2,000 Greater & Lesser Mysteries/2,000 Greater and Lesser Mysteries.iso/altscien/mys00056.txt

Text File | 1994-06-10 | 17.0 KB | 299 lines

Marinov's Toothed-Wheels Measurement of Absolute Velocity of Solar System.
J.P.Wesley.
Weiherdammstrasse 24, 7712 Blumberg, West Germany.

Abstract: Marinov reports measuring the absolute velocity of the closed
laboratory using two toothed wheels mounted on the ends of a rotating shaft.
Light incident on the first toothed wheel is chopped. As it arrives at the
second toothed wheel later, due to the finite time it takes light to travel
down the shaft, it is again chopped by the second toothed wheel. The amount of
light that gets through measures the oneway time-of-flight velocity of light
in the direction of the shaft. By directly comparing the results for beams
travelling in opposite directions the absolute velocity is directly measured,
v = ((c+v)-(c-v))/2. He reports the absolute velocity of the solar system as
v = 360 +- 40 km/s, alfa = 12 +- 1 h, delta = - 24 +- 7 deg, in agreement
with the results from the 2.7K cosmic background anisotropy and Marinov's
coupled mirrors experiment. The errors he reports are consistent with his
experimental setup and procedure.

1. INTRODUCTION
  It is of considerable importance to examine Marinov's claim(1):
i) It contradicts SPECIAL RELATIVITY, which assumes the velocity of light is
uniquely c fixed relative to the moving observer.
ii) It provides an additional independent measurement of the absolute
velocity of the solar system.

Considering point i) above there exists considerable dissatisfaction with
SPECIAL RELATIVITY already (2-7). It would also seem that the observations of
Roemer and Bradley(8,9), the Sagnac experiment(10), the 2.7K cosmic
background anisotropy(11), and the Marinov coupled mirrors experiment(12)
give firm evidence that the velocity of energy propagation of light is, in
fact, c fixed relative to absolute space. In addition, assuming absolute
space exists, it would appear that a moving observer must see two wave
velocities for light, the phase velocity and the velocity of energy
propagation, and not simply a single unique wave velocity of light as is
usually assumed(13). These two wave velocities need not have the same
magnitude nor direction. It is, thus, very impotant to know if more
independent experimental evidence is now available that can confirm the fact
that the velocity of energy propagation of light is c fixed relative to
absolute space.

Considering point ii) above, presently the only two reliable determinations
of the absolute velocity of the solar system are 1) the anisotropy of the
2.7K cosmic background radiation 2) the Marinov coupled mirrors experiment.
(12).The 2.7K background anisotropy provides one place accuracy. The Marinov
coupled mirrors experiment provides slightly better accuracy; although with
little difficulty it can be readily improved to give two, three or even four
place accuracy(14). The Marinov toothed wheel experiment provides still a
third independent method for determining the absolute velocity of the solar
system. He reports one place accuracy; but it would appear that with some
minor improvements that two place accuracy might easily be obtained. It is of
some interest to know the absolute velocity of the solar system to as great
an accuracy as possible; as three place accuracy might provide the chance of
detecting dark neighbours to the solar system.

The primary purpose of this paper is to provide a short understandable and
readily available description and critique of Marinov's toothed wheel
experiment, Marinov's own account(1) being neither clear nor readily
available. It is hoped that this presentation might encourage an independent
repetition of this important experiment.

2. MARINOV'S EXPERIMENTAL ARRANGEMENT (1)
Two toothed wheels consisting of 40 round holes of diameter b = 6 millimeters
drilled equi-angular distance from each other at a radial distance R = 12 cm
from the center of two circular steel plates were mounted on a common shaft d
= 120 cm from each other as indicated in Fig. 1. The shaft was driven at the
center by a variable speed motor, N revolutions per second. An Argon laser
illuminated the holes on the entrance wheel. A silicon photocell detected the
light passing out of the exit wheel. The entire apparatus was enclosed in a
vacuum.
<Illustration showing two lasers and two photocells and a wheatsone bridge,
and the shaft and the plates>
Fig.1. A diagram of the Marinov toothed-wheel experiment to measure the
absolute velocity of the closed laboratory.

