The M.-M. Experiment Cannot Disprove the Existence of Aether

Not sure if there's an aether like thing for photons, and there doesn't seem to be that strong of an indication of such regardless. However charged particles and magnetic fields do seem to show a very tiny drag when moving across free space. (Free space being as close to a perfect vacuum you can get.) There's this odd effect and one of the results of it is called the electric constant. So the question there is what exactly are the charges or fields pushing against? (A vacuum is supposed to have nothing in it, in terms of dielectric or paramagnetic properties.)

So for things like RF, or plasma streams there may be some interesting things going on. And my suspicion says that this phenomena may act like an "aether" for a device such as the EM-drive to be working against. However I'm not certain if there's new experiments to see if there's more interesting effects or characteristics relating to it. (Exactly the same under conditions of acceleration? Etc.?)

So there's this weird thing going right back to the same time period of Maxwell's theories (which also tie right into speed of light and aether questions), and outside of specialized physics it doesn't seem to have much scope other than some accounting for it sometimes in electrical system or electronics design.

a reply to: swanne


Hi swanne, thanks for this post. Unfortunately I missed it when it was being actively discussed. My thoughts are a bit different than what are presented above, so I'll post something here.

If you put two tacks into a tack-board and then slightly stretch a rubber band around those tacks, you can then take your thumb and forefinger of each hand to hold the rubber band. You can then take your middle finger and pluck the rubber band to get an oscillation to ensue. (I did this by myself; it may be easier to have a second person pluck it.) If you then move your thumb and forefinger along the rubber band, the oscillation will continue with nodes (zero displacement regions) established where your thumb and forefinger are. If you analyze the wave motion of the original standing wave before you move your fingers, you will have a wave traveling at speed u in one direction and another traveling at speed u in the opposite direction. When you move your fingers at a speed v, to keep the nulls moving with your fingers, the component waves travel at u+v in one direction and u-v in the other direction.

Now if we assume light is a wave on an aether, and assume that the aetherial displacement of that wave is proportional to the electric field, we have an analogous situation with the Michelson Morley experiment. Mirrors enforce a condition where the electric field is zero - a null. If we move the mirrors, we move the nulls. And this motion will constrain any standing wave within the apparatus to essentially alter the speed of the interior waves in just such a way that the null result of the Michelson Morley test is obtained.

It should surprise no one that an appartus may affect a phase result of what we are trying to measure, as this happens in quantum mechanics all the time.

And there is a way to do things differently. We now have technology to do a group velocity test with ultra short laser pulses. Such a test could possibly give a non-null result. But when we proposed such a test about 27 years ago it was rejected soundly, because the reviewers were absolutely certain that the result would simply be one more confirmation of the original Michelson Morley test. (I also made the unforgivable error of stating in the proposal that it might be possible that special relativity could be experimentally disproved by the test.)

It was at that time that I realized there was something seriously wrong with what passes as "science" when governmental approval is needed. We probably only needed $10K, but the equipment that we needed to use cost vastly more. The lab was government funded, and there was an understandable reluctance to do anything that might not be approved, as such activity might lead to funding loss in the future. So one needed to battle with the bureaucrats first to get approval, and only then we could go ahead. Due to other funding problems, I left that lab to take a position at the Superconducting Super Collider and the test was never done. I would still like to see it done some day.

By the way - the aether is a solid. I hope to get to a series of posts on that topic once my series of posts on The ABC Preon Model are complete.

a reply to: delbertlarson

It's good to see you, Del!

Thank you for explaining your idea in more details; I missed a couple of things in my OP!

So basically, for our laymen readers, the point still stands: the M-M experiment cannot disprove the existence of aether, correct?

I'm glad you'll be posting about your preon theory! It really is an amazing theory.

a reply to: swanne
I dont believe in aether but do in vacuum energy. The Casimir effect has not been disproven. its implications are alarming to those who carefully follow Tesla and other attempts at "overunity" devices. Look at the electron on a perfect spring analogy in the wiki vacuum energy discussion. the electron "jiggles" (also there is a nice German term) showing vacuum energy interaction. something like Brownian motion.
Vacuum energy is communication with our dimension via Casimir and electron jiggle, and how do we communicate back?? when we do i contend, we get overunity. just speculating of course.

originally posted by: swanne
a reply to: delbertlarson

So basically, for our laymen readers, the point still stands: the M-M experiment cannot disprove the existence of aether, correct?

Yes, you are correct in your central thesis. The M-M experiment does not disprove the existence of aether.

a reply to: darkstar57

I agree with you, vaccum energy most definitely exists. However its existence is the result of Quantum Mechanics - the Uncertainty Principle implies that the energy of even a perfect vaccum cannot be zero. In my opinion, quantum jitter and aether aren't exactly mutually exclusive either.

Overunity devices based on zero point energy, however, wouldn't work (contrary to popular belief). The reason for that is because zero point energy permeates everything, including the device. To have useable energy, you've got to have potential difference (example: water level is higher on one side, so when water fall to lower side you get a current which can drive a turbine). Zero point energy is present everywhere (it's analogous to water level being equal everywhere), so the only way you could harness ZPE would be by finding some ZPE-free zone (which is impossible since ZPE is a property of the universe itself).

a reply to: delbertlarson

To echo the question of one of the members here:

Is there any way other to improve the M-M Experiment to make sure it can measure (either to confirm or to falsify) aether?

originally posted by: swanne
a reply to: delbertlarson

To echo the question of one of the members here:

Is there any way other to improve the M-M Experiment to make sure it can measure (either to confirm or to falsify) aether?

See the bottom half of my reply above. It is possible to do a group-velocity test instead of the traditional phase-velocity test. Lasers with short enough pulses now exist to do such a test. Even then you wouldn't necessarily disprove an aether if the result is null, but it is an important test of nature that should be done.

Also it should be noted that the Lorentzian viewpoint of a physical length contraction as things move through an aether is a perfectly sound philosophy even with a null result of all Michelson-Morley type experiments. It is when one insists upon an Einsteinian relativity that a traditional aether becomes problematic.