Measuring The Earth's Rotation With Light Path Interferometers
Below is the mathematical equation that Michelson and Gale famously claimed showed the Earth rotated.
The capital "A" stands for area,
image source: original publication abstract
The Michelson Gale Experiment Is By Definition, Fudged
Can anyone really explain what the above equation is meant to model? The interferometer light paths are used as area, the capital "A" stands for that value. This is supposed to be an experiment that uses light to measure Earth's supposed rotation. How does area relate to that? Should we not have different values representing the different circuits the light beams were supposed to have taken. Shouldn't the equation represent the difference between one light path as opposed to the other. By using area as a value all Michelson and Gale and company needed do was to make the experiment the proper size and they would generate desired result.
Where are the values for opposing light paths?
One path was meant to go with imagined Earthy rotational flow, and one was meant to go against. Where are the mathematical values and where's the equation that was used to derive logical result to this cosmic inquiry? Should we not expect math that represents the difference between the light paths in terms of measuring the paths as individual values and not as some kind of geometric two dimensional "mass"? I would think this an example of very fallacious reasoning. This is an example of what would seem to be peer reviewed mathematical folly and fallacy. Perhaps Michelson learned his lesson from his famed failure to find any luminance based empirical evidence that the Earth orbited the Sun. Now it seems he understood how the "science" game was won. Reinforce what the people with funds want to hear and you get to keep and continue your career. Below the above equation is explained and you can see how it would really seem to be either consciously, semi-consciously or unconsciously designed to allow these supposed scientists to maintain orbital claim in spite of what they could actually learn from study of paths of light. Beautiful and so called elegant equation is no substitute for natural demonstrable principle.
Michelson Gale: No Control Circuit
Michelson-Gale Experiment explained source: Malcolm Bowden
Please note Malcolm Bowden does not refer to the actual math equation used to "prove" the experiment correct.
With all due respect, I disagree with many of Mr. Bowden's assumptions. As we can read the actual experiment uses one latitude and is not as Mr. Bowden describes.
Most people seem to love mystery and false dichotomy.
That equation cannot be used to measure anything. The equation does not show the Earth rotates or that there is a rotating Aether, Ether, or ether either. The experiment itself would probably result in as null a result as the Michelson Morley experiment produced. The equation Michelson and Gale used is their fudge. The use of area as the measure for the light paths excludes any real measure of the paths. Instead the design of the experiment itself will yield the desired result. The experimenters needed to only set up the correct area and bingo, the correct result.
Please notice the apparent bait and switch and contradiction between experiment description and the actual equation used to generate the desired result.
This experiment could detect no Sagnac effect, despite claims to the contrary. The equation shows the impossibility. The above equation cannot possibly measure the difference between one light path and another, can it? It is an equation designed with the end result in mind. It's not just that Einstein and other relativists are wrong, it's also that even some of the alternate ideas are wrong too. A lot of this seems designed to foster more mystery cult like speculation than not. Ether theories are fine to consider in correct context. When such ideas become conspiracy web fodder, then one is in "tabloid yellow journal land".
A Fallaciously Applied Mathematical Equation Does Not Equate With A Spinnning Earth
"The aim, as it was first proposed by Albert A. Michelson in 1904 and then executed in 1925, was to find out whether the rotation of the Earth has an effect on the propagation of light in the vicinity of the Earth. The Michelson-Gale experiment was a very large ring interferometer, (a perimeter of 1.9 kilometer), large enough to detect the angular velocity of the Earth. Like the original Michelson-Morley experiment, the Michelson-Gale-Pearson version compared the light from a single source (carbon arc) after travelling in two directions. The major change was to replace the two "arms" of the original MM version with two rectangles, one much larger than the other. Light was sent into the rectangles, reflecting off mirrors at the corners, and returned to the starting point. Light exiting the two rectangles was compared on a screen just as the light returning from the two arms would be in a standard MM experiment. The expected fringe shift in accordance with the stationary aether and special relativity was given by Michelson as:
where Δ is the displacement in fringes, A the area in square kilometers, ϕ the latitude (41° 46'), c the speed of light, ω the angular velocity of Earth, λ the effective wavelength used. In other words, this experiment was aimed to detect the Sagnac effect due to Earth's rotation."
