first observed by Bradley in 1728. But in a coordinate system in which the star is moving and the telescope is stationary, Postulate I* predicts no stellar aberration while Postulate III* predicts the correct result. This is the first proof of the validity of Postulate III* and the failure of Postulate I*.
http://www.physical-congress.spb.ru/...1/spencer1.asp
Therefore even according to HK experiment the postulates are invalidated and relativity is invalidated.
JM
No comments:
Post a Comment