3.THEORY FOR ONEWAY TIME-OF-FLIGHT VELOCITY OF LIGHT
Although the present paper is concerned with the direct measurement of the
absolute velocity of the closed laboratory; and it is not concerned with the
measurement of the oneway time-of-flight velocity of light; in order to
develop the theory and to indicate how possible errors may be estimated it is
convenient to first present the hypothetical example of how one might measure
the oneway time-of-flight velocity of light.

It might be thought that one need merely measure the oneway time-of-flight
velocity of light in two opposite directions and by subtracting them obtain
the absolute velocity of the laboratory. This is in principle possible; but
in practice the experimental errors for the measurement of the one-way
time-of-flight velocity in either direction are too large.It is only by
balancing the two results directly in a Wheatstone bridge that significance
can be obtained; and the absolute velocity of the laboratory can be
measured.

The rotating entrance wheel chops the light beam. The rotating exit wheel
chops this signal again but at a later time dt, the time for a pulse of light
to travel down the length of the shaft d. If the observed time-of-flight
velocity of light in the direction of the shaft is c*, then
   dt = d / c*   (1)
If the time-of-flight velocity of light is fixed as c relative to absolute
space, then
   c* = c - vd  (2)
where vd is the component of the absolute velocity of the laboratory in the
direction of the shaft.

The two wheels, being rigidly mounted to the same shaft, can be optically
aligned by simply altering the inclination of the light beam relative to the
axis of rotation. If the beam is aligned to achieve a certain intensity Io
(chosen as one half of maximum intensity, Io = Imax/2, to optimize the
sensitivity) when N = 0, then the intensity must change as N increases and as
the alignment of the entrance and exit holes changes relative to the chopped
light pulse. Ideally for square holes of width b that can be perfectly
aligned the fractional change in intensity is simply proportional to the
fractional mismatch created by the time it takes the light to travel between
the two toothed wheels; thus,
  dI/Io = 2 db/b  (3)
where
  db = 2 pi R N dt  (4)
It may be readily appreciated that for round holes and including possible
effects from diffraction and vibrations dI/Io, will be simply a linear
function of 2 db / b, if dI / Io is small, as is the case. In general then
Eq. (3) may be replaced by
  dI/Io = 2 K db / b (5)
where K is some konstant of proportionality. If this constant of
proportionality were desired, it could be measured directly or it could be
estimated theoretically. Combining Eqs. (1), (4), and (5) then gives the
oneway time-of-flight velocity of light as (15)
  c* = (K Io / dI) ( 4 pi R N d / b)  (6)

4. THEORY TO FIND THE ABSOLUTE VELOCITY OF THE LABORATORY
Marinov sent simultaneously laser beams in opposite directions through his
toothed wheel apparatus which were detected by two independent photocells, as
shown in Fig. 1. He measured the difference ddI in the intensities
registered by the two photocells directly using a Wheatstone bridge for the
outputs. Letting the two light velocities involved be
  c-* = c + vd and c+* = c - vd   (7)
Eq. (6) yields the component of the absolute velocity in the direction of the
shaft as
  vd = (c-* - c+*)/2 = (ddI / dI- dI+)(4 pi K Io R N d / b)  (8)
where 2 ddI = I- - I+ = |dI-| - |dI+| and dI- and dI+ are the intensity
differences registered in the two directions. It may be readily appreciated
that to within a negligible second order error of the order of (ddI / dI)^2
or (vd / c)^2 that
  dI- dI+ = (dI)^2   (9)
where dI may be taken as the intensity when vd = 0 or as 2 dI = |dI-| +
|dI+|. Combining Eqs. (8), (9) and (6) (for the case vd = 0) then gives the
desired result
  vd = (ddI / dI) c  (10)

To double his sensitivity and to obviate certain possible errors in alignment
of his apparatus Marinov employed the stratagem of measuring the change in
intensity dI when the shaft was rotated in both senses. Because when N = 0
the intensity Io was chosen as 1/2 the maximum intensity, Imax; the change in
intensity was positive for one sense of rotation, and negative in the
opposite sense. The effective intensity change that could be measured was,
thus, doubled. The intensity change dI was then taken as
  2 dI = |dI(clockwise)| + |dI(counter clockwise)| (11)
Marinov used the same stratagem when measuring ddI, averaging the results
for the shaft rotating in the two possible senses. If the intensities are
broken down into Io, a part dI that depends merely upon the average velocity
of light c(where vd may be regarded as zero), and a part that depends upon
the absolute velocity of the laboratory ddI, then the four possible
situations considered by Marinov experimentally are listed in Table 1. The
observed intensity difference was thus

