Today's Einsteinians ("later writers" in John Norton's text below) fraudulently teach that the Michelson-Morley experiment supports Einstein's 1905 constant-speed-of-light postulate but John Stachel and John Norton prefer to tell the truth:

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/1743/2/Norton.pdf
John Norton: "In addition to his work as editor of the Einstein papers in finding source material, Stachel assembled the many small clues that reveal Einstein's serious consideration of an emission theory of light; and he gave us the crucial insight that Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley experiment as evidence for the principle of relativity, whereas later writers almost universally use it as support for the light postulate of special relativity. Even today, this point needs emphasis. The Michelson-Morley experiment is fully compatible with an emission theory of light that CONTRADICTS THE LIGHT POSTULATE."

The situation is still strange - the Michelson-Morley experiment seems compatible with both the assumption that the speed of light does depend on the speed of the light source (c'=c+v) and the assumption that the speed of light does not depend on the speed of the light source (c'=c). From a logical point of view, neither compatibility is valid. In other words, the following arguments are both invalid:

(A) If the speed of light depends on the speed of the light source (c'=c+v), the result of the Michelson-Morley experiment will be null.

(B) If the speed of light does not depend on the speed of the light source (c'=c), the result of the Michelson-Morley experiment will be null.

Actually the Michelson-Morley experiment is not double-edged but this becomes clear when implicit assumptions are made explicit. The experiment is compatible with c'=c+v if there is no relativistic length contraction (unlimitedly long objects cannot be trapped inside unlimitedly short containers) and compatible with c'=c if length contraction is real (unlimitedly long objects CAN be trapped inside unlimitedly short containers). In other words, the following arguments are both valid:

(A') If the speed of light depends on the speed of the light source (c'=c+v), and if there is no relativistic length contraction (unlimitedly long objects cannot be trapped inside unlimitedly short containers), the result of the Michelson-Morley experiment will be null.

(B') If the speed of light does not depend on the speed of the light source (c'=c), and if length contraction is real (unlimitedly long objects CAN be trapped inside unlimitedly short containers), the result of the Michelson-Morley experiment will be null.

Argument B' is valid but is based on a false assumption - long objects cannot be trapped inside short containers:

http://www.einsteins-theory-of-relat...arage_irf1.png

Indeed, there is nothing more absurd than the relativistic length contraction - see what happens at 7:12 and 9:53 in this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xrqj88zQZJg
"Einstein's Relativistic Train in a Tunnel Paradox: Special Relativity"

Conclusion: The Michelson-Morley experiment is compatible with the assumption that the speed of light depends on the speed of the light source (c'=c+v) and incompatible with Einstein's 1905 constant-speed-of-light postulate (c'=c).

Pentcho Valev