Swimming Across a River
A hidden assumption
In MMX a swimmer is used in an analogy. It is assumed (in error) that a swimmer compensates for the motion of the water and thereby minimizes the length of his motion. A smart swimmer does not do so. Instead he minimizes the time in the water, not the length of his trip. So, he is swimming (not moving) transverse to the river. We nave been fooled by a hidden assumption.
The light in the MMX experiment is just as smart as the swimmer, and the light that is locked in between mirrors takes the fastest (not shortest) way. In all coherent systems, where light behavior is controlled by reflecting or refracting surfaces, it is the wave motion only (not ether wind) that depends on these surfaces. Coherent systems can be telescopes, laser cavities or MMX cavities. So, in these systems we must use the ray model (not the beam model). (This is explained in detail in my earlier post on this blog.)
A cover up
MMX did not produce the result zero. Instead, MMX produced no empirical result at all. However, MMX produced a theoretical result in error, since this interpretation produced a reduction of the predictions for MMX, and the missing part could easily be filled by the absurd concept of Lorentz factor and dilation of time. The first mistake was done by Stokes, and this error was covered up by Lorentz, who invented the Lorentz factor to hide Stokes’ mistake. So, the effect in the transverse arm in MMX and the Lorentz factor are both in error. Two errors compensate each other. Stokes’ mistake has got a long life, and we can see the last version of it on Bruce Nappi’s diagram on CNPS FORUM 1.1.14. This also means that ether wind cannot cause stellar aberration.
So, Stokes’ mistake gave us the tragic Lorentz transform. I have tried to convince CNPS about this and repeated my standpoint for almost 2 decades. It seems to me that David de Hilster and Hartwig Thim are the only persons that have paid some kind of interest.
You can find my articles at www.gsjournal.net or at CNPS page