Discussed in this forum: https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=75989.0 One can guy claims the LIGO team actually found evidence of this effect because they had to modify the design of the mirrors. If this is true, he must have been following the construction of LIGO closely.
Harry On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 5:57 PM bobcook39...@hotmail.com < bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Harry > > > > The 1927 paper seems valid > > to mer. Did you find any peer review comments at the time or in later > critical papers > > > > Bob > > > > Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for > Windows 10 > > > > *From: *H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com> > *Sent: *Saturday, December 26, 2020 1:30 PM > *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Buster Keaton and the Michelson Morley experiment > > > > So it seems that in 1927 the french astronomer and mathematician Ernest > Esclangon experimentally investigated what I have been pondering. > He looked for evidence of a change in the angle of reflection with motion > through the aether, and he found it with respect to the sidereal day, i.e. > a day measured with respect to the "fixed stars". This is interesting since > even in the 19th century many scientists considered it a stretch to suppose > motion wrt to aether could be detected relative to the Sun as Michelson > Morely sought to do with their experiment. > > > > Sur l'existence d'une dissymétrie optique de l'espace > > Translation: > > On the optical dissymmetry of space and the laws of the reflection. > > A note by M. Ernest Esclangon > > > http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/pdf/Ernest_Esclangon-On_the_optical_dissymmetry_of_space_and_the_laws_of_the_reflection_1927.pdf > > About Esclangon > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Esclangon > > > > > > Harry > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 12:39 PM H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Now I am thinking it not necessary for matter to spontaneously lean into > the aether wind. The angle that needs to change is the optical value of > normality (perpendicularity) to a mirror. The optical normal sets the angle > incidence equal to the angle of reflection, but if the optical normal is > altered by motion through the aether this will alter the angle of incidence > and angle of reflection. > > > > Harry > > > > On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 12:13 PM H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote: > > If matter spontaneously leaned into the aether wind then stellar > aberration would not arise. > > > > harry > > > > On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 12:09 PM H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I just realized that I am just making use of the well known phenomena of > stellar aberration...so leaning into the aether wind > can`t explain the MM experiment. > > > > Harry > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 5:20 PM ROGER ANDERTON <r.j.ander...@btinternet.com> > wrote: > > Well one of the things that has confused me when taught relativity is- if > have length contraction of an object in one direction and not perpendicular > to that direction; then surely its getting denser along the contracted > length and then increase gravitational force in the perpendicular > direction; so should cause contraction in that direction also (?) But > gravitational effect seems to be ignored. > > > > > ------ Original Message ------ > From: "H LV" <hveeder...@gmail.com> > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Sent: Tuesday, 8 Dec, 20 At 21:06 > Subject: [Vo]:Buster Keaton and the Michelson Morley experiment > > Can Buster Keaton explain the Michelson Morley experiment? ;-) > > > > > https://drive.google.com/file/d/14S0qNLyghHNzB4Sp7Rg-6s8yXypz7mBz/view?usp=sharing > > > > Instead of length contraction in the direction of the aether wind, suppose > the perpendicular leg of the MM apparatus leans into the aether wind > instead. > > The right amount of lean could have the effect of lengthening the travel > time on the nominally perpendicular leg so that no fringe shift is produced. > > > > Harry > > > > > > >
