The Rest Frame of the Michelson-Morley Experiment as the Preferred Reference Frame in the Special Theory of Relativity
Henok Tadesse
Abstract
Henok Tadesse
Abstract
In order to explain the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment, Einstein denied the existence of the absolute reference frame. It will be shown that all Einstein did was replace the absolute reference frame with another preferred reference frame: the rest frame of the Michelson-Morley apparatus. According to the Special Theory of Relativity (SRT ) , there is no preferred reference frame and all inertial reference frames are equivalent in predicting and analyzing the result of the Michelson-Morley experiment. No reference frame, including the rest frame of the experiment, has any special significance over other reference frames. It will be shown that the SRT analysis of the experiment violates this principle. This is because all other inertial observers moving relative to the Michelson-Morley apparatus do not know the outcome of the experiment until they get the experimental result of the observer in the rest frame of the apparatus. Only then can they use the Lorentz Transformation equations to ‘predict’ the 'null' outcome of the experiment in their own reference frames. If all inertial reference frames are really equivalent, why not first analyze the experiment in one of the reference frames moving relative to the apparatus, in which case there will be a fringe shift δ, and use Lorentz Transformation so that all other observers ( including the observer in the rest frame of the apparatus ) agree on the same fringe shift δ. The Special Relativity Theory ( SRT ) is just another form of Lorentz ether theory ( LET): both depend on a preferred reference frame. In LET the ether is the preferred reference frame, while in SRT the rest frame of the experimental apparatus is the preferred reference frame. SRT only shifted the privilege of deciding the outcome of the experiment from the absolute reference frame to the rest frame of the Michelson-Morley experiment. The same hidden fallacy exists in the SRT analysis of the Trouton-Noble experiment. An alternative theory of absolute motion and the speed of light will be proposed.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
In order to explain the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment, Einstein denied the existence of the absolute reference frame. It will be shown that all Einstein did was replace the absolute reference frame with another preferred reference frame: the rest frame of the Michelson-Morley apparatus. According to the Special Theory of Relativity (SRT ) , there is no preferred reference frame and all inertial reference frames are equivalent in predicting and analyzing the result of the Michelson-Morley experiment. No reference frame, including the rest frame of the experiment, has any special significance over other reference frames. It will be shown that the SRT analysis of the experiment violates this principle. This is because all other inertial observers moving relative to the Michelson-Morley apparatus do not know the outcome of the experiment until they get the experimental result of the observer in the rest frame of the apparatus. Only then can they use the Lorentz Transformation equations to ‘predict’ the 'null' outcome of the experiment in their own reference frames. If all inertial reference frames are really equivalent, why not first analyze the experiment in one of the reference frames moving relative to the apparatus, in which case there will be a fringe shift δ, and use Lorentz Transformation so that all other observers ( including the observer in the rest frame of the apparatus ) agree on the same fringe shift δ. The Special Relativity Theory ( SRT ) is just another form of Lorentz ether theory ( LET): both depend on a preferred reference frame. In LET the ether is the preferred reference frame, while in SRT the rest frame of the experimental apparatus is the preferred reference frame. SRT only shifted the privilege of deciding the outcome of the experiment from the absolute reference frame to the rest frame of the Michelson-Morley experiment. The same hidden fallacy exists in the SRT analysis of the Trouton-Noble experiment. An alternative theory of absolute motion and the speed of light will be proposed.
Key concepts: Frame of reference, Inertial frame of reference, Reference frame, Lorentz transformation, One-way speed of light, Rest frame, Rest (music), Moving magnet and conductor problem