The Earth's motion or lack of mechanical proof. Michelson-Morley, Sagnac, Miller and the wizards of Relativity.

Einstotle and the Relativists were needed to 'save the phenomena' of Copernican theology.

Earth’s motion and lack of proof

For 80 years from 1887 to the end of the 1960s and replicated at the end of the 20^th century, not a single mechanical experiment could find the motion of the Earth. This was of course the impetus for the wizards of Relativity, and the self-proclaimed heroes and geniuses of abstract ‘science’, to explain away these thousands of null or near-null results.

Relativity simply means no absolute motion can be measured because each ‘observer’ on an object can make the claim that they are at rest or in motion in relation to another object. Due to this, the Earth’s motion cannot be mechanically proven from an observer on the Earth. It is a nonsense. It is philosophy or Scientism, not science.

Relativity did not come to fruition out of nowhere just in the late 19^th century. It was analysed as far back as the 12^th century if not before. Galileo, Newton, Mach and others developed variations of Relativity given the difficulty in comparing objects in motion, with differing velocities and accelerations. There is also ‘gravitational Relativity’ that the ‘science’ rejects but is far better at explaining our universe (a future post will outline this concept).

Scientism and the Special Theory of Relativity. Part One (a), A layman’s overview of STR and an introduction of its potential defects.

Newton’s theories were based on non-accelerated reference frames with an aether as the absolute reference point. Modern ‘science’ rejects the aether and uses Relativity to incorporate acceleration frames of reference. Einstein attempted to update Newton’s theories to explain the orbit of Mercury for example. Gravity is of course, far too weak a force to explain the orbits of planets over an endless time scale.

Einstotle

Many posts on here take Relativity to the woodshed. There are too many issues to relist. The Special Theory of Relativity (STR) is false and given that the key postulate of the General Theory of Relativity (GTR) is Special Relativity, it is also falsified. GTR also incorporates the medium of the aether, whilst STR expressly rejects this. His tensor calculus is also incorrect (a future post will outline why this is so). Einstein was obviously confused and connived to hide his various mistakes.

Real world experiments

In 1887 Albert Michelson and Edward Morley performed an interferometer experiment in which the mirrors were arranged in such a way as to detect not angular or rotational motion, but linear motion. No motion of the Earth was detected. ‘The Science’ was thrown into a panic. Many similar experiments generated the same results.

Heliocentricity and Scientism (part 2). Post-1905 experiments which found no movement of the Earth.

Sagnac’s 1913 experiment was one such endeavour and it is almost never taught. Yet the results from that seminal insight are used today in gyroscopes (see here why gyros are a problem for the rotation of the Earth), communications and satellites. When Sagnac carried out this experiment using a series of mirrors on a table, he was able to detect the rotation of his table as he rotated his table, but wholly unable to detect any motion when the device he built was at rest on an allegedly moving Earth.

The ‘Sagnac effect’ can be observed by splitting a single beam of light into two separate beams and directing each beam of light in opposite routes through a series of fibre optic cables or mirrors covering distances of exactly the same length. The beams of light are then recombined immediately before they arrive at a sensor. The sensor detects a lack of synchronization between the light waves in the beams of light after they are recombined into a single beam of light. If there is motion, there must be a detection and a difference between the light beams.

Sagnac also disproved the ‘invariance’ of light speed, science-speak for the constant velocity of light. This by itself disproves Relativity and opens up a pandora’s box of issues with modern cosmology.

Sagnac’s experiment disproving Special Relativity and the constant ‘speed of light’.

Hall of Mirrors

After the Michelson-Morely failure of 1887, the ‘science’ was in confusion. By the early 1890s the Dutchman Lorentz had created his Relativistic maths termed, ‘The Lorentz Transformation’ (LT). This was used almost in-toto by Einstotle though there are some differences between the two models (which gives rise to the canard that Relativity is always right, if proven wrong it can be blamed on the incorrect interpretation of Relativity).

The LT is a product of Special Relativity and is also referred to as the ‘Lorentz Contraction’. Nonsensically and without any proof, Lorentz argued that the faster we go, the shorter we become along the length of the direction we are traveling. At the speed of light, you the 6-foot-tall human, would shrink to less than an inch, but you would maintain your full width. The overwhelming mechanical proof for this claim is….nothing. Or maybe a Hall of Mirrors.

The Lorentz Contraction (LC) is an attempt to rescue Scientism from Michelson-Morley by arguing that in their experiments, the path the light beam travelled parallel to the Earth's motion through space, had been shrunk proportionately. This means that the extra time the light beam would require to travel to the termination point was eliminated. This generates a null or a near-to-null result. Sagnac of course disproved the Lorentzian contraction.

