Excerpt
2
Abstract
We present an alternative to Einstein's explanation for the null result of the MichelsonMorley experiment. We
conceptualize a concept that states, "time's arrow is moving along a direction at a speed equal to the speed of
light." As a result, we find "there is a gap between space and time"; thus, the position of a body at a given point
does not necessarily imply that the impact of that body must initiate from this point. We use this idea to explain
the reasons for quantum entanglement despite the constancy of the light's speed and the MichelsonMorley
experiment.
Keywords
MichelsonMorley experiment, special relativity, Lorentz transformation, ether theory, spooky action at a
distance, quantum mechanics
3
Content
Abstract ... 2
Keywords ... 2
Content ... 3
1. Introduction ... 4
2. Ether Problem in the Train Experiment ... 6
3. Space and time ... 7
4. Results and Discussion ... 9
4.1 Effect of ether on time ... 9
4.2 Calculation of gap time ... 10
4.3 Advancement and delay in the time of the moving body ... 12
4.4 Confusion of time of moving body ... 14
4.5 Confusion of position of the moving body ... 15
4.6 Act of measurement ... 17
4.7 Fifth and sixth dimensions ... 18
4.8 Entanglement ... 20
4.9 Nature of time ... 21
4.9.1 Moving frame of reference ... 21
4.9.2 Absolutely stationary frame of reference (Ether) ... 22
4.9.3 Relatively stationary frame of reference... 22
4.10 Nature of simultaneity ... 23
4.10.1 Ether's reference ... 23
4.10.2 Moving frame of reference ... 24
4.10.3 Relatively stationary frame of reference ... 24
4.11 Negation of ether effect on light motion ... 25
5. Conclusions ... 28
Acknowledgements ... 29
Funding ... 29
Conflict of Interest ... 29
References ... 30
Figure Captions ... 32
4
1. Introduction
In 1887, Michelson and Morley performed the well-known MichelsonMorley experiment to determine
the speed of the earth relative to that of the luminiferous ether [1, 2], which was considered the fundamental
substratum of space and believed to be the medium of light propagation [3]. We recommend referring to a video
prepared (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTsD3vI04-g) to help simplify the understanding of our study and
the concepts presented. The idea of the experiment can be summarized as follows: "The motion of the earth in
the ether at velocity v generates an ether wind with the same velocity (scene 1); therefore, if we successfully
measure the effect of the ether wind on the motion of light, it will serve as a strong evidence for the existence of
ether (scene 2)."
The null result of the MichelsonMorley experiment is considered strong evidence against the ether
theory [4] (scene 3) and is unexpected according to Galilean physics. In 1892, Lorentz first explained this null
result in an attempt to conserve the ether theory; he suggested that the length of a body/object in the direction of
motion contracts by an amount equal to
(the Lorentz factor) because of a postulated similarity between
molecular cohesion forces and electrostatic forces [5] (scene 4). The Lorentz transformations are a set of
mathematical equations [6] used to correlate the space and time coordinates of a moving system to determine the
space and time of another system when two observers (each in either system) are moving relative to each other.
The MichelsonMorley experiment can be explained by these transformations; the length of an object along the
direction of motion contracts (by a factor equal to ) [7] while transforming to a moving frame. Consequently,
the speed of light is identical in all frames, thus yielding the null result of the MichelsonMorley experiment.
Following this, in 1905, Einstein posited the non-existence of the absolute medium of ether and
introduced the theory of "special relativity," which is based on two postulates: first, the laws of electrodynamics
and optics are valid for all frames of reference, and second, the speed of light is constant regardless of the motion
of the light source [8] (scene 5). Einstein deduced the Lorentz transformation from these two postulates.
Consequently, he suggested that the length of moving bodies contracts along the direction of their motion and
that the bodies undergo time dilation [9, 10] (scene 6); therefore, the result of the MichelsonMorley experiment
is negative. Special relativity introduces a different system in which space and time are not absolute for all
inertial frames [11]. Rather, they are relative to the frame of reference [12] unlike in the Newtonian world, where
space and time are absolute for all inertial frames.