How could this detect a Sagnac effect?
Where are the values for the light paths the experiment was meant to measure? The total area of the path can't possibly be used to measure the difference between the paths due to the effect of the rotation of Earth or Ether. All mathematical modeling elegance aside, why would anyone expect to measure the supposed rotation of the Earth with light paths? This seems counterintuitive to me. Why also would anyone need to imagine a rotating medium? How does a rotating medium really make sense? Seems to me, and Lord knows I may be mistaken, but is it not more logical to speculate and imagine a prime material like medium that moves not but just "waves", like the rippling ocean surface?
In any event, why were these scientists so intent on proving the Earth moved in some fashion? Why did no one bring up the possibility that heliocentric theory was wrong? We don't seem to have any credible evidence that any serious scholars presented any kind of criticism of heliocentric theory despite all the flaws and obvious ad hoc reasoned patchwork. Was criticism repressed or were all imaginations so enamored with popular theory that they could consider no other option, showing the power the crowd mind really has over humanity? Whatever was or wasn't the case, the fact remains that the above experiment equation lacks the means to measure what it claims to. It appears to be obviously circularly reasoned and contrived to yield desired result.
The Predetermined Outcome
"The outcome of the experiment was that the angular velocity of the Earth as measured by astronomy was confirmed to within measuring accuracy. The ring interferometer of the Michelson-Gale experiment was not calibrated by comparison with an outside reference (which was not possible, because the setup was fixed to the Earth). From its design it could be deduced where the central interference fringe ought to be if there would be zero shift. The measured shift was 230 parts in 1000, with an accuracy of 5 parts in 1000. The predicted shift was 237 parts in 1000. According to Michelson/Gale, the experiment is compatible with both the idea of a stationary ether and special relativity.
As it was already pointed out by Michelson in 1904, a positive result in such experiments contradicts the hypothesis of complete aether drag. On the other hand, the stationary ether concept is in agreement with this result, yet it contradicts (with the exception of Lorentz's ether) the Michelson-Morley experiment. Thus special relativity is the only theory which explains both experiments. The experiment is consistent with relativity for the same reason as all other Sagnac type experiments (see Sagnac effect). That is, rotation is absolute in special relativity, because there is no inertial frame of reference in which the whole device is at rest during the complete process of rotation, thus the light paths of the two rays are different in all of those frames, consequently a positive result must occur. It's also possible to define rotating frames in special relativity (Born coordinates), yet in those frames the speed of light is not constant in extended areas any more, thus also in this view a positive result must occur. Today, Sagnac type effects due to Earth's rotation are routinely incorporated into GPS."
The Michelson Gale Rectangle
The experiment set up seems to have light paths that were all the same size. One would think the combined effect would cancel out any possibility of a measure of difference. Mr. Malcolm Bowden explains an experimental set up of his own imagining. If you read the description of the setup (see link below) you will see that the interferometer pipes were set up on a squared rectangle tract of land with the dimensions of 2010 feet by 1113 feet. The 12 inch water pipes were laid level and straight.
Even were the Earth rotating, this set up, if as truly straight as advertised, would seem to predict a null result as the different paths to and fro would seem to cancel out. One of the horizontal paths does need to be shorter than the other and there I think Mr. Bowden correct.
Michelson Was So "Square" Wasn't He?
He seemed awfully fond of numbers having to do with trinity.
"Brother Albert Michelson December 19th 1852 – May 9th 1931 Member of: Washington Lodge #21, New York City, New York American physicist known for his work on the measurement of the speed of light and especially for the Michelson–Morley experiment. In 1907 he received the Nobel Prize in Physics. He became the first American to receive the Nobel Prize in sciences."