Table 1. Four intensities involved in Marinov's toothed-wheel experiment.
case direction
a    c + vd         Ia = Io + dI + ddI
b    c + vd         Ib = Io - dI - ddI
c    c - vd         Ic = Io + dI - ddI
d    c - vd         Id = Io - dI + ddI

  4 ddI = (Ia - Ic) - (Ib - Id)  (12)

It was found to be impossible to align the apparatus so that the two beams in
opposite directions were precisely equivalent. Thus in fact (Io + dI)a - (Io
+ dI)c = I' and (Io - dI)b - (Io - dI)d = I'' were not precisely zero. A
residual constant error (I' + I'')/2 remained in the determination of ddI. It
is clear that this assymetry could have been easily taken into account if the
apparatus had been mounted on a turn table and turned through 180 deg to
repeat the observations. Averaging the two results would have then removed
this constant error. Since Marinov's equipment was righidly fixed to the
earth and could not be rotated; he resorted to the following strategem:

5 TWELVE HOUR OBSERVATIONS TO DETERMINE THE ABSOLUTE VELOCITY OF THE
LABORATORY

Marinov placed his shaft in the north-south direction horizontal to the
earth's surface. At the latitude of Graz, Austria, where the experiment was
performed, as the earth rotated, the shaft moved on the surface of a cone
making an angle of 47 deg with respect to the axis of the cone, which was
parallel to the axis of the earth's rotation. Thus, Marinov had to merely
wait 12 hours for the earth to rotate his equipment through 180 deg as far as
the component projected onto the earth's equatorial plane is concerned. It
was, therefore an easy matter to subtract off the constant error (I' +
I'')/2, mentioned above, by making observations over 12 or more hours without
changing any alignments.

6. DETERMINATION OF THE DIRECTION OF THE ABSOLUTE VELOCITY OF THE SOLAR
SYSTEM

Because the component of Marinov's shaft projected onto the earth's equitorial
plane sampled  all possible directions in this plane after 12 hours of
observation, and because the component of the shaft projected onto the
earth's rotational axis provided the remaining direction to be sampled;
straight forward trigonometry provided the direction of the absolute velocity
of the earth on the day observations were made.
  The absolute velocity of the solar system (ie the sun) was then obtained by
simply subtracting off the earth's orbital velocity with respect to the sun
(which was, in fact, only of the order of the error that he reports for his
observations). The tangential velocity of the earth's rotation, which is less
than the error Marinov reports, did not enter in due to the north-south
orientation of the shaft of his apparatus.

7. DISCUSSION
  The final formula(10) for vd involves only the intensity differences ddI
and dI. Only these two quantities need be examined to determine the random or
experimental error. Is the error of 11% reported by Marinov reasonable? This
can be best estimated by considering 4 dI/I, and 4 ddI / Io. The factor 4
arises from the increased sensitivity due to two senses of rotation being
used and due to the two directions of light travel being used. From Qu. (6),
setting c* = c, the fractional value 4 dI / Io, according to the numbers
provided by Marinov, where he estimated the value of K theoretically for round
holes as 9/2, is
  4 dI/Io = K 16 pi R N d / c b = 5E-3  (13)
To obtain dI it was necessary to subtract separate readings on a
galvanometer. Separate large readings  on a galvanometer can be usually made
to about 1% accuracy. Thus, the theoretical and the experimental estimate of
the fractional error are roughly the same.

The determination of ddI was quite different. Here the difference was
measured directly on a Wheatstone bridge. Differences of the order of ddI =
1E-3 dI = 5E-6 milliamps could be measured. Since ddI/dI ,varying as vd/c,
Eq. (10), is in fact, about 1E-3, as known from the 2.7K anisotropy(11) and
the Marinov coupled mirrors experiment; the fractional errors to determine
4 ddI / Io and 4 dI / Io are comparable.

