On Saturday, April 29, 2023 at 5:01:14 PM UTC-3, JanPB wrote:
On Tuesday, August 30, 2022 at 1:54:49 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote:
On Tuesday, August 30, 2022 at 1:06:09 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
1) The luminiferous aether demonstrated by the effect of the wind relative to the aether in a uniformly rotating interferometer. Note by G. Sagnac, 1913
https://en.wikisource.org/?curid=759415
2) On the proof of the reality of the luminiferous aether by the experiment with a rotating interferometer. Note by G. Sagnac, 1913 [Expand (1), in the same year].
https://en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/Translation:On_the_Proof_of_the_Reality_of_the_Luminiferous_Aether
Previous publications in 1905, 1910 and 1911. About Georges Sagnac:
https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/sagnac-georges-m-m
Sagnac studied mainly the radiation produced by X rays and the optics of interference. He is remembered today primarily for his design of a rotating interferometer and for the experimental results it provided. He was very interested in the
theoretical analysis of optics of moving systems; his approach was classical, and he interpreted the results of his optical experiments as contradicting Einstein’s theory of relativity.
The results of Sagnac’s interferometer experiments were used by some scientists in France as an argument against the theory of relativity. As late as 1937 Dufour and Prunier repeated the experiment in a modified form for that purpose.2
The experiment does not contradict relativity theory in any way, however, and in 1921 and 1937 Langevin responded with an explanation of how it should be interpreted.3 [NOTE: Nor Langevin neither Sagnac published HOW did they
developed their formulae]
As Langevin explained it, the experiment can be understood equally well in terms of both classical and relativistic theories (the phenomenon involves only a first-order effect in v/c).
AS OF TODAY, Sagnac's effect can be proven by classic theories, special relativity and general relativity. There IS NO WINNER THEORY, because the effects imply rotating frames (which SR and GR fail to explain)
Both SR and GR apply to rotating frames. Any frames, in fact. Just like, say, Newtonian mechanics.
and
VERY SMALL AMOUNTS OF MOTION, which rapidly renders relativistic equations to the REALM of classic physics.
No, incorrect.
IT'S PROBABLE THAT UNKNOWN PHYSICAL EFFECTS ARE THE REASON
FOR SUCH INCREDIBLE DISCOVERY, WHICH IS WIDELY USED TODAY.
Gobbledygook.
But relativists, POST-Sagnac, tried for 100 years to get such TROPHY as a demonstration of Minkowski's SR or Hilbert-Einstein GR. And those efforts
END with linear approximations that DISMISS ANY RELATIVISTIC EFFECT.
Sagnac effect is modelled perfectly well in SR (or GR). There are small differences between the relativistic and Newtonian results of such modelling.
Probably the first direct description of the issue is in:
J. Anandan, “Sagnac effect in relativistic and nonrelativistic physics”,
Phys. Rev. D 24 No. 2 (1981), 338–346
We discussed Sagnac on this NG countless times over literally decades, here is an old note in which I describe the relativistic formulae. The time
delay formula denoted by (*) there has the standard term (the one dependent
on the projected area enclosed by the loop) and an extra correction term. That extra term is proportional to w^3 so it's very small: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2N1X7SgQnLRdWxyOUtrekVMN0k
The correct link is: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2N1X7SgQnLRdWxyOUtrekVMN0k/view?usp=sharing&resourcekey=0-O4MZ1Y99lb3fpwHbGDegTg
--
Jan
I like your attitude, JanPB.
Resurfacing old threads, so you keep punishing yourself with the shame of the HOAX OF RELATIVISM.
Good for your masochist urges.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)