Extendet Michelson-Morely Experiment

Hello Pese,

If these videos can be validated and verified, and the experiments reproduced, then this could be truly astounding. If no other things are influencing the interferometer between horizontal and vertical scan, the interferometer is imaging gravity, which may lead to the measurement of gravity!

I'll make sure I keep focused on this and related developments.

Disclaimer: I don't know much about this type of science, so don't kill me if I appear naive.

Mike

Interesting, but have we eliminated the possibility that the device is flexing?

Right!

Also, it was not clear whether the effect was static or dynamic. Does the amount of shift depend on velocity, or only on position?

There was no attempt to hypothesize a cause; I think you've explained it...

Good point. This idea can be checked easily when the table is horizontal. Just get two people to push gently at opposite ends of the platform.

I mean really, that is a flimsy looking rig!

If there is no evidence of flexing in the aparatus then I would assume that the light waves are being affected by gravity as Einstein has proved. The shifting occurs when the mirrors are beginning their rotation into a plane parallel with the force of Earth's gravity and on the other side their shift into a plane rotating way from gravity. Otherwise I have no other explanation.

Proves time and again that photons have mass, and are polarized.

First I'd like to congratulate Mr. Grusnik (my apologies if I've misspelled your last name) on a innovative experiment. But it looks like not enough homework was done with this presentation.

But there is one critical thing that I noticed in this presentation that is not addressed. At the beginning of the horizontal rotation mode the interference pattern on the right never forms. As expected during the horizontal rotation, the left interference pattern remains static. In the vertical rotation mode the right interference pattern does occur but to a lesser degree than the left interference pattern. This static difference at the beginning of the two experiments demonstrates that this rig is not rigid enough for any conclusions to be taken. For just by statically changing the direction of gravity a different interference pattern gets created (two patterns instead of just one). So when gravity's vector gets dynamically changed things flex and patterns move.

The precision required of the Michelson-Moreley experiment is astonishing. I would have liked to have known how far the adjustment mirror had to be moved to generate the interference pattern, and how the mirror was locked in position to prevent movement. You first demonstrated that movement of parts of the rig (the adjustment) makes the interference pattern occur and move. But you do not discuss at all any effort done to secure components while gravity will be changing or how small of a change was required to produce this moving interference pattern.

Now that I've mentioned the flaws I see in this presentation, I want to explain why I still commend you. You do do a nice initial analysis in pointing out the geometry of the conditions that cause the patterns to stop. Because of this I believe that you are an honest home scientist doing your own personal explorations. I commend you for doing this and presenting your results.

As I have commented in a previous thread, he M-M experiment was designed to show the existence of the aether that the earth was travelling through.

My contention, then, was that the M-M expt. disproved the existence of the wrong aether, and that all energy and matter are manifestations of an aether (if you will) that pervades this universe (and perhaps others) in the totality of a space that has no bounds.

In this aether there would be a null result because the measurements of the comparative speeds of light at right angles would naturally result in a null as the experiment was not passing through but was a part of the aether .

Regarding this apparatus it would be necessary to determine whether there is a slight lengthening and then shortening of the light paths as the bench turns which would cause the fringes to move, before making any more of it.

"During different times of the day" was just mentioned on the side but has not been explained at all. I'll give it a go.

I had thought of the micro climate in the room and had another look at were it was positioned. I was lead to think that if the instrument stays on one level during its travel through a micro climate (Heat of lights, etc) it is only subjected to one layer of micro climate temperature etc. variations.

These minute differences could be explained by the laser light being refracted ever so slightly by ambient temperature/humidity/air flow and cause misinterpretation of the results. Repeated in a vacuum would eliminate this ever so minute chance of micro climate interfering with light. The chance of flexing causing this phenomenon is about the same if not less important. Remember "Time of the day".

I have seen light do amazing things and what is trying to be measured here needs finer tools and a more controlled environment, as others have hinted.

If substantiated, it would be a good and reliable measuring tool for gravity. I will have to rely on the aches and pains which are a good way to be reminded that Newton invented the bloody stuff, its all his fault.

Nur nicht den humor verlieren. Gut gemacht Jungs, Ky.

