The MMX Revisited

All the posters in these NGs are under the bogus assumption that the
MMX supposed to detect the motion of the earth in the ether. This is
not true. The design of the MMX can only detect the absolute motion
(Motion wrt light) of the apparatus within the plane of its light rays.
Null result for the MMX means that there is no absolute motion of the
apparatus within the plane of its light rays. OTOH non-null result
means that there is absolute motion of the apparatus within the plane
of its light rays.
On earth all the MMXs done so far show null result. Therefore there is
no absolute motion of the apparatuses in the "HORIZONTAL" plane of its
light rays. OTOH the Pound and Rebka experiments show that there is
frequency shift of the light rays in the vertical direction. That means
that there is absolute motion in the vertical direction. Therefore if
we aligned the MMX with the plane of the ;ight rays in the vertical
direction we should be able observe fringe shift as the apparatus is
rotated. The max. shift should occur when one of the arm is aligned
vertically.
A more reliable alternative is to do the experiments described in the
following link:
http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/2005Experiment.pdf
These experiments are capble of determining the magnitude and direction
of absolute motion of the distant clock.

Ken Seto

wrote:
All the posters in these NGs are under the bogus assumption that the
MMX supposed to detect the motion of the earth in the ether. This is
not true. The design of the MMX can only detect the absolute motion
(Motion wrt light) of the apparatus within the plane of its light rays.

Wrong again Seto!

wrote in message
ups.com...
All the posters in these NGs are under the bogus assumption that the
MMX supposed to detect the motion of the earth in the ether.

Specifically it was designed to measure the speed
of the apparatus through an un-dragged, Galilean
invariant aether. In that model, light moves at c
relative to the aether. The design is perfectly
capable of doing that. The sensitivity they
achieved should have easily detected the 60km/s
change in motion over a 6 month period.

This is
not true. The design of the MMX can only detect the absolute motion
(Motion wrt light) ...

"absolute motion" in that experiment meant motion
relative to the aether through which the equipment
was moving.

Your phrase "Motion wrt light" is meaningless
because there is no unique direction in which light
moves. You would have to say "Motion wrt THE light"
and specify which particular light you meant.

George

In sci.physics.relativity,

wrote
on 3 Dec 2005 08:45:31 -0800
. com:
All the posters in these NGs are under the bogus assumption that the
MMX supposed to detect the motion of the earth in the ether. This is
not true. The design of the MMX can only detect the absolute motion
(Motion wrt light) of the apparatus within the plane of its light rays.

MMX has been conducted more than once. What, precisely, does
that do to your theory?

(Besides blowing it into small radioactive flinders, of course.)

--
#191,
It's still legal to go .sigless.

wrote:
All the posters in these NGs are under the bogus assumption that the
MMX supposed to detect the motion of the earth in the ether. This is
not true. The design of the MMX can only detect the absolute motion
(Motion wrt light) of the apparatus within the plane of its light rays.
Null result for the MMX means that there is no absolute motion of the
apparatus within the plane of its light rays. OTOH non-null result
means that there is absolute motion of the apparatus within the plane
of its light rays.
On earth all the MMXs done so far show null result. Therefore there is
no absolute motion of the apparatuses in the "HORIZONTAL" plane of its
light rays. OTOH the Pound and Rebka experiments show that there is
frequency shift of the light rays in the vertical direction.

No they don't:
R. V. Pound and J. L. Snider, Effect of Gravity on Nuclear Resonance,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 13, 539 (1964). [3] The more accurate measurement with
Snider.

Sue...

That means
that there is absolute motion in the vertical direction. Therefore if
we aligned the MMX with the plane of the ;ight rays in the vertical
direction we should be able observe fringe shift as the apparatus is
rotated. The max. shift should occur when one of the arm is aligned
vertically.
A more reliable alternative is to do the experiments described in the
following link:
http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/2005Experiment.pdf
These experiments are capble of determining the magnitude and direction
of absolute motion of the distant clock.

Ken Seto

wrote in message
ups.com...
All the posters in these NGs are under the bogus assumption that the
MMX supposed to detect the motion of the earth in the ether. This is
not true. The design of the MMX can only detect the absolute motion
(Motion wrt light) of the apparatus within the plane of its light rays.
Null result for the MMX means that there is no absolute motion of the
apparatus within the plane of its light rays. OTOH non-null result
means that there is absolute motion of the apparatus within the plane
of its light rays.
On earth all the MMXs done so far show null result. Therefore there is
no absolute motion of the apparatuses in the "HORIZONTAL" plane of its
light rays. OTOH the Pound and Rebka experiments show that there is
frequency shift of the light rays in the vertical direction. That means
that there is absolute motion in the vertical direction. Therefore if
we aligned the MMX with the plane of the ;ight rays in the vertical
direction we should be able observe fringe shift as the apparatus is
rotated. The max. shift should occur when one of the arm is aligned
vertically.
A more reliable alternative is to do the experiments described in the
following link:
http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/2005Experiment.pdf
These experiments are capble of determining the magnitude and direction
of absolute motion of the distant clock.