The Speed of Light is Another Fiction, But That is A Story For Another Time
Men of the masonic order of the enlightenment age would try to bring managerial freedom and wage slave liberty to all. Revolutions, scientific or otherwise, tend not to be all they are cracked up to be. (stone breaking pun intended)
These initiated minds tended to be obsessed with building obelisks and Solar cult trappings. Funny how these square stoned guys seem to be enamored with light and telling time. Are these men disciples of the mythic ancient Roman god of winter solstice time, the lord of capitol domes himself, scythe wielding, child consuming Saturn?
Keep It In "G" Brah
Being a Freemason used to mean something special. Maybe for some it still does, (Hollywood seems enamored with it), but these secret society brotherhoods evolved into the Anglo American foundations and corporate business entities of today. Jesuits, Freemasons and all the rest of the conspiratorial cast are used as tabloid bogeyman fare that tends to totally eclipse the actual role these organizations really played in developing what we would consider to be foundational to today's highly contrived and preplanned world of global commercial enterprise with layers of cancerous government, most seem to take for granted.
image and quote source: Albert Michelson - Ezekiel Bates Lodge A.F. & A.M.
see also: http://www.navesinklodge9.org/famous.htm
"Michelson, Albert A: The first American scientist to win a Nobel Prize (1907)."
They Couldn't Measure Earth's Imagined Orbit Either (ether or not)
Modern Cosmology: An ad hoc pyramid house of glass shards waiting to fall.
One ad hoc spawns another in endless fractal cycle. Without Michelson Morley's folly, Einstein could not become plagiarist idol. Quantum foam fallacy wouldn't be considered reality and there'd be no need to dream of dark multiverse inspired, ever changing and occulted matter rearranging, official Big Bang Red Bull-Spit.
Apologetics Aside: There is No Demonstrable Proof Earth is On Some Kind of Space Ride
Up next: Foucault's Fudge Filled Pendulum Wouldn't Measure Earth's Rotation On A Spinning Globe Anyway
Didn't you know? (a sea man's fare thee well)
Sir Isaac Newton was into sailors. Really into them. Or so the stories say. I hear he wore a wig. Or maybe he was one.
I wonder if he some traveling lucky someone's renaissance cotton candy-dandy. Whatever floats your boat, is all I'd say.
Newton's Orbital Mechanics Are Whacked Out!
Apples are not like The Moon. One falls with accelerated velocity, (an increasing speed) and the other never falls to the Earth. Can you tell which is which?
Further, rocks do not fly. Rocks do not orbit. It's not only counter intuitive to think this, it is also unnatural.
If someone wishes to demonstrate an actual experiment we can all replicate, round rocks as explanation for lights in the sky is fanciful speculation and nothing more.
I know what the Moon seems to look like and I do not dismiss speculative possibility. I just think there is no reason to think any of this is demonstrable reality.
Newton's feverish imaginings relies on illogical mathematical equation. The value for Big G is a sleight of hand trick. Whatever one thinks of gravity or not, the fact is the phenomena is demonstrably an accelerated one, putting a fixed value in mathematical equation makes little sense. Not in this context at least. Demonstrable ballistic physics shows Newton's fallacy. God would have to keep adding an infinite supply of ever increasing energy to meet the need Newton imagined.
A real projectile and Netons's imagined cannonball have a fixed horizontal velocity and the pull of gravity is a demonstrably accelerated effect. It starts slow and builds up. These are two independent axes. A future article will again go over this ground. If you want check out the article index, I have a few articles that deal with this subject.
see also: The Birth of a New Physics
Asteroids Falling Out Of The Sky Are More Than Likely Another Historical Masonic Like Hoax, Like French Freemason Created Ancient Egypt
"In 1801, while making a star map, Italian priest and astronomer Giuseppe Piazzi accidentally discovered the first and largest asteroid, Ceres, orbiting between Mars and Jupiter. Although Ceres is classified today as a dwarf planet, it accounts for a quarter of all the mass of all the thousands of known asteroids in or near the main asteroid belt.
Over the first half of the 19th century, a wealth of asteroids were discovered and classified as planets. William Herschel coined the phrase "asteroid" in 1802, but other scientists referred to the newfound objects as minor planets. By 1851, there were 15 new asteroids, and the naming process shifted to include numbers, with Ceres being designated as (1) Ceres. Today, Ceres shares dual citizenship as both an asteroid and a dwarf planet, while the rest remain asteroids.