The rigidity of materials is temperature dependent, as is the spacing between mirrors and all other optical components. It appeared that most of the construction was of aluminum, but he did mention that at least the screen was plywood. Plywood will vary with humidity as well as with temperature. All this adds to my agreement with others, that the apparatus is flexing. Adding a pair of crossed wires from corner to corner should reduce the flexing.

If he is implying that gravity is bending the light, then a much simpler dual-slit arrangement should show the same effect. I've done that with nothing more than a $5 pen laser and a few strips removed from multi-blade razors. Adding a lens would presumably shorten the distance required. It would be easy to mount such an assembly on a single rectangular tube. Performing the experiment twice with different size tubes would presumably show a difference based on stiffness.

I wrote to Martin asking him to respond to comments in posts #2 #3 and #4 (about the structural stability of the apparatus), and, he has responded:-

Many people here in Germany say my construction is mechanical too unsteady, and Gravity influences my apparatus. But, because of the Youtubefilm I have got help. A man who has seen my film, lent better optical equipment to me. So I build another one.
The new Interferometer is only a steelplate with 189mm diameter and 8mm thick. The mirrors and the mirrorholders are from the company Edmund, USA. The beamsplitter from the same compony is mechanical to unsteady, so I use my selfmade one.
The interference pattern is projected on a small piece of paper. During a 180° rotation with the new Interferometer, I can see average up to 2.5 interference fringe shifts per night and 3.0 per day. With the older one, you see in the youtube movie, there are 11.0 shifts per night and 11.5 per day. So, at both Interferometers (the older and the newer one) is a difference of 0.5 interference fringe shifts per day and night. I also would like to mention that a slight variation in the strength of the fringe pattern movement occurs during different days of month.

The zero point , where a stand still of the pattern movement happens is at both interferometers at the same position. At the two zero points, in a 360° rotation of both interferometers, the beam splitter is positioned horizontally to the earth surface. To all people who say, there is only gravity influence at the interferometer, there is a simple question. Why is there no zero point or stop of the fringe pattern movement if the beam splitter is vertical positioned? If the beam splitter is vertical positioned, the mirrors and the mirror holders are symmetrically pushed by gravity. But there is no zero point.

Though I still want to make some more experiments with the interferometer. I will also examine whether the stars and the moon influences on the apparatus have. An influence is there, but I want to have exact data. Moreover, I hope somebody will repeat my experiments. To the aether theories I want to say at the moment publicly still nothing. Because, I am in contact with different physicists, and some of them are big supporter of the theory of relativity. If they hear about mine theoretical thinking, they broke the contact with me, and then I would get no more information of them.
I will continue with a new experiment.
It concerns around a modern variation of the Cavendish experiment. If I am successful, something becomes clearer.

Excuse please my bad English, I have also used translator's software. In the mail are also included some photos of the new and the old interferometers.

With kindest regards!

Martin Grusenick

In each of the pictures below the text at the bottom just indicates with arrows that the "gravitational direction" is downward.

Randall or Martin,

Using a green laser means that the wavelength of the light is in the range of 500 nanometers (5*10^-7 m). The amount of flexing required to move the interference lines so that what was a maximum is now a minimum is only 250 nanometers (2.5*10^-7 m). By reducing the size of the platform he is making things more rigid, but keeping a mechanical system to 250 nanometer rigidity while changing the direction of gravity will be tough, certainly impractical and maybe impossible.

More informations anout that

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8025.msg200418#msg200418

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7T0d7o8X2-E

http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/43118/Extendet-Michelson-Morely-Experiment

http://cr4.globalspec.com/comment/473378/Re-Extendet-Michelson-Morely-Experiment

http://otto-gb.150m.com/mme/

Pese

One thing I wished to expand a little about my earlier comment. The critical dimensions that a quarter of a micron will move the interference lines are I believe the following dimensions.

• Beam splitter to mirror A (vernier control used to create image)
• Beam splitter to mirror B (another vernier)
• Beam splitter to projected plane angle (This is the most suspect dimension to me.)

Like his original experiment "poking" the equipment gently in various places with a stick should either confirm or reject the argument that the effect is caused by relative physical disturbance. I would have thought that movement of the beam splitter was most likely to cause the results he has seen here.