Ken Seto


This experiment is so so old compared to todays

"Jason Stanidge" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
ups.com...
All the posters in these NGs are under the bogus assumption that the
MMX supposed to detect the motion of the earth in the ether. This is
not true. The design of the MMX can only detect the absolute motion
(Motion wrt light) of the apparatus within the plane of its light rays.
Null result for the MMX means that there is no absolute motion of the
apparatus within the plane of its light rays. OTOH non-null result
means that there is absolute motion of the apparatus within the plane
of its light rays.
On earth all the MMXs done so far show null result. Therefore there is
no absolute motion of the apparatuses in the "HORIZONTAL" plane of its
light rays. OTOH the Pound and Rebka experiments show that there is
frequency shift of the light rays in the vertical direction. That means
that there is absolute motion in the vertical direction. Therefore if
we aligned the MMX with the plane of the ;ight rays in the vertical
direction we should be able observe fringe shift as the apparatus is
rotated. The max. shift should occur when one of the arm is aligned
vertically.
A more reliable alternative is to do the experiments described in the
following link:
http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/2005Experiment.pdf
These experiments are capble of determining the magnitude and direction
of absolute motion of the distant clock.

Ken Seto


This experiment is so so old compared to todays

The funny part is that anyone can cobble together a few mirrors
and a laser pointer and repeat it in their kitchen. Why Seto doesn't
do it himself instead of proposing some other poor sod carries out
his stupidity only shows what a kook Seto is.

Androcles.

"Dastardly Fiend" wrote in message .uk...

"Jason Stanidge" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
ups.com...
All the posters in these NGs are under the bogus assumption that the
MMX supposed to detect the motion of the earth in the ether. This is
not true. The design of the MMX can only detect the absolute motion
(Motion wrt light) of the apparatus within the plane of its light rays.
Null result for the MMX means that there is no absolute motion of the
apparatus within the plane of its light rays. OTOH non-null result
means that there is absolute motion of the apparatus within the plane
of its light rays.
On earth all the MMXs done so far show null result. Therefore there is
no absolute motion of the apparatuses in the "HORIZONTAL" plane of its
light rays. OTOH the Pound and Rebka experiments show that there is
frequency shift of the light rays in the vertical direction. That means
that there is absolute motion in the vertical direction. Therefore if
we aligned the MMX with the plane of the ;ight rays in the vertical
direction we should be able observe fringe shift as the apparatus is
rotated. The max. shift should occur when one of the arm is aligned
vertically.
A more reliable alternative is to do the experiments described in the
following link:
http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/2005Experiment.pdf
These experiments are capble of determining the magnitude and direction
of absolute motion of the distant clock.

Ken Seto


This experiment is so so old compared to todays

The funny part is that anyone can cobble together a few mirrors
and a laser pointer and repeat it in their kitchen.

Yes, in their kitchen:
http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/di.../AndroMMX.html

Dirk Vdm


Why Seto doesn't
do it himself instead of proposing some other poor sod carries out
his stupidity only shows what a kook Seto is.

Androcles.

In sci.physics.relativity, Dirk Van de moortel

wrote
on Sun, 04 Dec 2005 10:22:20 GMT
:

"Dastardly Fiend" wrote in message .uk...

"Jason Stanidge" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
ups.com...
All the posters in these NGs are under the bogus assumption that the
MMX supposed to detect the motion of the earth in the ether. This is
not true. The design of the MMX can only detect the absolute motion
(Motion wrt light) of the apparatus within the plane of its light rays.
Null result for the MMX means that there is no absolute motion of the
apparatus within the plane of its light rays. OTOH non-null result
means that there is absolute motion of the apparatus within the plane
of its light rays.
On earth all the MMXs done so far show null result. Therefore there is
no absolute motion of the apparatuses in the "HORIZONTAL" plane of its
light rays. OTOH the Pound and Rebka experiments show that there is
frequency shift of the light rays in the vertical direction. That means
that there is absolute motion in the vertical direction. Therefore if
we aligned the MMX with the plane of the ;ight rays in the vertical
direction we should be able observe fringe shift as the apparatus is
rotated. The max. shift should occur when one of the arm is aligned
vertically.
A more reliable alternative is to do the experiments described in the
following link:
http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/2005Experiment.pdf
These experiments are capble of determining the magnitude and direction
of absolute motion of the distant clock.

