Timeline for Without the Michelson-Morley experiment, is there any other reason to think speed of light is the universal speed limit?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 17, 2016 at 7:36 | comment | added | HolgerFiedler | @PentchoValev Claiming that light is moving with the speed of plus the speed of the source is wrong. Would it be so we should observe in particle accelerators EM radiation with near twice the speed of light. Saying that light moves with c and see depends locally from the gravitational potential would not contradict the M-M-experiment. | |
| Dec 16, 2016 at 18:13 | comment | added | Thom Smith | He's claiming not merely that M-M doesn't prove constant c, but also that M-M proves variable c. It looks like he's misunderstanding the sources he's quoting, which make only the weaker claim. | |
| Dec 15, 2016 at 21:29 | comment | added | Pentcho Valev | "...the M-M experiment doesn't show the constancy of the speed of light. While this is in some sense true..." In 1887 the experiment PROVED that the speed of light varies with the speed of the source (c'=c+v). But they were all etherists at that time and fabricated, ad hoc, the absurd length contraction - the experiment became "compatible" with what it had originally refuted. | |
| Dec 15, 2016 at 17:14 | comment | added | ACuriousMind♦ | This seems to be an attempt to argue that the M-M experiment doesn't show the constancy of the speed of light. While this is in some sense true, I don't see how it answers the question, and I also think answers should contain some original contribution beyond copy-pasting quotes. | |
| Dec 15, 2016 at 17:12 | history | answered | Pentcho Valev | CC BY-SA 3.0 |