Michelson-Morley Exp: Does this Paper Have Validity?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Dillopotot
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Paper
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the validity of a paper titled "Michelson–Morley experiment: A misconceived & misinterpreted experiment," which critiques the original Michelson-Morley experiment and its implications for various scientific theories. Participants explore the credibility of the journal and the claims made in the paper.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested, Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants request a proper citation for the paper, indicating difficulty accessing the link provided.
  • One participant summarizes the abstract of the paper, highlighting claims that the Michelson-Morley experiment was misinterpreted due to the neglect of the Doppler Effect and the solar system's motion.
  • Another participant expresses skepticism about the paper's claims, labeling it as "BS" without having read it.
  • Concerns are raised regarding the reliability of the Indian Journal of Science and Technology, with one participant categorizing the article as pseudoscience.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the validity of the paper and its claims, with some expressing skepticism about its credibility and others seeking more information.

Contextual Notes

Participants have not reached a consensus on the reliability of the journal or the validity of the claims made in the paper. The discussion reflects differing opinions on the interpretation of the Michelson-Morley experiment.

Dillopotot
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
[Moderator's note: link deleted]

Does it have any validity?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
The link didn't work for me. Can you give us a journal reference, with author, volume, etc.? Is the paper on arxiv.org?
 
bcrowell said:
The link didn't work for me. Can you give us a journal reference, with author, volume, etc.? Is the paper on arxiv.org?
It's called "Michelson– Morley experiment: A misconceived & misinterpreted experiment", from the Indian Journal of Science and Technology, Vol. 4 No. 10, Oct 2011
 
Title: Michelson– Morley experiment: A misconceived & misinterpreted experiment

Abstract:
A thorough review of the Michelson–Morley experiment reveals that the experiment had been not only misinterpreted but also misconceived. Under the theory & methodology adopted by Michelson & Morley the reasons of misconception and misinterpretation have been found to be: 1. Doppler Effect of light was not taken into account and 2. The motion of the solar system was not also taken into account. Since this experiment formed the basis of misinterpretation of absence of luminiferous ether in the space and as the consequence of absence of luminiferous ether the concept of length contraction in the direction of motion, theories of relativity, space–time concept and big bang theory were adopted. The basis of all these theories and concepts is challenged. The present article is the detailed and corrected version of the article ‘Ultimate Proof of Energy Theory of Matter & Cosmology’ Mohammad Shafiq Khan (2010a) necessitated by the article ‘Foundation of Theory of Everything; Non-living & Living Things’ Mohammad Shafiq Khan (2010b). This article finally explains the Michelson-Morley experiment.

I haven't looked at the article, but from its title and abstract, I call BS.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: fresh_42, PAllen, bcrowell and 1 other person
The Indian Journal of Science and Technology is not a reliable publication, and this article is pseudoscience.

Thread closed.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bcrowell

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
6K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K