Ken Seto


This experiment is so so old compared to todays

The funny part is that anyone can cobble together a few mirrors
and a laser pointer and repeat it in their kitchen.

Yes, in their kitchen:
http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/di.../AndroMMX.html

Dirk Vdm

The main problem with Dick Dastardly's supposition is
that the original experiment was mounted on a granite
block and turned using a mercury-filled bearing,
presumably to reduce vibration during rotation to an
absolute minimum. A monochromatic light source, a few
mirrors (one half-silvered), some mirror mounts, and some
optics for the interferometer completed the experiment.
(Of course it helps if the mirrors are correctly assembled.
Presumably DD has figured out which mirror goes in the
middle by now.)

http://www.bookrags.com/sciences/phy...iment-wop.html

is admittedly the best I could do using a Google search, though
adding "diagram" to the search did cough up the interesting
picture

http://www.upscale.utoronto.ca/JPU200Y/Class04.html

Apparently the "kitchen" in this case didn't have much in the
way of a stovetop, cooking utensils, or a sink. :-)

I could see the granite block being available in the
kitchen (it's an install option for some countertops),
but not the mercury. The monochromatic light source could
be easily obtained, though, using a laser pointer unit.
In a pinch water might be substitutable for mercury, though
there will be problems with such things as air bubbles
unless the water is carefully degassed first. A free-standing
"butcher block" might be pressed into service, but it would
require quite a bit of handiwork.

A very tiny light fringe shift might be observable
because of the Earth's rotation and the resultant
timespace distortion, but not the far larger time shift
expected because of the Earth's absolute motion through
the luminiferous aether, which, if the light paths are 10m
in length and one uses a 500 nm lightsource (blue-green),
should readily detect an absolute motion of the aether on
the order of 10^-4 c.

My calculations suggest that they could use a light path
length of 20m, since the first article suggests an 0.4
fringe shift. If they were using He/Ne lasers the light
path length lengthens to about 26m. However, the original
experiment apparently was done using an effective path
length of 4.8 m, so I'm not sure what velocity they were
in fact expecting.

The "monochromatic" light source is also unclear; the maser
wasn't invented until 1954 and the first optical He/Ne laser
wasn't developed until 1960. (The main issue here is the
jitter of the light source; it wouldn't take much to wipe
out the entire measurement.)

http://www.greatachievements.org/?id=3706

As a pure guess, I'd surmise a sodium vapor lamp. Unfortunately,
the first mercury arc lamp wasn't until 1901, invented
by Peter Cooper Hewitt. MMX was, after all, only performed 8
years after the perfection of Thomas Edison's light bulb in 1879.

http://www.answers.com/topic/michels...ley-experiment

suggests a coherent (not merely monochromatic) light source, and
a fringe shift of 0.04 wavelengths. Apparently several versions
of the experiment were used, with varying path lengths.
(Given the result, this makes perfect sense.)

It gets worse. Michelson had a prototype in 1881 -- 6 years prior.

The good news is that

http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki...ent_light_bulb

suggests that the first practical light sources were available
way back in 1801 -- though they wouldn't have lasted long -- and
that Thomas Edison was involved in a patent dispute with Joseph
Wilson Swan, who was partnering with Edison at one point.

The bad news is that these light sources don't appear to be
monochromatic. Color me slightly confused.

Of course the obvious hits one right in the face at the very end;
a scan for "invention neon lighting" suggested that experimenters
were playing with gas discharge devices as far back as 1675,
and that a "geissler tube" was available back in 1855.

http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa980107.htm

also mentions Georges Claude, who created a fairly modern neon lamp,
though actual signs weren't widely used until the 20's.

So maybe not so confusing after all, but I'll admit to still
wondering whether monochromaticity is enough; it's a bit like
listening to music in a stadium in that case.

[rest snipped]

--
#191,
It's still legal to go .sigless.

The MMX isn't as easy as it sounds. Dayton Miller spent 20 years of
his life working on this experiment. And the light source isn't the
most important part of the experiment. Distance is important. That is
why the light path was made to be about 240ft. The greater the
distance, the more accurate the experiment is. I just found an online,
real-time laser interferometer site in Europe.
http://wwwcascina.virgo.infn.it/MonitoringWeb/General/

This device has a six kilometer light path. I'm going to check it out
and see what can be learned from this. I was really surprised to see
the online data since the US labs don't share their LIGO data.

Dave