🚀 go-pugleaf

On Jul 14, 2:56 pm, Yanick Toutain <YanickTout...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
Dear Uncle Ben:  Michelson's interferometer was a marvelous instrument
for measuring DISTANCES and angles.  He used such to measure the
length of the standard meter to a fraction of the wavelength of the
light used.  For each measurement, he had a micro adjustable screw to
cause a PHYSICAL CHANGE in just one light course's length.  The light
course without the screw served as a CONTROL.
     But in the M-M experiment, it was wrongly assumed that each light
course would act as a control for the other.  The assumption was that
such experiment was a comparison of two ORTHOGONAL light courses.
When I was taking college physics, as the professor tried to explain M-
M, I realized, immediately, that the light courses weren't orthogonal;
they were tee shaped.  There was a beam splitter at the middle to
cause both light courses to travel to a target.  So, any velocity
effects must consider the speed-up or slow-down in both legs the
tees.  If the TIME of travel of the light from source to target
remains unchanged, there will be ZERO fringe shifts observed.  Using
algebra, I calculated the TIMES of travel and verified that logical
assumption.  You should read the following, and try doing the math for
yourself.  — NoEinstein —

Replicating NoEinstein’s Invalidation of M-M
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/t/ac6fcd9b4e8112ed?hl=en
Where Angels Fear to Fall
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/1e3e426fff6a5894/898737b3de57d9e6?hl=en&lnk=st&q=Where+Angels+Fear+to+Fall#898737b3de57d9e6
Cleaning Away Einstein’s Mishmash
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/5d847a9cb50de7f0/739aef0aee462d26?hl=en&lnk=st&q=#739aef0aee462d26
Dropping Einstein Like a Stone
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/989e16c59967db2b?hl=en#

