Puzzle of negative result of Michelson Morley experiment

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the implications of the Michelson-Morley experiment, particularly how it challenges the existence of ether and supports Einstein's theory of relativity. It highlights that the constancy of light speed in all frames of reference leads to the necessity of length contraction and time dilation to reconcile observations from different observers. The conversation emphasizes that if light were to behave differently based on motion, it would contradict the principle of relativity. A practical example of the failure of Galilean transformations is provided through Fizeau's 1850 measurements, which demonstrate that light speed varies in moving media, contradicting earlier assumptions. Overall, the negative results of the Michelson-Morley experiment significantly advanced the understanding of light and motion in physics.
mdn
Messages
49
Reaction score
0
HI all
How can Michelson itself predicted contraction of length and Einstein about constancy of light from negative result of MM experiment.
forget about existence of ether, light speed always same in moving frame of reference and importantly in any direction so how can one except shift in fringes?
not only light, any object would have been same speed in all direction in moving frame of reference.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That last part is called The Principle of Relativity and extending the concept to include light while reconciling it with a constant speed of light was indeed the key conclusion. To most people that is a surprising result and to make like be the same speed for everyone regardless of their state of motion requires length contraction/time dilation. Otherwise, shooting a beam of light from a moving object to a stationary one would give two different speeds of light according to the two observers.
 
thanks
the answer would have been " no ether" that's sufficient. would you give me one practical example where Galilean transformation is ineffective?
 
mdn said:
thanks
the answer would have been " no ether" that's sufficient. would you give me one practical example where Galilean transformation is ineffective?
There is a sticky thread at the top of this forum on experimental confirmation of relativity. The great majority cannot be reconciled with the Galilean transforms.

Fizeau's 1850 measurements of the speed of light in a moving medium are a direct falsification of Galilean transformations.
 
So I know that electrons are fundamental, there's no 'material' that makes them up, it's like talking about a colour itself rather than a car or a flower. Now protons and neutrons and quarks and whatever other stuff is there fundamentally, I want someone to kind of teach me these, I have a lot of questions that books might not give the answer in the way I understand. Thanks
Back
Top