"OG" napisal w wiadomosci
...
On 29/10/2011 09:00, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
napisal w wiadomosci
...
On 28/10/2011 08:29, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
napisal w wiadomosci
...
On 27/10/2011 17:30, Szczepan Bialek wrote:
napisal w wiadomosci
...
On 27/10/2011 09:07, Szczepan Bialek wrote:

So the: " "The first result of any importance which the
spectrographic
method furnished was the proof of the influence of the Earth's
annual
motion
on the displacement, which the earlier direct observations had
failed
to
show." was probably verified by many others. Also with the radio
waves.

S*

I'm sorry, but I still don't see what point you're making. You can't
detect any diurnal/annual change to the speed of light by the
Earth's
motion,

The diurinal was detected by Michelson-Gale in 1925 and is practised
in
GPS.

The diurnal what? Clearly not a diurnal change in the speed of light,
so
what?

He detected the rotational movement of the Earth.

but you can detect a diurnal/annual effect by using spectroscopy.

The annual was detected by Vogel and I do not know who use it.

The two experiments are doing different things and the results are
completely compatible.

The Arago result of spectroscopy is compatible with Michelson-Morley
and
Michelson-Gale.

I'm not sure the Arago result was spectroscopic in nature.

Arago and Vogel used the same in nature. Arago used spectroscopy and
Vogel
spectrography.

Do you have a description of Arago's experiment? I suspect not.

The Brace's descripion from 1904: " "Arago, in the second instance,
reasoning on the same theory, concluded that the deviation produced by a
prism would vary with the direction of the earth's motion; but he was
unable
to detect any such change, a result verified later by more delicate means
in
the hands of Maxwell, Mascart, and others. This experiment, which
demonstrated the absence of any effect of the earth's movement on
refraction
is of great historical interest. "
"...and the negative results of the many and various experimental
investigations which have thus far been made and whose validity is
unquestioned, whether in refraction, interference, diffraction, rotary
polarization, double refraction, induction, electric convection, etc.".
From: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Et..._moving_Matter

But that's not spectroscopy. It just looked at the angle of refraction
through a prism, nothing about looking at spectra.

It seems to me that the only way to measure the angle of refraction is to
measure the absorption line position.

Below is the problem of the radial speeds of planets. Also the result is
null:
http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//...00243.000.html


The Vogel's result do not fit to them.

Why not?

In all textbooks is wrote that Arago, Mchelson-Morley and Truton-Noble
fit
together.

So what (in your own words) is the problem with Vogel's result?

The problem will appear if it is confirmed.

What problem?

Now it is mentioned only in Wiki. Without any comments.
If it is right than: "This experiment, which
demonstrated the effect of the earth's orbital movement on refraction
is of great historical interest. "

Arago's result yes.

I still don't know why you think there's a problem with Vogel's result.

I know that in the whole World students are told that at measuring of the
radial speed of stars they should take into account the orbital speed of the
Earth.
The reason is the Vogel's result.

It is some problem because in 1905 Einstein wrote that it is impossible to
detect the orbital speed. So are the two possibilities:
1. Brace and Einstein did not know about Vogel's result.
2. Vogel's result become wrong.
S*