The Rejected "Gods"

What does it mean for Albert Abraham Michelson and his interferometer? It means only this:

Statement B is the essence of that experiment. Despite that, Michelson did not understand the experiment. As a mathematician, he believed that his way of thinking (mathematical calculations) was correct and the experiment was flawed. That is a grave problem for all mathematicians (or "their unforgivable sin"). They treat mathematics as some "god" that "reveals" something to them. They understand mathematical equations as some "revelation of their mathematical-god." Apparently, nobody (including mathematicians) can disbelieve in "god" because 2 multiplied by 2 is always 4. Mathematicians do believe in that. Therefore, they "start jumping up and down with bulging eyes" and hammer the idea of their "god" in the mind of everyone else (including you).

More than that. Albert Abraham Michelson came to the US and conducted a similar experiment again, this time in collaboration with Edward Morley, who was famous at the time for his own experiments. Michelson ever thought that his way of thinking (his calculations) was correct and that there was something wrong with the experiments, i.e., he believed in "wrong physics." The primary purpose of his address to Morley was to seek help. Morley, as an experienced experimentalist, confirmed the correctness of a given experiment that made the problem in Michelson's mind even worse. He believed that his way of thinking was right and physics was wrong.

However, neither Michelson nor Morley, nor anyone else, thought of another way to see the true meaning of the experiment that demonstrates this.

Statement C became proven many decades later by Norbert Feist and his Acoustic Michelson-Morley experiment. He confirmed the same so-called “null” result of such measurements in the case of air as a medium. Therefore, all round-trip experiments show the same so-called “null” result.

That is an astonishing “revelation” for Michelson because that experiment effectively disproves all his speculations and calculations. Air is an obvious medium for sound waves. However, it does show the same so-called “null” result. You can also conduct such experiments in any acoustic environment, whether in air or water. It is also possible to perform them in air-tubes in any lab.

Later research, as revealed in the works of Allan Zade, showed another explanation of the problem. It stems from a deep understanding of the physical nature of those experiments. That understanding leads to the idea of the Aurora experiment (a one-way experiment) that makes measurement of observer-to-medium relative motion possible. In the case of light, the Aurora experiment involves at least two atomic clocks for measurements.

Apparently, such technical devices were inaccessible at Michelson's time. They show the core of Michelson's delusion. Figure 1 shows that delusion graphically.

Figure 1. Aurora ellipsoid

Figure 1 shows the Aurora ellipsoid. This can be observed in any lab through a one-way experiment. The figure has the following meaning. An observer begins observing a round-trip experiment at point A1. A signal and the observer move regarding the medium (the picture plane). The observer uses a rod to keep a constant distance between points A and B (points of measurement). The signal starts propagating from point A1 and meets the other end of the rod at point B2 after some duration DF (forward propagation duration). The rod and the observer cover distance A1-A2 for the same duration. The signal reflects from the other end of the rod and comes back with a duration DB (backward propagation duration). It covers the distance from B2 to A3 in backward motion.

Changes in the rod orientation lead to changes in signal propagation in both directions. However, the sum of both durations remains constant. All feasible experiments confirm that result.

Unlike the round-trip experiment, the Aurora experiment splits the full duration D into two elements of forward and backward propagation. That is the essence of any round-trip experiment. In other words,

Strictly speaking, the experiment shows only the deficiency of Michelson's approach and the weakness of his understanding of the physical process of signal propagation along with the observer in a given medium.

Despite that, Michelson made another grave mistake. He used Zeus fakement to support his illusions in the following form. "Nobody can point out my error in calculations. Therefore, I'm right and I cannot be wrong! The physical experiment is wrong" (because the "god of mathematics" cannot be disproved).