Speed of Light: Michelson-Morley Experiment Revisited

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter x-vision
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Experiment
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of the Michelson-Morley experiment and its relation to the speed of light, particularly in the context of whether the Earth's atmosphere affects the isotropy of light speed. Participants explore different assumptions regarding the presence of an atmosphere and the nature of light speed measurements, leading to a debate on the validity of ether-dragging models.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that if the Earth has an atmosphere, the Michelson-Morley experiment indicates an isotropic speed of light within that atmosphere, suggesting it remains isotropic despite the Earth's motion.
  • Others argue that if the Earth did not have an atmosphere, the Michelson-Morley experiment would imply a constant speed of light for all observers, regardless of their motion.
  • A participant notes that the Fizeau experiment and the Michelson-Morley experiment are equivalent in measuring light speed in a moving medium, with Fizeau measuring a partial "drag" effect and Michelson-Morley measuring a full "drag".
  • There are claims regarding the accuracy of the Michelson-Morley experiment being vastly superior to that of Fizeau's experiment.
  • Some participants challenge the idea that the speed of light can be concluded as constant for all observers, given the context of the Michelson-Morley experiment's atmospheric conditions.
  • There is a meta-discussion questioning whether the points raised are indeed obvious, with references to historical experiments that have ruled out ether-dragging models.
  • Participants mention that experiments measuring light speed have been conducted in a vacuum, suggesting that previous models may have been overlooked.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement on the implications of the Michelson-Morley experiment and the relevance of atmospheric conditions. Multiple competing views remain regarding the interpretation of light speed measurements and the validity of ether-dragging models.

Contextual Notes

Some claims about the equivalence of the Fizeau and Michelson-Morley experiments and the nature of "drag" effects remain unresolved, with participants not providing definitive evidence for their assertions. The discussion also touches on the historical context of light speed experiments and their interpretations.

x-vision
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
If we assume that:
  • the Earth has an atmosphere
  • the Michelson-Morley experiment measured an isotropic speed of light inside the atmosphere
We can conclude that the speed of light inside the atmosphere remains isotropic while the Earth is moving through space.

But if we assume that:
  • the Earth does not have an atmosphere
  • the Michelson-Morley experiment measured an isotropic speed of light in space (from the surface of the earth)
We can conclude that the speed of light is constant/isotropic for all observers, irrespective of their motion.

The fact of the matter is, the Earth does have an atmosphere.
Do you see where this is going?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters and Michael Price
x-vision said:
Do you see where this is going?
Given the number of experiments with light in a vacuum (edit: and Fizeau's experiments which measure the "drag" effect of a medium) of which you are apparently ignorant, towards a thread lock I suspect.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Michael Price and weirdoguy
edit: and Fizeau's experiments which measure the "drag" effect of a medium
Aha. Have you considered that the Fizeau and the Michelson-Morley experiments are actually equivalent?
Both measured the speed of light in a moving optical medium but did it differently:
  • Fizeau measured the speed of light as light passes through the moving medium (water)
  • Michelson-Morley measured the speed of light inside the moving medium (the atmosphere)
Fizeau measured a partial "drag" effect, whereas Michelson-Morley measured a full "drag".
The accuracy of the Michelson-Morley was vastly superior (1200+ times better).

The point is, you can't really conclude that the speed of light is constant for all observers if you are aware that the MM experiment measured the speed of light inside the atmosphere.

Not looking to pick a fight here. Just pointing out the obvious.
Best regards
 
x-vision said:
If we assume that:
  • the Earth has an atmosphere
  • the Michelson-Morley experiment measured an isotropic speed of light inside the atmosphere
We can conclude that the speed of light inside the atmosphere remains isotropic while the Earth is moving through space.

But if we assume that:
  • the Earth does not have an atmosphere
  • the Michelson-Morley experiment measured an isotropic speed of light in space (from the surface of the earth)
We can conclude that the speed of light is constant/isotropic for all observers, irrespective of their motion.

The fact of the matter is, the Earth does have an atmosphere.
Do you see where this is going?
You can do the experiment in a vacuum chamber.
 
x-vision said:
Just pointing out the obvious.
Meta-question: if it's obvious to you, do you really think it would have been missed by the entire physics community for more than a century? You are talking about an ether-dragging model, effectively. Between stellar aberration experiments, Michelson-Morley and Fizeau (not to mention interferometry done in a vacuum), all such models (partial and complete dragging) were ruled out decades ago.
x-vision said:
Fizeau measured a partial "drag" effect, whereas Michelson-Morley measured a full "drag".
Evidence for this claim...?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters
Meta-question: if it's obvious to you, do you really think it would have been missed by the entire physics community for more than a century?
Yup. That's exactly what I'm thinking ;).
 
  • Sad
Likes   Reactions: weirdoguy
x-vision said:
Yup. That's exactly what I'm thinking ;).
And that you wish to continue to think this is why you don't acknowledge the point about people repeating the experiment in vacuum, and why you offer no evidence for your partial/full dragging claim about the Fizeau experiment.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters and Vanadium 50
IBTL

Ibix said:
people repeating the experiment in vacuum

Georg Joos, in the 1920's.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ibix
  • #10
x-vision said:
Yup. That's exactly what I'm thinking ;).
Suffice to say, that's an unreasonable thing to think. There's ample documentation of light speed experiments (MM and other) conducted in a vacuum if you choose to look at them.

The question is adequately answered, thread locked.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: weirdoguy and Ibix

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
6K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K