Despite the constancy of the speed of light (the basis of special relativity) that has been successfully
tested several times, there is a paradox between the constancy of the speed of light and other experiments that
refer to spooky action at distance [13]. These experiments involve a concept called quantum entanglement. This
5
concept simply means that when considering a pair of ("entangled") particles, when something happens to one
particle, something also happens to the other particle that it is inextricably linked to, no matter how far apart the
two particles are from each other (scene 7). Earlier in the last century, Einstein and other renowned physicists
concluded that quantum entanglement was either impossible or that there was some hidden variable affecting the
states of both particles. Einstein famously refused to believe that this phenomenon was real [14] as it violated the
intricate workings of his special relativity, which implies that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. In
fact, it took quite some time for quantum entanglement to gain acceptance [15]. The detection of this
phenomenon has proven to be extremely elusive, and linking particles together does appear to be impossible, but
it can be achieved. In one experiment, two particles were separated by a distance of 89 miles, and the "spooky
action" was still found to occur. After many other experiments, the loopholes surrounding the validity of the
phenomenon were deemed closed [16, 17]. Einstein turned out to be incorrect, quantum entanglement was
accepted as an actual phenomenon, and further, its real-world applications could be quite beneficial. Many
physicists have continually attempted to discover methods that prove the invalidity or incompleteness of
quantum entanglement; it is considered that this kind of thinking is incompatible with the previous results of
experiments related to "spooky action," which may further delay the development of the applications of quantum
entanglement. Meanwhile, it has become necessary to reconsider our knowledge about the nature of light; the
verified existence of the "spooky action" between particles may be the end of just one chapter in the long history
of physics. However, it also marks the beginning of another chapter in an exciting new field, in which the effects
between two particles can be transferred faster than the speed of light. In this context, in this paper, we introduce
a new mechanism that can simply explain this paradox between special relativity and spooky action (scene 8).
This paper revisits the ether problem of the MichelsonMorley experiment and provides an alternative
explanation for the null result to those provided by Lorentz and Einstein [18]. The alternative solution considers
that the position of the body at a given point does not necessarily imply that the body's effect must initiate from
this point. In other words, there is a gap between the body's position and time, and this gap will compensate for
any alteration in the speed of light created by the ether wind. Accordingly, for example, a bulb's effects (light)
will not emanate from the source; instead, light is emitted at a distance away from the light source (scene 9).
This new explanation can yield a better understanding of the reasons underlying quantum entanglement despite
the constancy of the speed of light. Further, the explanation is consistent with the null result of the Michelson
Morley experiments, with classical mechanics, with experiments that prove the constancy of the speed of light,
yields results that unify the particle world with the macroscopic world, and finally again posits the existence of
ether. There are many new avenues of research can open up based on this new explanation.
6
The second contribution of this paper is related to simultaneity. According to Einstein, simultaneity
between two events separated in space is relative; it depends on the observer's frame of reference. In contrast, in
this study, simultaneity is absolute regardless of the observer's frame of reference.
The third contribution is related to time. We find that the time of the observed body progresses and
regresses according to the position of the observer.
This paper is organized as follows: Sections 2 and 3 describe the Einstein train problem and the concept
underlying our explanation of the null result. Sections 4 onward describe and discuss the results based on the
concept.
2. Ether Problem in the Train Experiment
The null result of the MichelsonMorley experiment indicates there is a problem with regard to the
existence of ether. This problem can be resolved by considering the train experiment, which is a thought
experiment [19] designed by Einstein [20]. Let us first consider the "Einstein train," which moves with a velocity
v, and let us assume that a bulb is located in the middle of the train's carriage at point (A). A ray of light is
emitted from the middle of the carriage to a passenger at the back ("rear" passenger) located at point (B) and to a
passenger at the front ("front" passenger) at point (C) of the vehicle. Let the length between (A) and (B), r
AB
,
be
equal to the length between (A) and (C), r
AC
, and let the train move in the direction of the ray emitted from (A)
to (B). Further, we assume the existence of the ether, and therefore, the velocity of the train will generate an
ether wind blowing opposite to the train's direction (toward point (C)) with a velocity equal to that of the train,
which influences the speed of light (scene 10). We can explain this situation in terms of the two following points.
First, in accordance with classical mechanics [21] (Galilean velocity addition law), the speed of light is
not constant, and additive and subtractive mathematical operations can be applied to it [22]. Therefore, the
velocity of the ether wind is added to the speed of light if light moves in the same direction as the ether wind,
whereas it is subtracted if light moves in the direction opposite to the ether wind. Therefore, the time required by
light to travel from (A) to (C) in the latter case is given by
(
)
( )
, 1
+
AC
C
A
r
t
t
c
v
-
=
where
( )
A
t
represents the time at which the light is emitted from the bulb toward the front passenger and
( )
C
t
is the time at which the light reaches the front passenger.
7
Second, the time required by light to travel from (A) to (B) when it moves against the direction of the
ether wind is given by
(
)
( )
, 2
-
AB
B
A
r
t
t
c v
-
=
where
( )
A
t
represents the time at which light is emitted from the bulb and
( )
B
t
represents the time at which the
light emitted from the bulb reaches the rear passenger. Thus, the two events are out of synchronicity with respect
to the two moving passengers (Figure 1).
