The analysis of Michelson’s experiment for the definition
of a ether existence and Earth speed relative to it in the space
Artyomyenro-Bessarab G.I.
c. Dnipropetrovsk, 5 side street Shtabnoy, app.20, Ukraine
E-mail: iscatele@ukr.net
The analysis of Michelson’s experiment.
During my student's years, while studying the course of physics, I had some doubts
concerning the correctness of carrying out the analysis of the experiment MichelsonMаrlеy and accuracy of its conclusions. A desire to check them up appeared after all.
But it turned out, that it requires certain conditions and a great deal of time. That’s why I
managed to realise such a work only being advanced in years. That is the reason of my
great regret, because the conclusions have turned out to be stunning for me and for
physics as well. The results of this work have provoked a number of following works
which also turned out to have astonishing conclusions and results.
The experiment analysis was spent in order to check up its competence in carrying
out the tasks. The light ray which supposedly possesses duality of physical properties
(wave and corpuscular) was taken as the experiment basis. It is necessary to take into
account during the analysis. Besides, so-called а ether participates in the experiment. For
some reasons, I have called it field substance (FS). It is necessary to consider its
behaviour during experiment in the analysis:
1. FS is attracted by the atmosphere of Earth at its surface completely.
2. FS is not attracted by the atmosphere of Earth.
3. FS is attracted by the atmosphere of Earth partially.
The absence of FS is absolutely excluded and as the analysis will show and it was
not without some ground.
In due time Phiso has shown partial attraction of light by a small amount of
substance (it was a moving water in a pipe). It should be expected, that atmosphere
above the surface of Earth carries away FS completely which the environment of
distribution of electromagnetic radiation.
The analysis is carried out in several directions, because it would be illogical to do
it only in one of them. But such an analysis gives a possibility to find a variant which
would satisfy the results of Michelson’s experiment. There is no doubt in reliability of
his results, and the absence of the shift of interference fringes is the brilliant, the most
convincing result of the experiment! But it was misunderstood and misinterpreted.
Let's do the first division of the analysis:
1) FS is attracted by the atmosphere of Earth at the level of its surface completely;
2) FS is not attracted by the atmosphere of Earth.
The second division:
1) Analysis of the experiment according to the wave properties of light;
2) the analysis according to the corpuscular properties.
The scheme of the analysis
fig. 1
DА = DB = l
t – time
с – speed of the light
fig. 2
А and B – mirrors, D – semitransparent mirror
F – the source of the light, C – telescope
V – the speed of Earth on the orbit around the Sun
Ι. The variant with wave properties of light,
spreading in the environment of the field substance (FS).
The analysis with the environment (FS), The analysis with the environment (FS)
which is completely attracted by Earth. which is not attracted by the movement
of Earth.
The first beam which passes the way DBD according
to fig. 1 before the rotation of the device:
Along the section DB the beam catches up As the environment (FS) of light
with the mirror B on the part DB of the
distribution should be completely attracted
way. That is why the time necessary for by the Earth and its atmosphere at the
the beam to pass the part DB of the way surface then according to this variant
will be:
everything follows the stationary
conditions.
Then why the time necessary for the beam
to pass the part DB of the way will be:
l
c V
On the part DB of the way the beam
having reflected from a mirror moves to
mirror D which approaches.
Therefore the part DB of the way:
1) t DB 
2) t DB 
l
c V
Thus, it will take the first beam to pass the
way DBD :
l
l

c V c V
l
l


c V c V
1)
t DB 
2) t DB 
l
c
l
c
Thus, it will take the first beam to pass the
way DBD :
t DBD  t DB  t BD 
t DBD
t DBD 
2l
c
The second beam which passes the way DAD before the turn of the device:
According to fig. 2 the second beam
should pass the way DAD perpendicularly
to the direction of movement of Earth,
considering that FS does not move with
Earth and remains motionless. While the
light passes the way from mirror D to a
mirror A this mirror has time to move to a
point A'. When the beam returns to mirror
D, it will appear in point D ″ already. Thus,
the beam way on the part of the way DAD
according to the fig. 1 will be more the
than doubled length of the shoulder 2l and
The second beam should pass the way
DAD according to fig. 1 as the
environment (FS) should be attracted by
Earth completely.
will be executed on way DА'D ″ of fig. 2.
Let's designate actual time of the passage
of the beam of the part DА' as tDА '. Then
the way DА' = сtDА', and the section
DD'=VtDA'. In the rectangular triangle
DА'D' the leg of the triangle is
А' D'  l 
ct DА' 2  Vt DА' 2  t DА' c 2  V 2 ,
whence
1, 2) t DА'  t А'D" 
l
l
с
1, 2) t DА  t АD  , therefore
c2 V 2
Therefore the full time of the passage of
the way DА'D″ will be twice more:
t DА'D" 
2l
c2 V 2
This is the time of the second beam before
turn, without attraction of FS by Earth. The
difference in time of beams passage before
the turn of the device, without attraction of
FS by Earth will be:
t1  t BDB  t DА'D" 
l
l
2l


2
c V c V
c V 2
The full time of the passage of the way
DАD will be twice more:
2l
t DAD 
с
It is the second beam before turn with the
condition that FS is completely attracted
by Earth.
The difference in time of beams passage
before the turn of the device, with full
attraction of FS by Earth will be
t1  t BDB  t DА'D" 
2l 2l
 0
c
c
After 90° turn of the device relative to the direction of movement of the Earth, the values
of summands in expressions ∆t will be just permuted. Therefore:
t 2  t DBD  t DАА 
2l
c2 V 2

