A Simple Classical Interpretation of Fizeau's Experiment: Difference between revisions
Imported from text file |
infobox: unlink bare volume/issue numbers (removes redlinks to numeric titles) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Infobox paper | {{Infobox paper | ||
| title = A Simple Classical Interpretation of Fizeau | | title = A Simple Classical Interpretation of Fizeau's Experiment | ||
| url = [http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_645.pdf Link to paper] | | url = [http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_645.pdf Link to paper] | ||
| author = [[Umberto Bartocci]], [[Giuseppe Antoni]] | | author = [[Umberto Bartocci]], [[Giuseppe Antoni]] | ||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
| published = 2001 | | published = 2001 | ||
| journal = [[Apeiron]] | | journal = [[Apeiron]] | ||
| volume = | | volume = 8 | ||
| number = | | number = 3 | ||
| num_pages = 7 | | num_pages = 7 | ||
| pages = 139-145 | | pages = 139-145 | ||
Latest revision as of 09:23, 21 July 2026
| Scientific Paper | |
|---|---|
| Title | A Simple Classical Interpretation of Fizeau's Experiment |
| Read in full | Link to paper |
| Author(s) | Umberto Bartocci, Giuseppe Antoni |
| Keywords | Special Relativity, Stokes's Aether Theory, Speed |
| Published | 2001 |
| Journal | Apeiron |
| Volume | 8 |
| Number | 3 |
| No. of pages | 7 |
| Pages | 139-145 |
Read the full paper here
Abstract
It is well known that Stokes's aether dragged theory is one of the best classical aether theories, since it is in agreement with almost all experimental results (see for instance R. Resnick's popular textbook: Introduction to Special Relativity). This theory is usually dismissed on the grounds of two natural phenomena, which are said to be "unexplainable" in Stokes's conceptual context: Bradley's astronomical annual aberration, and the speed of light in moving water (Fizeau's experiment). In this paper, a simple "time-delay" model for the behaviour of light in a transparent medium is given, which at least gets rid of the second of the two previous objections.