(
)
(
) ( )
, 3
B
A
C
A
t
t
t
t
-
-
The expected results of this experiment confirm that the light will not reach the "front" and "rear"
passengers at the same time (i.e., light will not reach at the same clock's reading) (Figure 2) because of the ether
wind's effect (scene 11), and this is what Michelson and Morley expected while performing their experiment.
However, the result was negative, which implies there is no effect of the expected ether wind on light motion.
Therefore, applying the null result of the MichelsonMorley experiment to this thought experiment would lead
to a situation where the two light rays reach the "rear" and "front" passengers simultaneously (Figure 3) (scene
12).
Therefore, this problem raises the following questions: what is the mechanism that considers both the
effect of the ether wind and the null result of the MichelsonMorley experiment? Does this mechanism exist? If
it exists, what are its consequences? Can we test these consequences experimentally? To obtain clear answers to
these questions, we attempted to develop a system that can conserve classical mechanics, solve the ether problem,
and subsequently explain the MichelsonMorley experiment based on the effects predicted using this concept.
3. Space and time
Time's arrow is the direction of time in which the bodies, particles, and light are moving (scene 13). To
solve the ether problem and explain the null result of the MichelsonMorley experiment, we suggest a concept
that states, "time's arrow is moving along a direction at a speed equal to the speed of light." The motion of
time's arrow along this direction means that the time of moving bodies and particles (moving to the future) will
increase by an additional amount equal to the time that the arrow travels (scene 14), according to the following
equation.
(
) ( )
.
.
, 4
t a
m b ad
T
T
=
8
where
( )
.
t a
T
is the time taken by time's arrow, while
(
)
.
m b ad
T
is the increase in the time of the moving body,
i.e., the additional amount of time required by the moving body to travel toward the future (scene 15).
Based on this concept, we find that the "space and time of moving bodies are separated from each
other." The immediate connection between the space and time of a moving body is missing; hence, there is a gap
between the space and time of a moving body (like the bulb of the train). We called this gap an "S.T.G." We can
determine the length of the S.T.G of the moving body
( )
gap
L
, i.e., the distance between space and time, using
the following:
( )
( )
.
, 5
gap
m b ad
L
T
v
=
Using (Eq. 4), we obtain
.
.
gap
t a
L
T
v
=
Thus,
.
.v.
gap
t a
L
T
=
In addition, as
,
.
,
t a
t a
L
T
c
=
we obtain
( )
,
.
, 6
t a
gap
L v
L
c
=
where (c) is the speed of light, (v) is the velocity of the moving body, and
( )
.
t a
L
represents the distance traveled
by time's arrow equal to the length of space (L). We can use the following equation to determine the length of
the S.T.G.
( )
.
, 7
gap
L v
L
c
=
where (L) is the length of space traveled by time's arrow.
9
4. Results and Discussion
4.1 Effect of ether on time
Applying the aforementioned concept to the train experiment, we find that the light reaches the "rear"
and "front" passengers simultaneously. To clarify this, we consider a bulb inside a moving train. Owing to the
motion of time's arrow, the time of the train is increased to forward by accessory time; hence, the space and time
of the train are separated. The same applies to the bulb of the train. Owing to the motion of time's arrow, the
space and time of the bulb exist separately. As a result, the impact of the bulb (represented by light) located at a
point (A) in the train will not initiate from its position. Rather, it will initiate from a point located at a distance
equal to the length of the S.T.G of the bulb
( )
gap
L
(Figure 4). We can calculate the distance at which the light
travels perpendicularly
( )
light
d
(scene 16) using the following:
( )
( )
( )
2
2
, 8
light
gap
d
L
L
=
+
With respect to the moving observer such as the rear and front passengers, the time of the bulb exceeds
its position. There is always a gap between the time and position of a moving body owing to the motion of time's
arrow. Hence, the result from the perspective of the moving observer will be a bulb and light beams emitted from
a point located slightly in front of the bulb along the direction of the train's motion (scene 17).
Therefore, the time required by light to travel from point (A) to point (B) (Figure 5) in relation to the
ether (the absolute rest) is given by
(
)
( )
L
. 9
AB
gap
B
A
r
t
t
c
v
-
-
=
-
From (Eq. 7), we find
(
)
,
AB
AB
B
A
r v
r
c
t
t
c
v
-
-
=
-
(
)
1
,
AB
B
A
v
r
c
t
t
c
v
-
-
=
-
(
)
,
AB
B
A
c v
r
c
t
t
c
v
-
-
=
-
(
)
1
r .
.
,
B
A
AB
c v
t
t
c
c v
-
-
=
-
Excerpt out of 32 pages
- Quote paper
- Mohamed Abdelwhab (Author), 2016, New explanation of Michelson-Morley experiment, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/338348
Similar texts
Publish now - it's free
✕
Excerpt from
32
pages
Comments