Does the Michelson-Morley Experiment Solely Confirm Constant Light Speed?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter LSMOG
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Experiment
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation of the Michelson-Morley experiment, particularly whether the results solely confirm the constancy of the speed of light. Participants explore the implications of the interference pattern observed in the experiment and the conditions under which constructive interference occurs.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that the arrival of light beams in phase does not necessarily imply they travel at the same speed, suggesting that other conditions can lead to constructive interference.
  • Others emphasize that the interference pattern remains unchanged when the device is rotated, which is a critical aspect of the experiment's interpretation.
  • There is a discussion about the significance of the zero path difference fringe and its visibility, with some noting that it has the strongest contrast due to finite coherence times.
  • Participants question whether two waves traveling at different speeds can still be in phase, exploring the implications of the ether model assumed by Michelson and Morley.
  • One participant suggests that maintaining a constant phase relation after recombination at the beam splitter indicates no phase difference, even with continuous rotation of the interferometer.
  • Another participant clarifies that while a bright fringe is not strictly necessary, an unchanging fringe is sufficient for the experiment's requirements.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of the experiment's results, particularly regarding the conditions for constructive interference and the interpretation of the interference pattern. There is no consensus on whether the results solely confirm the constancy of light speed.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions about the ether model and the conditions for interference are not fully resolved, and participants highlight the dependence on specific interpretations of the experimental setup.

LSMOG
Messages
62
Reaction score
0
In Michelson-Morley experiment, the two light beams arrive in phase at the detector, so they say this means waves are traveling at the same speeds because they arrive in phase at the detector,
What if the waves started in phase and their path difference is an integer multiple of the wave lengths (meaning they will arrive in phase at the detector too).
I am arguing that same speed is not the only condition for constructive interference.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
While this is true, it does nothing for the interpretation of the experiment. The point is that the interference pattern does not change when the device is rotated. There is also no a priori requirement that the interference should be constructive.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
But then you rotate the experiment and the relative velocities change (or, more precisely, Michelson and Morley expected them to change).

Also, with a bit of practice it's fairly easy to recognise the zero path difference fringe. Due to finite coherence times, it has the strongest contrast between it and the adjacent minima (black/white rather than dark grey/light grey).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
Orodruin said:
While this is true, it does nothing for the interpretation of the experiment. The point is that the interference pattern does not change when the device is rotated. There is also no a priori requirement that the interference should be constructive.
Okay thanks, I think its becoming clear now. Is it possible for two waves traveling at different speeds to be in phase? Why?
 
LSMOG said:
Okay thanks, I think its becoming clear now. Is it possible for two waves traveling at different speeds to be in phase? Why?
Even under the ether model Michelson and Morley assumed, the waves are traveling at the same speed in the output arm because they're traveling in the same direction. They would pick up a phase difference inside the interferometer, but would then maintain a constant phase relation after they were recombined at the beam splitter.
 
Ibix said:
Even under the ether model Michelson and Morley assumed, the waves are traveling at the same speed in the output arm because they're traveling in the same direction. They would pick up a phase difference inside the interferometer, but would then maintain a constant phase relation after they were recombined at the beam splitter.
Now I think my problem is solved! This means getting bright fringe at the detector means there has been no such phase difference even if the interferometer was rotated CONTINUOUSLY in all angles??
 
LSMOG said:
Now I think my problem is solved! This means getting bright fringe at the detector means there has been no such phase difference even if the interferometer was rotated CONTINUOUSLY in all angles??
You would typically zero your interferometer at a bright fringe, then show that you had a bright fringe at all angles and in all seasons, yes. Strictly, the bright fringe isn't necessary - an unchanging fringe is all you need. Practically, though, the brightest thing is the easiest to find and track.
 
Ibix said:
You would typically zero your interferometer at a bright fringe, then show that you had a bright fringe at all angles and in all seasons, yes. Strictly, the bright fringe isn't necessary - an unchanging fringe is all you need. Practically, though, the brightest thing is the easiest to find and track.
Thanks a looooooot!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
6K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K