Physics Help Forum michelson morley experiment construction

 Special and General Relativity Special and General Relativity Physics Help Forum

 Jul 27th 2019, 06:01 PM #1 Member   Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 71 michelson morley experiment construction If you built the MM experiment in a frame that was subject to an unknown velocity vector would the arms of the experiment be the same length ? Last edited by RossBlenkinsopPerth; Jul 27th 2019 at 06:03 PM.
 Jul 27th 2019, 06:22 PM #2 Member   Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 71 a Last edited by RossBlenkinsopPerth; Jul 27th 2019 at 06:26 PM.
Jul 27th 2019, 06:37 PM   #3
Member

Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 71
see attached images PDF and text PDF

The bottom images is the analysis of the arm parallel to Vu. A photon would travel from the source (point a) to the end of the arm (point g), In that time the MM experiment would move a distance tag x Vu (tag is the time from point a to g) the direction Vu and then mutatis mutandis for the return trip point g to e

Vv is the velocity of the photon in the direction perpendicular to Vu I resolved the photon travelling at an angle to Vu into its horizontal component and perpendicular to Vu component

By my reckoning something in the experiment , when it was built, had to be askew for it to work, or alternatively Vu = 0 in which case the earth is miraculously absolutely stationary

Actually my analysis is not right as the MM experiment worked of the phase difference of the photon, so the length of the arms only has to be an integer multiple of the wavelength of the photons , not necessarily the same length ?
Attached Files
 MM experiment v2.pdf (252.1 KB, 0 views) mm images.pdf (90.5 KB, 0 views)

Last edited by RossBlenkinsopPerth; Jul 27th 2019 at 07:09 PM.

 Jul 27th 2019, 07:11 PM #4 Member   Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 71 Actually my analysis is not right as the MM experiment worked of the phase difference of the photon, so the length of the arms only has to be an integer multiple of the wavelength of the photons , not necessarily the same length ?
 Jul 27th 2019, 07:19 PM #5 Member   Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 71 but that means by chance the arms could be the same length , so back to square 1, something was askew Last edited by RossBlenkinsopPerth; Jul 27th 2019 at 07:25 PM.
Jul 27th 2019, 08:13 PM   #6

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On the dance floor, baby!
Posts: 2,778
Quote:
 Originally Posted by RossBlenkinsopPerth but that means by chance the arms could be the same length , so back to square 1, something was askew
As you pointed out it is the phase difference between the two beams which is important, not the actual length of the arms. For example, the experiment would be done over a several days and the phase difference tracked. If the aether thoery was correct there should be a detectable phase difference. (You could even potentially do it over the course of a year if you have the patience.) This is a very sensitive experiment and it clearly showed that there was no difference in the lengths of the bars.

-Dan
__________________
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

See the forum rules here.

Jul 27th 2019, 08:22 PM   #7
Member

Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 71
 Originally Posted by topsquark As you pointed out it is the phase difference between the two beams which is important, not the actual length of the arms. For example, the experiment would be done over a several days and the phase difference tracked. If the aether thoery was correct there should be a detectable phase difference. (You could even potentially do it over the course of a year if you have the patience.) This is a very sensitive experiment and it clearly showed that there was no difference in the lengths of the bars. -Dan
you have misunderstood what i am saying. The experiment itself would have been constructed in a frame subject to an unknown velocity vector Vu.

I did an analysis of that and found that, if the arms were the same length, then the round trip for each photon would be a different time.

Given your response the outcome is unclear as i will have to do the analysis for a photon of a given wavelength and see if the unknown velocity vector Vu has an impact on the result.

As it used the phase diff of the light I know it is super sensitive

Last edited by RossBlenkinsopPerth; Jul 27th 2019 at 08:29 PM.

Jul 28th 2019, 01:27 AM   #8
Member

Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 71
Not sure what to make of this result

On the above analysis the return time on the vertical leg is different to the return time on the horizontal leg. That is ok as long as the difference is an integer multiple of the wavelength of the photons used, not allowing for possible Doppler effects

If Vu has no impact i should be able to rotate the MM experiment by 45 degrees, or some angle, and I should get the same result. If I rotate the MM experiment by 45 degrees then both paths are an identical length, so Vu does change the analysis or some other phenomena is at play. , see attached PDF image

So, not allowing for Doppler effects, MM should have been able to detect Vu, or Vu was zero which is extremely unlikely or doppler is causing the paradox

Can anyone show me how to do the Doppler analysis on this ?
Attached Files
 mm diag images .pdf (109.0 KB, 0 views)

Last edited by RossBlenkinsopPerth; Jul 28th 2019 at 01:31 AM.

 Jul 28th 2019, 01:37 AM #9 Member   Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 71 the other possibility is when they were building the experiment Vu was influencing the build
 Jul 28th 2019, 04:57 AM #10 Senior Member   Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 434 When you write "subject to an unknown velocity vector" you seem to be under the impression that there is some absolute frame under which we could have such a velocity vector. Even in "Gallilean relativity" there is no such frame. Every object has 0 velocity relative to itself. If that is not what you mean, the "unknown velocity vector" is relative to what?

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Similar Physics Forum Discussions Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Michael77 Special and General Relativity 7 Mar 29th 2015 10:54 AM logandiez Light and Optics 18 Oct 27th 2014 09:26 AM tesla2 Quantum Physics 4 Oct 24th 2012 10:17 AM Aryth Special and General Relativity 1 Sep 1st 2009 03:25 PM