>
> http://monsyte.blogspot.com/2008/07/answers-to-mr-ben-michelsons-mirr...
> french :http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_url?doit=done&tt=url&intl=1&fr=b...
> chinese :http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_url?doit=done&tt=url&intl=1&fr=b...
>
> Answers to Mr. Ben : Michelson's mirrors
>
> Dear Mr. Ben
>
> My 3 texts about the experience of Mr. Anton Zeilinger and Mr. Markus
> Aspelmeyer are also an introduction for a text about the mirrors of
> Michelson
>
> You have written
>
> ====
>
> "Just to refresh memories, they looked for the ether, trying to
> measure the velocity of the earth through it. Their interferometer
> floated on the surface of a tank to eliminate vibrations. They tried
> during different times of the year, when the motion of the earth
> around the sun was going in opposite directions relative to the stars.
> And they tried just rotating the interferometer. The sensitivity of
> the interferometer was such that they should have been able to detect
> motion at a small fraction of the speed of light. "
>
> ======
>
> I refuse the ether (I am a Newtonist, a partisan or Isaac Newton).
> Only vacuum and atomOs.
>
> But you're right:
>
> "Just to refresh memories, they looked for the ether, trying to
> measure the velocity of the earth through it. Their interferometer
> floated on the surface of a tank to eliminate vibrations. "
>
> But you need to say that Albert Michelson forgot the motion of the
> Earth.
>
> Then you wrote:
>
> " They tried during different times of the year, when the motion of
> the earth around the sun was going in opposite directions relative to
> the stars. And they tried just rotating the interferometer. "
>
> The motion of revolution of the Earth is not 30 km/s. That motion is
> 250 km/s.
>
> Then
>
> When you wrote
>
> " The sensitivity of the interferometer was such that they should have
> been able to detect motion at a small fraction of the speed of light.
> "
>
> Your opinion is wrong.
>
> Michelson and Morley and Miller were wrong about that: They ignored
> the motion of the Sun.
>
> =====
>
> You wrote:
>
> "They never did find any evidence of motion through the ether.
>
> Conclusion: Either a) the luminiferous ether that fills all space and
> transmits light to us from the stars is fixed to a floating
> interferometer in a tank in the basement of Adelbert Hall at Western
> Reserve University, or b) there is no ether, or c) galilean relativity
> is wrong, or some combination of these ideas."
>
> =========
>
> I agree about b)
>
> A) is stupid: the vibrations of the ether need to prove that the ether
> exists. Huygens never proved it. (neither Francesco Grimaldi)
>
> The waves are always the movement and/or the vibration of bodies.
>
> The bricks of matter are photons (Newton wrote it)
>
> The bricks of photons are atomOs (materialists think that since
> antiquity: atomOs are the last bricks.
>
> =========
>
> C) Let Galileo Galilei quiet: if you want to use his texts you must
> write the texts.
>
> Einsteinists use his name to create a smog of smoke.
>
> =======
>
> I will answer B) later
>
> =====
>
> You concluded
>
> "Einstein proposed (independently of this experiment, which he learned
> about later)answer c), and that if there is an ether, it is so clever
> at hiding from us that we can never detect it.
>
> What do the anti-relativity folk have to say about this experiment? I
> predict that Spaceman will say their interferometer malfunctioned.
>
> Some will say that Michelson and Morley must have been Jewish. Other
> than that, I am curious.
>
> Uncle Ben "
>
> =====
>
> Einstein was a Zionist: he went in USA with Chaim Weizmann (2nd April
> of 1921) to collect money for the Zionism (an "Hebraic university").
>
> But it is not the PROOF that his thesis was stupid.
>
> Kings of Belgium, of Spain, of Japan supported him: Three killers of
> poor people, killers of African workers, killers of Spanish republican
> workers, killers of Asian workers. Albert Einstein traveled around the
> world to thank them.(1921-1922).
>
> But it is not the PROOF that his thesis was stupid.
>
> He was going to smile to the killer Hiro-Hito when he knew that he has
> obtained the Nobel Price.
>
> But it is not the PROOF that his thesis was stupid.
>
> Vatican, Jerusalem Muslims chiefs, Jewish chiefs, reincarnated
> Buddhists, agree with him
>
> But it is not the PROOF that his thesis was stupid.
>
> (Read the apologists: Banesh Hoffman and Langevin)
>
> I don't know if Michelson, Morley and Miller believed in god or were
> bigots...
>
> BUT
>
> ===========
>
> My answer and my arguments for B)
>
> 1°) The possible speed of 5011 km/s (objective speed) need to use
> large mirrors. If the mirrors are too small, the photons will go
> beside.
>
> 2°) the photons will not arrive at the same place on the receptor.
>
> 3° The delay will be higher than the delay with a little stupid speed
> of 30 km/s.
>
> Conclusion: the" experience of Michelson" is a stupid pseudo
> experience of two clowns that ignore what Herschel have discovered one
> century before: the motion of the Sun in the direction of the apex
> (19,6 km/s) (Hercules)
>
> The results of the experience of two clowns that ignore such a motion
> are a very good brick to build a stupid pseudo theory like the
> relativity.
>
> Lenin, in "Materialism and empiriocriticism" ignored Einstein: He
> answered to him.
>
> The reality is objective. The time also, the space also.
>
> He was writing against Bogdanov / Malinovsky, against Mach, against
> Poincaré, against Bishop Berkeley.
>
> He was a Newtonist!
>
> We will win.
>
> I am finishing my excel drawings to show the motion of the photons
> during the pseudo experience of the two clowns Michelson and Morley.
>
> On 10 juil, 18:40, Uncle Ben <b...@greenba.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > How does the anti-Einstein crowd explain the famous Michelson-Morley
> > experiment?
>
> > Just to refresh memories, they looked for the ether, trying to measure
> > the velocity of the earth through it.  Their interferometer floated on
> > the suface of a tank to eliminate vibrations.  They tried during
> > different times of the year, when the motion of the earth around the
> > sun was going in opposite directions relative to the stars. And they
> > tried just rotating the interferometer.  The sensitivity of the
> > interferometer was such that they should have been able to detect
> > motion at a small fraction of the speed of light.
>
> > They never did find any evidence of motion through the ether.
> > Conclusion: Either a) the luminiferous ether that fills all space and
> > transmits light to us from the stars is fixed to a floating
> > interferometer in a tank in the basement of Adelbert Hall at Western
> > Reserve University, or b) there is no ether, or c) galillean
> > relativity is wrong, or some combination of these ideas.
>
> > Einstein proposed (independently of this experiment,which he learned
> > about later) answer c), and that if there is an ether, it is so clever
> > at hiding from us that we can never detect it.
>
> > What do the anti-relativity folk have to say about this experiment?  I
> > predict that Spaceman will say their interferometer malfunctioned.
> > Some will say that Michelson and Morley must have been Jewish.  Other
> > than that, I am curious.
>
> > UncleBen- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -