The proof of earth's non-motion: the experiments

[agor95]

I think it is Willful Blindness that prevents the more accurate
Michelson-Gale-Pearson of 1925 not being acknowledge to the Michelson-Morley of 1887.

I believe we have seen links that prove the rotating Earth.
Also the variation of that rotation.

So this thread is done - Well that is my prophecy.

[daxwc]

Don’t we have a non-motion experiment that isn’t a hundred years old Silvertiger?

[Fletcher]

Silly question .. ST says that all interferometer experiments (and there are many different types of interferometers - light, sound, radio waves) show only 5% 'fringe' difference than expected (interference pattern). This is where they have their own light source on board and the light beam is split 90 degrees and returned and combined etc, and form an interference pattern. Apparently they are all basically consistent in this 'fringe' pattern generated. So its not a NO result but a small result.

Does this hold true for the interferometer experiments traveling east to west at the equator at altitude and speed, and also from north to south and reverse ?

Hubble first noted a red shift in the light from distant galaxies etc. This red shift should change frequency very slightly if subject to the same experimental protocols of the above experiment in relation to a one distant light source i.e. a jet mounted telscope. IOW's the frequency should shift left or right depending on direction to or from the light source because the light waves are either being compressed or elongated.

Compare the results from both the telescope and the interferometer for the same headings, speed, and altitude.

I'd probably start there before deducing a small interferometer result indicates a non-rotating earth if the red shift test shows something different.

[Silvertiger]

So its not a NO result but a small result.

I know...I've said it many times, and the fact that cosmology disregards it and claims a null result...even though it shows up every single time.

Does this hold true for the interferometer experiments traveling east to west at the equator at altitude and speed, and also from north to south and reverse ?

The light has to travel just a tiny bit farther from east to west than north to south (or south to north) to get the 0.02 result, which translates to an ether flow of roughly 3,350 mph.

Hubble first noted a red shift in the light from distant galaxies etc. This red shift should change frequency very slightly if subject to the same experimental protocols of the above experiment in relation to a one distant light source i.e. a jet mounted telscope. IOW's the frequency should shift left or right depending on direction to or from the light source because the light waves are either being compressed or elongated.

Fletcher...you're a genius! You actually just figured out how to establish a control group for interferometry experiments. I can explain further when I get home. It would require access to a telescope like Hubble as you say lol.

[Silvertiger]

I think it is Willful Blindness that prevents the more accurate
Michelson-Gale-Pearson of 1925 not being acknowledge to the Michelson-Morley of 1887.

I believe we have seen links that prove the rotating Earth.
Also the variation of that rotation.

So this thread is done - Well that is my prophecy.

Of course its acknowledged, but not many know about it, since the MM1887 took the fame.

The MG experiment is a LONG story...so I'll keep this VERY brief unless you want to know more about the experiments and the sequence of events that led up to it. Michelson summed up the experiment with one sardonic comment:

All we can deduce from this experiment is that the earth rotates on its axis

Oh my but how very nobly Copernican of him! However, in reality, the experiment did not distinguish between an Earth rotating against the ether as opposed to the ether circling around a fixed-Earth. In other words, it provided no proof that the Earth rotates, but opened the door very wide to suggest that Copernicus was wrong, since NO translational motion corresponding to 30 km/sec was found by Michelson and Gale.

It is interesting to note that, after analyzing the results of the Sagnac and Michelson-Gale experiments, Hayden and Whitney, in the title of, “If Sagnac, Why Not Michelson-Morley?� write:

The logical existence of the incremental Sagnac effect implies…that there is some compelling physical reason why the effect cannot be observed at the surface of the Earth….We hold that until something new is brought to the table, this question simply cannot be resolved. No currently accepted theory reveals why, like a Cheshire cat, the Sagnac effect shows itself in one kind of experiment but not in another.

- Howard C. Hayden and Cynthia K Whitney, “If Sagnac and Michelson-Gale Why Not Michelson-Morley?� Galilean Electrodynamics, vol. 1, no. 6, Tufts University, Nov./Dec. 1990, pp. 73-74

Though they are correct in concluding, “until something new is brought to the table, this question simply cannot be resolved,� the resolution staring them in the face but which has been “unthinkable� since the days of Lorentz and Einstein is that the Earth is not moving. Whereas Sagnac and Michelson-Gale, being themselves Copernicans, were testing for “The Effect of the Earth’s Rotation on the Velocity of Light,� the interpretation of their results in regard to a geocentric universe is, as I said earlier, that Earth is motionless at the center of the universe. There is a slight movement of the ether against “the surface of the Earth� due to the rotation of the universe, which then shows up in miniscule fringe shifts in the interferometer experiments. Accordingly, since the Earth has no translational motion, experiments seeking to detect such motion will always come to a “null� result.

The result, once again, is not actually null; rather, all the experiments show a slight positive result (as did the original Michelson-Morley experiment in 1887), but the physicists and astronomers interpreting the results consider them null because they do not produce the expected fringe shifts if the Earth is understood to be moving through the ether by revolving around the sun at 18.5 miles/sec. In other words, if one presupposes a revolving and rotating Earth, the fringe shifts are always way too small to account for such double motion. But if we assume a stationary Earth in the center of a universal ether, there will, indeed, be a slight movement of the ether against Earth, just as there would be against a ship in the eye of a hurricane.

That's all I'll say about it, unless you have specific questions.

[Silvertiger]

Don’t we have a non-motion experiment that isn’t a hundred years old Silvertiger?

Yes: the 2004 Wolf and Bize experiments with sapphire oscillators also show null results. As it stands, any Copernican experimenters always find the same “null� result as Michelson-Morley, and they always conclude that the speed of light is the same in all directions, and therefore constant...which it isn't...which is proven. LOL.

After a hundred years, no one seems to have caught on to the idea that the “null� result was a product of a motionless Earth. Second, in the control experiment, Wolf and Bize used a hydrogen maser that they claimed “shouldn’t be affected by Earth’s motion.� This begs the question as to how a hydrogen maser would not be affected by the “Earth’s motion,� while every other light source is affected by such motion?

Moreover, if it is true that a hydrogen maser is not affected by the “Earth’s motion,� then the hydrogen maser should be used in all future interferometers to test whether the speed of light is truly constant. Of course, the problem would be to prove that a hydrogen maser is not affected by motion. But how can one do so if he already assumes the Earth is moving? Any test done on a hydrogen maser has Earth as its laboratory.

[daxwc]

https://www.academia.edu/35814658/Galil ... th_Edition

[Silvertiger]

Wonderful source Dax, packed full of the history of the experiments and how the results were hijacked. Now that you have it...not sure why you never downloaded it til now LOL...but now that you have, read it. It's a long read. It's been updated since. There's also "Journey to the Center of the Universe," my go-to since 2018 and my all time favorite - like an encyclopedia of trials, failures, journals, papers, interviews with scientists, etc., all culminated in just a few places. Of course this whole search began from reading the bible. Then I read the paper "Preferred Axis in Cosmology," which made me question what I had learned from school. Five years of research LOL.

Also, there is a DVD version and a podcast series of your PDF if you like watching instead of reading:

On the note of Creationism and Geocentrism, I did a lot of research before finding a podcast series called "The Principle," along with a DVD of the same name. I ordered the DVD last year (2016) and it was fascinating. Much of this information is on that series and DVD, and shows how many scientists and physicists have changed their views on the universe and the motion of the earth in light of the plethora of evidence presented. You guys should check it out. The CMB axis of evil is the crux of their investigation, as the data received from Planck Satellite showed that we are cosmically aligned with the axes along our equator and along our ecliptic. And the only explanation for it is an earth that doesn't move. It is the cornerstone of the whole thing. And yes, God is a part of it. But one shouldn't dismiss science, the nature of observation and recording it, because God may be involved. After all, although it is a rare occurrence, it IS possible to believe in God and to be pragmatic at the same time. Just because something may seem to be a certain way doesn't necessarily mean that it is that way.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwyM0C ... gMw7aLC0TA

[daxwc]

Yes I have started to read it as it is an easy read. Doesn't hurt to keep an open mind. Still don’t understand why they don’t turn a Martian probe and observe earth rotating around the sun, the argument would be over in a few months.

Silvertiger:

ovyyus wrote:
Would it be equally difficult to prove that Mars is moving after conducting the same experiments from the surface of Mars?

No. Mars does rotate, and it orbits the sun. An interferometer test would reveal that.

Mars rotates but earth does not. Mars orbits the Sun. The Sun orbits the earth. Hard to believe some kind of math dilemma wouldn’t exist. How do we know the universe doesn’t rotate around every independent observer?

[daxwc]

You know what I hate the most about your proposal Silvertiger. You took away one of my options of a real energy source for Bessler’s wheel. That being harvesting earths rotational energy.

[Silvertiger]

You still can. It's just the rotational energy of the universe you would be exploiting - massive inertial forces "akin to gravitation": centrifugal, Coriolis, and Euler. The math and principles remain the same. Imagine a bunch of magnets rotating at distance from a center-placed magnet where the net torque acting is zero. You still have the inertial effects acting on that center magnet.

[Silvertiger]

Mars rotates but earth does not. Mars orbits the Sun. The Sun orbits the earth. Hard to believe some kind of math dilemma wouldn’t exist. How do we know the universe doesn’t rotate around every independent observer?

The sun doesn't "orbit" the earth. Rather, it is gravitationally tethered to the rest of the stars, and it is rotating with that system around the earth/center of mass. And there is a math dilemma, bit only when it comes to trying to force it to fit the Copernican Principle, hence the requirement for things like dark matter, dark energy, and the Lorentz Transform. Otherwise, yes it can be hard to believe, but the math works out just fine, and all observations are accounted for. A good example of this is accounting for "extra gravity" in galaxies that don't have enough observable mass to support it. In this case, the massive inertial forces "akin to gravitation" caused by the universe's 24 hour rotation perfectly account for this. As far as rotation around an independent observer in some arbitrary spot in space, the Copernican model doesn't permit it, nor does it permit universal rotation at all.

[daanopperman]

HI All .

If you have 2 space probes fly them in from deep space in different directions around the earth in direction of rotation , 180 deg offset to each other , one should speed up one should slow down , should proof rotating earth , if both have the same velocity after flyby proof of a non rotating earth .

Daan

[Silvertiger]

You know, I thought of that five years ago, but with space shuttles lol. But alas, it wouldn't work because inertial forces from the rotating stars would yield the difference in speeds. However, I still think as I did years ago that launching two shuttles from opposite sides of the earth, one going west in the forward direction around the sun and one going east in the reverse direction, just might be viable. This would be a manual verification for Michelson-Morley.

There are two possible outcomes.
1. If both shuttles cover the same distance away from Earth AND insodoing expend the same amount of propellant, then the earth doesn't move.
2. If both shuttles cover the same distance and DO NOT expend the same amount of propellant, then there is motion.

The drawback is the distance from Earth. If the earth is moving at 67,000 mph, then one of the shuttles will never make it back if it gets too far away, and they would have to wait a year for the earth to come back around.

I'm just not sure if the inertial forces of the spinning universe would aid its return. I'm banking on the fact that if the light in MM wasn't affected, then it just may be the case for the shuttle, as opposed to the Sagnac Effect on light.

[Fletcher]

That sound reasonable Daan - slingshot effect plus/minus rotational dragging, or not !

The sun doesn't "orbit" the earth. Rather, it is gravitationally tethered to the rest of the stars, and it is rotating with that system around the earth/center of mass.

Of course the sun orbits earth in your proposed geocentric model. All the universe orbits daily around the non-rotating earth center. That's what we've been discussing for days. And that's what we see as the sun passes thru the sky.

Don't make me grab quotes lol.