Understanding Wave Direction in Michelson-Morley Interferometer

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the Michelson-Morley interferometer, specifically examining the implications of using an omnidirectional photon source and the effects of motion on wave direction as perceived by stationary and moving observers. The scope includes conceptual understanding and technical reasoning related to wave behavior and photon trajectories within the interferometer setup.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how a moving observer perceives the wave direction compared to a stationary observer, particularly whether the wave direction is bent and how this affects the interpretation of light transmission through the pipe.
  • Another participant suggests illustrating the trajectory of a single photon to clarify how it can travel through the tube without hitting the walls, proposing that successive photons could be visualized as following diagonal paths.
  • A different participant asserts that the direction of the wave should be diagonal due to the movement of the pipe.
  • One participant emphasizes the distinction between waves and photons, questioning whether wave fronts would lag behind a moving source and how this differs from the behavior of bursts of photons.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the behavior of waves versus photons in the context of motion and directionality. There is no consensus on how these elements interact within the interferometer setup, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight potential limitations in understanding due to assumptions about wave behavior and the definitions of wave fronts versus photon trajectories. The discussion does not resolve these complexities.

ith
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Hello, I would like to understand the Michelson–Morley interferometer, but with the laser being an omnidirectional photon source and a pipe.

http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/6520/interferometer.png

There are two pipes, but only one transmits light. The other absorbs the light, because the wave direction is not parallel to the pipe.

One of the images shows the interferometer as seen by the stationary observer.

Now, what about the moving observer? I have a problem understanding the case. Is the wave direction bent for him, relatively to the stationary observer? If yes, how he interprets, that still the same pipe transmits light? If not, what about the direction of the output beam, which should be diagonal for the moving observer in order to hit the mirror?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
It would be a lot easier to illustrate if you showed the trajectory of a single photon as it traced out two diagonal paths, the outbound one going up and to the right and the inbound one going up and to the left. Then it would be easy to see how this photon will be able to travel through the tube without hitting the walls. Once you see it that way, you can imagine successive photons traversing their own diagonal paths each one above the previous one. Then, if you want, you can draw other illustrations to show how other photons emitted in different directions don't make it through the tube.
 
Perhaps I kow already. The direction should be diagonal, because the pipe moves.
 
I purposedly wanted to draw the wave, and not photons.

Let the source moves relatively to some observer.
Photons in other images are shown as little balls, that follow their source. So they move diagonally, relatively to the observer. Why waves would do so? Is the bottom image correct for the observer? Would the wave front lag behind the source or move with it just as these "photon balls"?

What if the circles were not wave fronts, but instead bursts of photons. Would not they lag behind? Would they behave differently that wave fronts?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
7K