my absolutely last post re: c^2 and Longitudinal Waves

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <Mddeming-at-aol-dot-com>

In a message dated 2/7/02 10:48:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, tesla-at-pupman-dot-com
writes:


>
> 2. The Aether does NOT exist. (cf Michelson-Morley experiment and Einstein's 
> interpretation thereof)
>
> Can you tell us exactly what Michelson-Morley concluded about their
> experiments?  
> Also what was Einstein's interpretation regarding the MM experiments?  Cites
> would
> be appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> RWW



         In 1881 Albert A. Michelson and Edward W. Moreley performed a classic
experiment that contributed to the downfall of such concepts as absolute space
and the ether (aether). The generally accepted theories of late 19th century
science required space to be filled with a medium (the aether) through which
light and other electromagnetic waves were thought to propagate. This Aether
was needed to provide an absolute reference frame in which light propagated at
velocity c. Such an absolute reference frame and the aether proposed to fill it
were undetectable; i.e., the Aether, if it existed had no measurable physical
properties. 
         Einstein concluded that "Any observer will always find the same value
for light in vacuo relative to himself, regardless of the direction of travel
of the light and regardless of the velocity of the source." 
         Without going heavily into relativity theory, the outcome was the
following:

1. The existence of the Aether is not necessary to explain any observable
physical phenomena.
2.  The Aether has no detectable physical properties.   

This puts the Aether into the realm of gods and angels; a subject more for
epistemological philosophers than Tesla Coilers. i.e.  If something cannot be
detected by any means in the physical universe,  does not interact in any
physical way with that universe, and is unnecessary to the explanation of the
physical universe,  in what sense can it be said to exist?

>From the preface to "The Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience." , Dr. W.F. Williams,
ed. in reference to Ether Theory and Phlogiston Theory:
"Each was examined rigorously for a considerable period, was eventually found
wanting, and was abandoned when a better explanation emerged. In their day they
could hardly be described as pseudoscience., but a committed advocate  of
either theory today would definitely  be into Pseudoscience."

See also:

"The Principle of Relativity", Albert Einstein, Hendrik Lorentz, H. Minkowski,
and Hermann Weyl, English Translation Dover Publications, 1979

"Elements of Physics" , George Shortly and Dudley Williams, Prentice-Hall 1961

"Hidden Unity in Nature's Laws" , John C. Taylor, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2001

"College Physics" Francis W. Sears and Mark W. Zemansky, Addison-Wesley, 1960

"Elementary Modern Physics" , Richard T. Weidner and Robert L. Sells, Allyn &
Bacon, 1968

"Special Relativity" , W. Rendler, Oliver & Boyd pub., 1960

"Theory of Relativity" ,Wolfgang Pauli, (G. Field transl.), Dover Publications,
1981

"Physics - Concepts and Connections", Art Hobson, Prentice-Hall 1999

"A History of Science and its relation with Philosophy and Religion"  Sir
William Cecil Dampier, Cambridge Univ. Press 1948

"Einstein - The Life and Times" , Ronald W. Clark, World Publishing, 1971

"Naturforschung von Heute", Nelson Van de Lutster, Appleton-Century-Crofts,
1963

Matt D.
G3-1085