The highest current Marinov recorded for Io was 21 milliamp; and the maximum
difference associated with the difference ddI was about 6E-5 milliamps. This
means a fractional intensity difference of 4 ddI/Io = 1E-5 was recorded.
Others have also reported being able to measure such intensity differences
down to a level of 1E-5 using electronic comparisons. From Eq. (10)the
fractional error for vd / c is the sum of the fractional errors of 4 dI / Io
and 4 ddI / Io. As estimated above each of these fractional errors are of the
order of 1%; so Marinov's experimentally determined experimental error of 11%
seems quite reasonable.

It has been speculated that mechanical vibrations would make it impossible
for Marinov to have obtained a positive result. Although it may be true that
instantaneous mechanical distortions produced misalignments resulting in an
instantaneous error of the order of 1E-5 in fractional intensity;
observations were not taken instantaneously. Observations were averaged over
a time span long in comparison to the period of any mechanical vibrations of
interest. Even if vibrations  of the order of 1E-3cm existed, the fractional
error produced by holes of 0.6 cm would be much less than Marinov's reported
error. It seems clear taht vibrations could not possibly have affected the
results. And Marinov reports, consistent with this estimate, no difficulty
with vibrations.

It is difficult to imagine systematic errors that might have distorted
Marinov's results. Since the apparatus was evacuated, no atmospheric effects
could enter in. No temperature effects were involved, as there was no large
time laps between the measurements of ddI and dI.

REFERENCES
1. S. Marinov, Thorny way of truth II (East-West, 8044 Graz, Austria, 1984)
pp. 68-81
2. S.Marinov an J.P.Wesley, eds, Proc.Int.Conf.Space-Time Absoluteness, Genoa
(East-West, 8044 Graz, Austria, 1982)
3. J.P.Wesley, Found.Phys.,11,945 (1981); 10, 503, 803 (1980); Spec. Sci.
Tech.,3,409 (1980); Proc.Int.Conf.Cybernetics & Soc. (IEEE, Denver, 1979) p
766.
4. H. Dingle, Nature, 144, 888 (1939); 146, 391 (1940); 177,
783(1956);183,1761(1959); 195, 985
(1962);197,1288(1963);216,199(1967);217,20(1968); Science at the Crossroads
(Nelson, London, 1972).
5.W.Honig, ed., a collection of papers, 'Alternatives to Special
Relativity',Spec.Sci.Tech.,2,no. 3 & part of no. 4 (1979)
6.G.Builder, Austral.J.Phys.,10,246,424 (1957);11,279,457
(1958);Phil.Sci.,26,135(1951);Am.J.Phys.,27,656 (1959).
7. Israel,E.Ruckhaber, and R.Weinmann, eds.,Hundert Autoren Gegen Einstein (A
hundred authors agaiunst Einstein)(R.Voigtlanders Verlag, Leipzig, 1931).
8.J.P.Wesley in Proc.Int.Conf.Space-Time Absoluteness, Genoa, eds.S.Marinov
and J.P.Wesley(East-West, 8044 Graz, Austria, 1982) p. 168; Causal Quantum
Theory (Benjamin Wesley, 7712 Blumberg West Germany, 1983) Chp 4.
9. J.Bradley, Lond.Phil.Trans.,35,No. 406 (1728).
10. G.Sagnac,Comp.Rend.,157,708,1410(1913);J.dePhys.,4,177 (1914)
11.E.K.Conklin, Nature,222,971 (1969);P.S.Henry,Nature, 231,516 (1971).
12. S.Marinov, Gen Rel. Grav.,12,57,(1980);Eppur Si Muove, 2nd ed. (East
West, 8044 Graz, Austria, 1978) pp 101-111 and 130-141;
Chechosl.J.Phys.,B24,965(1974). After correcting some computational errors
Marinov now reports for his coupled mirrors experiment the value of the
absolute velocity of the solar system v = 303 +- 20 km/sec, alfa = 13.3 +-
0.3 h, delta = -21 +- 4 deg.
13.J.P.Wesley, Found.Phys.,16,817(1986)
14.J.P.Wesley, Found.Phys.,11,945 (1981)
15.S.Marinov measured the oneway velocity of light to one place accuracy
using a terrestrial light source, Spec.Sci.Tech.,3,57 (1980)