An informational search-and-find task for adventurous physics thinkers
Note: I reviewed this post in April 2025. I still broadly agree with what I have written. However, in my readers interest I suggest that you look at this latest post relating to this subject. There is a small degree of overlap.
You will need to do most of the heavy lifting with respect to the information that I am providing for you today. I am merely providing you with scientific clues for you to ponder about and draw your own conclusions.
- I ask you to consider this question. Was the 1887 Michelson and Morley (M and M) ether experiment a null result or not? Conservative physicists say it was, and more open-minded (liberal thinking) physicists say it was not. These latter scientists say the results were inconclusive. Entrenched attitudes by both sides of this physics argument divide remain unto this day. There is extensive material to be found on line. This is if you care to follow the happenings relating to this debate from 1920 onwards. Keep in mind that the merits or otherwise of Einstein’s Special Relativity theory at that time hinged upon whether the M and M results were null or not!
- Also consider this. In 1926, and for a period of around three years the highly acclaimed American physicists Dayton Miller demonstrated that it was likely that the original Michelson and Morley experimental results were not null. He showed from extensive measuring methods over the period, and with more sophisticated measuring equipment that M and M had in 1887, that the earth was moving through ‘something’. This might be likened to the ether that M and M were looking for in 1887. However, Miller’s new results were dismissed by his peers. This is because they allegedly found flaws in his conclusions. The reason for this is Miller could not fully explain what was happening for him to record the types of results that he did. There is extensive on line material about this debate.
- I believe that the following contemporary physics results also need to be considered by you with respect to the possible existence of some type of ether in the universe or not. In contemporary times it has been scientifically demonstrated that the earth is moving through ‘something’ at the rate of 502 k/ms per second. Random Event Generator devices have measured this speed of travel of the earth. These findings have been confirmed by other means as well such as those devised by Cahill and his associates. Importantly, these contemporary readings confirm those earlier determined by Dayton Miller. This is as discussed above. For example see the paper ‘Perth-Muenster REG-REG Correlations: Remarkable New Evidence for Dynamical Space’ presented by Morris and the associated mathematical results therefrom entitled ‘Estimating 3-Space Velocity from REG-REG Correlations’ also posted by Morris. Both of these informational results were determined by means of the cited international Random Event Generator devices.
- I feel that you should also consider the little known physics lecture delivered by Einstein in Berlin in 1920 entitled Ether and the Theory of Relativity with respect to the existence of ‘something’ in space that Einstein refers to as ‘ether’. If you read this paper you will note that Einstein says that without an ether theory his theory of General Relativity would not work (especially see the last summarising paragraph). Einstein also said on two subsequent occasions later in his career that:-
Quotes:
A. “..My opinion about Miller’s experiments is the following. … Should the positive result be confirmed, then the special theory of relativity and with it the general theory of relativity, in its current form, would be invalid. Experimentum summus judex. Only the equivalence of inertia and gravitation would remain, however, they would have to lead to a significantly different theory. — Albert Einstein, in a letter to Edwin E. Slosson, July 1925”
B. “I believe that I have really found the relationship between gravitation and electricity, assuming that the Miller experiments are based on a fundamental error (they weren’t). Otherwise, the whole relativity theory collapses like a house of cards.” — Albert Einstein, in a letter to Robert Millikan, June 1921 (in Clark 1971, p.328)” ((I italicised)
If this is the case then perhaps we should consider if ether must be a key component of Einstein’s General Relativity model. If so, then why does Einstein’s Special Relativity theory depend on there being no ether for it to work? Can the universe have both some sort of ether and no ether at the same time? Do you think that there might be some form of contradiction of Einstein theories here? I suggest not. This is if both theories are “embraced” within a separate cosmic continuum. This is outlined in the Infinite Potential theory.
I hope that my few words today might contribute towards you further developing your own ideas about how “things” might come together and work in the manner that they do. This is in the wider universe around us. As I have suggested, it is important for you to know that both of Einstein’s relativity theories are NOT wrong! They are incomplete. I understand from my readings that a (dynamic) common ether like reference frame between both of Einstein’s Special and General Relativity models would ‘fix’ the alleged physics dilemma that I have asked you to consider.
You will find my position in this link and this link.
Good hunting!