1
1

c V c V
t 2  t DBD  t DAD 
2l 2l
 0
c c
This value of ∆t in the wave variant
This value ∆t in the wave variant with
without attraction of FS after the rotation full attraction of FS after the rotation of the
of the device.
device.
As we see, with full attraction of the
If the attraction of FS by the
FS by Earth and atmosphere at level of its
atmosphere of Earth is absent, the wave
surface, the wave variant gives ∆t = 0, that
variant gives certain values of ∆t before
is the experiment should not show
◦
and after the 90 rotation of the device, but anything a fortiori.
these values are different only in the sign.
It turns out, that the wave variant of
That is, the interferential picture would
the analysis with complete attraction of FS
remain without changes but if we rotate the precisely satisfies the results of
device, we would observe gradual change Michelson’s experiment!
of the value ∆t from positive value to the
negative. It was not observed in the
experiments of Michelson’s. That is why
this variant does not match the results of
the experiment.
ΙΙ. The corpuscular variant of the analysis.
It should not depend on the availability of FS, therefore this variant does not have
subvariants. The beam will be considered in the form of movement of a photon flux
according to fig. 1.
The movement of the first corpuscular beam on the section DBD before the
rotation of the device.
In this case the analysis will be done according to fig. 1.
1. The movement of the first beam along the section DB.
The movement of photons along the section DB coincides with the direction of
movement of Earth on its orbit. The speed of the beam photons relative to mirror D and
mirror B will be c. Therefore the time of passage of the section DB by the beam will be:
l
t DB 
c
2. The movement of the first photon flux along the section BD is in opposite
direction relative to the speed of Earth V, but its speed relative to the mirrors D and B
will be equal c and the time of passage of the section BD by the beam will be:
t BD 
l
 t DB
c
And the time of passage of the section DBD by the beam before the rotation of the
device will be:
t DBD  t DB  t BD 
2l
c
The movement of the second corpuscular beam before the rotation of the device.
It will pass along the section DА'D″ fig. 2 perpendicularly to the movement of
Earth on its orbit. While the light passes from the mirror D to the mirror А, this mirror
has time to move to a point А'. When the beam returns to mirror D, the mirror will
appear in the point D″ already. Thus, the beam way on the part of the way DAD
according to the fig. 1 will be more the than doubled length of the shoulder 2l and will
be executed on way DА'D ″ of fig. 2. The photon flux along all this way has the speed c,
therefore its time of passage of this way will be the same as in the wave variant with not
attracted FS:
1, 2)
t DА'D" 
2l
c2 V 2
In the corpuscular variant the difference in time during which the beams come to the
turn is:
t1  t DBD  t DА'D" 
2l
2l

c
c2  V 2
After the rotation of the device by 90 ◦ relative to the direction of the movement of the
Earth on its orbit, the values of summands in expressions ∆t of the corpuscular variant
will be just permuted, therefore:
t 2  t DB'D"  t DAD 
2l
c2 V 2

2l
c
That is, after the rotation of the device - ∆t2 = ∆t1, that cannot give the displacement
of interference fringes. However such a displacement should take place in the process of
the rotation of the device.
Therefore the analysis of a corpuscular variant says that it does not fit the results of
Michelson’s experiment.
The corpuscular analysis that we carried out is suitable for Einstein's positions in
theory of relativity where c is constant in any inertial base, and the results of the analysis
and the conclusion will be the same!
The note: in the corpuscular variant the speed of photons in the flux along the
section DBD of way coincide and are equal c from the point of view of classical
mechanics as well as from the point of view of Einstein’s theory of relativity.
From the point of view of classical mechanics, photons fly from the source to a
mirror D with the speed с+V, but the mirror B moves away from them with speed V, the
Resultant speed of photons of a beam relative to the mirror B will be:
(c + V) - V = c.
Photons, being reflected from a moving away mirror, lose a part of their speed and
it turns out to be equal с-V, but the mirror D flies towards them with the speed V,
therefore the resultant speed of photons relative to the mirror D will be:
(c - V) + V = c.
Final conclusions of the analysis
Only one variant of the carried out analysis satisfies to the zero result of
Michelson’s experiment: the variant of wave process with complete attraction of FS by
Earth and its atmosphere at the level of its surface. And it definitely proves the
availability of FS in surrounding space, the wave nature of light, excluding corpuscular
nature and dualism of its properties.
From Einstein's point of view (in vacuum the speed of light c = const in any (ISC)
we also get the result fitting to the one received in Michelson’s experiment. But it is not
corpuscular, but wave! For the theory of relativity it is a catastrophe! As the wave
variant for its realisation demands the environment. And the availability of the
environment (FS) and the theory of relativity are not compatible in essence!
So it turns out that the experiment of Michelson-Morli which was carried out by
them and their followers repeatedly for almost 100 years has given accurate and
convincing above stated result. And this result was not seen! To define the speed of
Earth relative to FS (ether) in this experiment is not possible.
I developed other experiment to prove the availability of FS and to define the speed
of Earth relative to this environment. Experiment is simple, reliable, with high
sensitivity, but demands to be carried out the open space, that is - outboard of a space
station.