A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Research
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 9th 05, 09:55 AM posted to sci.astro.research
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal

In the 1920's and 30's Dayton Miller made an enormous number of
measurements using several versions of his Michelson interferometer. In
1933 he published a review article, "The Ether-Drift Experiment and the
Determination of the Absolute Motion of the Earth" [1]. If valid, the
results of that paper would refute SR and GR. Since its publication, no
convincing refutation of that paper has been given, though Shankland et
al tried to do so [2]. Since then numerous people have proclaimed
Miller's data are correct, and have built castles in the air based on
that assumption.

This article explains why Miller, and modern advocates of his anomalous
result, are wrong: there is no real signal in his data at all; his data
and results are completely explained by a large systematic error that
masquerades as a "signal".

The full article is posted to the newsgroup sci.physics.relativity, and
all discussion will take place there.


Tom Roberts
  #2  
Old December 11th 05, 01:05 PM posted to sci.astro.research
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Dayton Miller's Data have no Real Signal

In article , Tom Roberts
wrote:
In the 1920's and 30's Dayton Miller made an enormous number of
measurements using several versions of his Michelson interferometer. In
1933 he published a review article, "The Ether-Drift Experiment and the
Determination of the Absolute Motion of the Earth" [1]. If valid, the
results of that paper would refute SR and GR. Since its publication, no
convincing refutation of that paper has been given, though Shankland et
al tried to do so [2]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dayton_Miller appears to give a concise
description of this matter, which to be honest, I'd never heard of
before.

There's a meta-issue in this - the parody of science portrayed by
many religious fundamentalists and internet kooks has it that scientific
orthodoxy is handed down from professor to student, graven into slabs of
Unobtanium, and woe betide the heretic who dares question the Law! (I
typed that doing my worst Judge Dredd impersonation G) So perhaps
there's grounds to encourage wider knowledge of this sort of
disagreement.


[Posted for the information of s.a.r readers, not followed up to s.p.r
since I'm quite sure that there will be flame wars licking the ceiling
there before long.]
--
Aidan Karley,
Aberdeen, Scotland,
Location: +57d10' , -02d09' (sub-tropical Aberdeen), 0.021233
Written at Fri, 09 Dec 2005 13:21 GMT
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
STS51L Accident Questions Mark Percival History 594 April 3rd 05 01:54 AM
Sedna, space probes?, colonies? what's next? TKalbfus Policy 265 July 13th 04 12:00 AM
FAQ-2-B: sci.space.tech reading list (special post to ssh) dave schneider History 0 May 19th 04 01:22 AM
Space Shuttle ypauls Misc 3 March 15th 04 01:12 AM
Question For Craig Markwardt re Pioneer 10 Data ralph sansbury Astronomy Misc 32 November 30th 03 09:47 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.