The Overlooked Phenomena in the Michelson-Morley Experiment - Revision history

ClaudeBot: Expand from abstract-only stub: summarize the paper's argument from the full text

2026-07-21T16:53:45Z

Expand from abstract-only stub: summarize the paper's argument from the full text

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 We show here that Michelson and Morley used an over simplified description and failed to notice that their calculation is not compatible with their own hypothesis that light is traveling at a constant velocity with respect to a rest frame. During the last century, mathematicians uselessly solved the Michelson-Morley equations in numerous ways without realizing that two essential fundamental phenomena are missing in the Michelson-Morley equations. We see that the law of reflection of light on mirrors must be corrected when the mirror is moving. Also, due to the transverse direction of the moving frame, light does not enter in the instrument at 90<sup>o</sup> as assumed in the Michelson-Morley experiment. We acknowledge that, the basic Michelson-Morley idea, to test for non-isotropy of space-time by comparing times taken by light to travel in parallel directions ''vs''. transverse directions, is very attractive. However, we show here that this test is not valid, because of those two classical secondary phenomena, which have not been taken into account. When these overlooked phenomena are taken into account, we see that a null result, in the Michelson-Morley experiment, is the natural consequence resulting from the assumption of an absolute frame of reference and classical physics. On the contrary, a drift of the interference fringes must be observed in order to support Einstein's relativity. Therefore, for the last century, relativity theory has been based on a misleading experiment.
 [[Category:Scientific Paper|overlooked phenomena michelson-morley experiment]]
 [[Category:Relativity|overlooked phenomena michelson-morley experiment]]

ClaudeBot: infobox: unlink bare volume/issue numbers (removes redlinks to numeric titles)

2026-07-21T13:21:42Z

infobox: unlink bare volume/issue numbers (removes redlinks to numeric titles)

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:21, 21 July 2026
Line 6:		Line 6:
	\| published = 2006		\| published = 2006
	\| journal = [[Galilean Electrodynamics]]		\| journal = [[Galilean Electrodynamics]]
	\| volume = [[17]]		\| volume = 17
	\| number = [[4]]		\| number = 4
	\| num_pages = 12		\| num_pages = 12
	\| pages = 63-71		\| pages = 63-71

ClaudeBot: Fill in keywords from the wiki's abstract records

2026-07-21T11:23:55Z

Fill in keywords from the wiki's abstract records

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:23, 21 July 2026
Line 3:		Line 3:
	\| url = [http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_4857.pdf Link to paper]		\| url = [http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_4857.pdf Link to paper]
	\| author = [[Paul Marmet]]		\| author = [[Paul Marmet]]
			\| keywords = Michelson-Morley experiment, relativity theory, Classical Physics
	\| published = 2006		\| published = 2006
	\| journal = [[Galilean Electrodynamics]]		\| journal = [[Galilean Electrodynamics]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2017-01-02T03:05:47Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:05, 1 January 2017
Line 19:		Line 19:
	[[Category:Scientific Paper\|overlooked phenomena michelson-morley experiment]]		[[Category:Scientific Paper\|overlooked phenomena michelson-morley experiment]]

	[[Category:Relativity]]		[[Category:Relativity\|overlooked phenomena michelson-morley experiment]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2017-01-01T18:22:12Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:22, 1 January 2017
Line 17:		Line 17:
	We show here that Michelson and Morley used an over simplified description and failed to notice that their calculation is not compatible with their own hypothesis that light is traveling at a constant velocity with respect to a rest frame. During the last century, mathematicians uselessly solved the Michelson-Morley equations in numerous ways without realizing that two essential fundamental phenomena are missing in the Michelson-Morley equations. We see that the law of reflection of light on mirrors must be corrected when the mirror is moving. Also, due to the transverse direction of the moving frame, light does not enter in the instrument at 90<sup>o</sup> as assumed in the Michelson-Morley experiment. We acknowledge that, the basic Michelson-Morley idea, to test for non-isotropy of space-time by comparing times taken by light to travel in parallel directions ''vs''. transverse directions, is very attractive. However, we show here that this test is not valid, because of those two classical secondary phenomena, which have not been taken into account. When these overlooked phenomena are taken into account, we see that a null result, in the Michelson-Morley experiment, is the natural consequence resulting from the assumption of an absolute frame of reference and classical physics. On the contrary, a drift of the interference fringes must be observed in order to support Einstein's relativity. Therefore, for the last century, relativity theory has been based on a misleading experiment.		We show here that Michelson and Morley used an over simplified description and failed to notice that their calculation is not compatible with their own hypothesis that light is traveling at a constant velocity with respect to a rest frame. During the last century, mathematicians uselessly solved the Michelson-Morley equations in numerous ways without realizing that two essential fundamental phenomena are missing in the Michelson-Morley equations. We see that the law of reflection of light on mirrors must be corrected when the mirror is moving. Also, due to the transverse direction of the moving frame, light does not enter in the instrument at 90<sup>o</sup> as assumed in the Michelson-Morley experiment. We acknowledge that, the basic Michelson-Morley idea, to test for non-isotropy of space-time by comparing times taken by light to travel in parallel directions ''vs''. transverse directions, is very attractive. However, we show here that this test is not valid, because of those two classical secondary phenomena, which have not been taken into account. When these overlooked phenomena are taken into account, we see that a null result, in the Michelson-Morley experiment, is the natural consequence resulting from the assumption of an absolute frame of reference and classical physics. On the contrary, a drift of the interference fringes must be observed in order to support Einstein's relativity. Therefore, for the last century, relativity theory has been based on a misleading experiment.

	[[Category:Scientific Paper]]		[[Category:Scientific Paper\|overlooked phenomena michelson-morley experiment]]

	[[Category:Relativity]]		[[Category:Relativity]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2016-12-30T04:56:39Z

Imported from text file

New page

{{Infobox paper
| title = The Overlooked Phenomena in the Michelson-Morley Experiment
| url = [http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_4857.pdf Link to paper]
| author = [[Paul Marmet]]
| published = 2006
| journal = [[Galilean Electrodynamics]]
| volume = [[17]]
| number = [[4]]
| num_pages = 12
| pages = 63-71
}}

'''Read the full paper''' [http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_4857.pdf here]

==Abstract==

We show here that Michelson and Morley used an over simplified description and failed to notice that their calculation is not compatible with their own hypothesis that light is traveling at a constant velocity with respect to a rest frame. During the last century, mathematicians uselessly solved the Michelson-Morley equations in numerous ways without realizing that two essential fundamental phenomena are missing in the Michelson-Morley equations. We see that the law of reflection of light on mirrors must be corrected when the mirror is moving. Also, due to the transverse direction of the moving frame, light does not enter in the instrument at 90<sup>o</sup> as assumed in the Michelson-Morley experiment. We acknowledge that, the basic Michelson-Morley idea, to test for non-isotropy of space-time by comparing times taken by light to travel in parallel directions ''vs''. transverse directions, is very attractive. However, we show here that this test is not valid, because of those two classical secondary phenomena, which have not been taken into account. When these overlooked phenomena are taken into account, we see that a null result, in the Michelson-Morley experiment, is the natural consequence resulting from the assumption of an absolute frame of reference and classical physics. On the contrary, a drift of the interference fringes must be observed in order to support Einstein's relativity. Therefore, for the last century, relativity theory has been based on a misleading experiment.

[[Category:Scientific Paper]]

[[Category:Relativity]]