In fact, most interferometer experiments did not produce an expressly zero result but a small calibration of roughly 0.3 km per second. In the 20^th century Dayton Miller and others performed literally tens of thousands of experiments which disproved Relativity and confirmed what Sagnac, Michelson, Morley and friends also discovered – no movement of the Earth, but a small positive fringe result.

The not-null result is significant indicating that the aether or a drag on the light beam existed. This is not what textbooks, or the online trumpeting and thundering apologia will ever disclose. So here we have tens of thousands of mechanical experiments which disproves Relativity. No one can show me a single physical experiment Einstotle or the Relativists performed to prove ‘Relativity’.

Some problems

There are some obvious issues with the magic of the Lorentz Transformation. Its purpose was to explain why Michelson and Morley could not detect the Earth's motion. Why then do Sagnac devices (gyroscopes) properly detect the motion of a submarine as it moves through the ocean, but not the motion of the Earth as it moves through space? The same is true of airplanes and cars. This is absurd. These ‘Sagnac’ devices are deployed because they work. The Lorentz Transformation is unproven mathematical modeling.

You can buy a cheap gyroscope. Point the gyroscope’s axis at the Sun around mid-day. If the Earth is not moving your gyroscope will indicate this by remaining rigid. It must be motionless in relation to the Earth. If the Earth is rotating, your gyroscope's axis will track the Sun, continuing to point at the Sun as it moves across the sky. As mentioned in another post, I have done this many times and never has my gyroscope moved.

Bottom Line

In the last post, there was a summary of the linkages between Kant, Mach and Einstein and how Relativity was premised on philosophical imperatives, not on mechanical, experiential science. By the late 19^th century, over a span of 350 years Copernicanism had failed to provide any repeatable proof for its claim of heliocentricity or the Earth’s rotation. All ‘proofs’ could easily be explained by other models.

Then the 19^th and 20^th century interferometer experiments came into play and proved there was no discernible motion. A missile had pulverised the wall of ‘science’. Into this breach sallied the late 19^th century and early 20^th century Relativists. Einstein’s Relativity (1905) was largely a synthesis of existing ideas and the open plagiarism of Lorentz, Fitzgerald and Riemann. But it was easier to understand and ‘saved the phenomena’.

Beyond saving ‘phenomena’ it is self-evident that Einstein or Einstotle, can be credited as the man who saved Scientism from real science. Einstotle is now largely deified and usually immune to criticism, yet the ‘science’ he bequeathed to us has retarded and impoverished the objective study of natural phenomena. Nevertheless, mechanical reality has killed Relativity. Long live Relativity and all hail.

Next post: the background to the Lorentz theorems, and after that we will analyse the Transformation maths and their issues. Not much of this is taught which is a pity.

Nb:

There are plenty of experiments confirming Miller’s 1925 results, including the non-interferometer coaxial cable experiments of DeWitte (1991) and Torr and Kolen (1984). Using cable completely nullifies the heat transfer objection. In analysing these results physicist Cahill concludes: “So the effect is certainly cosmological and not associated with any daily thermal effects, which in any case would be very small as the cable is buried” (T. Cahill Novel Gravity Probe B Gravitational Wave Detection, Flinders University, August 21, 2004, pp. 16-17).

Heliocentricty and Scientism (part 4). Dayton Miller and 30 years of proofs which negate STR and call into question Copernicanism.

Sources

Héctor Múnera, “Michelson-Morley Experiments Revisited: Systematic Errors, Consistency Among Difference Experiments, and Compatibility with Absolute Space,” Apeiron, Vol. 5, Jan.-April 1998

K. K. Illingworth, “A repetition of the Michelson-Morley experiment using Kennedy’s refinement,” Physical Review, 30, 692-696, 1926. Múnera writes: “…most papers exhibit an inconsistency between observation (a non-zero velocity) and interpretation (a null result). This paper is no exception...”

A. A. Michelson, F. G. Pease and F. Pearson, “Repetition of the Michelson-Morley experiment,” Nature 123, 1929, 88

Yuri Galaev, “Ethereal Wind in Experience of Millimetric Radiowave Propagation,” The Institute of Radiophysics and Electronics of NSA in Ukraine, Aug. 26, 2001

T. S. Jaseja, A. Javan, J. Murray and C. H. Townes, “Test of Special Relativity or of the Isotropy of Space by use of Infrared Masers,” Physical Review 1, 133a: 1221-1225, 1964

Richard Wolfson, Simply Einstein: Relativity Demystified, New York, W. W. Norton Co. 2003

Arthur Lynch, The Case Against Einstein, 1932 (open-source editions exist)