Since the International Astronomical Union is less strict on how asteroids are named when compared to other bodies, there are asteroids named after Mr. Spock of "Star Trek" and rock musician Frank Zappa, as well as more solemn tributes, such as the seven asteroids named for the crew of the Space Shuttle Columbia killed in 2003. Naming asteroids after pets is no longer allowed."
Spaced Out Meteorite Minds Believe Dinosaurs Will Make The World End
"Two of the oldest recorded meteorite falls in Europe are the Elbogen (1400) and Ensisheim (1492) meteorites. The German physicist, Ernst Florens Chladni, was the first to publish (in 1794) the then audacious idea that meteorites were rocks from space. His booklet was "On the Origin of the Iron Masses Found by Pallas and Others Similar to it, and on Some Associated Natural Phenomena". In this he compiled all available data on several meteorite finds and falls concluded that they must have their origins in outer space. The scientific community of the time responded with resistance and mockery. It took nearly ten years before a general acceptance of the origin of meteorites was achieved through the work of the French scientist Jean-Baptiste Biot and the British chemist, Edward Howard. Biot's study, initiated by the French Academy of Sciences, was compelled by a fall of thousands of meteorites on 26 April 1803 from the skies of L'Aigle, France.
One of the leading theories for the cause of the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event that included the dinosaurs is a large meteorite impact. The Chicxulub Crater has been identified as the site of this impact. There has been a lively scientific debate as to whether other major extinctions, including the ones at the end of the Permian and Triassic periods might also have been the result of large impact events, but the evidence is much less compelling than for the end Cretaceous extinction."
source: Meteorite - Wikipedia
The Father of Meteorites
Meteors are myths. Can anyone do an experiment to show how rocks orbit the Earth or the Sun? Stones and rocks are of interest to historical masons and miners. Coins had to be minted from metal and metal comes from mining rock. I hope you can appreciate why there are myths of flying stones. Meteors come across like an old historical masonic joke or pun of sorts. Mining, metallurgy and minting make money.
"Ernst Florens Friedrich Chladni (German: [ˈɛʁnst ˈfloːʁɛns ˈfʁiːdʁɪç ˈkladnɪ]; 30 November 1756 – 3 April 1827) was a Germanphysicist and musician. His most important work, for which he is sometimes labeled the father of acoustics, included research on vibrating plates and the calculation of the speed of sound for different gases. He also undertook pioneering work in the study of meteorites and is regarded by some as the father of meteoritics."
"In 1794, Chladni published Über den Ursprung der von Pallas gefundenen und anderer ihr ähnlicher Eisenmassen und über einige damit in Verbindung stehende Naturerscheinungen ("On the Origin of the Iron Masses Found by Pallas and Others Similar to it, and on Some Associated Natural Phenomena") in which he proposed that meteorites have an extraterrestrial origin. This was a controversial statement at the time, since meteorites were thought to be of volcanic origin. This book made Chladni one of the founders of modern meteorite research.
Chladni was initially ridiculed for his claims, but his writings sparked a curiosity that eventually led more researchers supporting his theory. In 1795, a large stony meteorite was observed during its fall to Earth at a cottage near Wold Newton in Yorkshire, England and a piece of it, known as the Wold Cottage meteorite, was given to the British chemist Edward Howard who, along with French mineralogist Jacques de Bournon, carefully analyzed its composition and concluded that an extraterrestrial origin was likely. In 1803, the physicist and astronomer Jean Baptiste Biot was commissioned by the French Minister of the Interior to investigate a meteor shower over L'Aigle in northern France that had peppered the town with thousands of meteorite fragments. Unlike Chladni's book and the scientific publication by Howard and de Bournon, Biot's lively report became popular and persuaded more people to take Chladni's insights seriously."
source: Ernst Florens Chladni
see also: Alvarez hypothesis - Wikipedia
more about meteorites and measuring gravity coming soon