Question about gravity
in [Physics]
|
From: mpc755 on 9 May 2010 17:15 On May 9, 2:39 pm, Esa Riihonen <e...(a)riihonen.net.not.invalid> wrote: > mpc755 kirjoitti: > > > > Post a link to the experiment or keep your baseless assumptions to > > yourself. > > This is quite basic and easy experiment, so it would be quite strange if > no one would have done it. Turns out the issue was studied already almost > two hundred years ago - see Arago-Fresnel laws. > > [0] > But anyways, here is one recent experiment:http://arxiv.org/abs/1003.2729 > > Specifically see the figure 3 on page 5. > > Now that the prediction of your aether theory (actually your declaration, > supposedly somehow based on the theory), namely that L and R light will > produce differing interference patterns, has been experimentally shown > wrong we will do as any sane scientist will do: scrap the theory and start > something new - right? > http://arxiv.org/abs/1003.2729 "The results of Fig. 2 seem to indicate a slight polarization dependent transversal shift. This could be traced back to a systematic beam displacement during adjustments of the Babinet compensator. The results of Fig. 3 were obtained after resolving this problem." It wasn't a problem that required fixing. The transversal shift is exactly what I predicted.
From: mpc755 on 9 May 2010 19:35 On May 9, 2:39 pm, Esa Riihonen <e...(a)riihonen.net.not.invalid> wrote: > mpc755 kirjoitti: > > > Post a link to the experiment or keep your baseless assumptions to > > yourself. > > This is quite basic and easy experiment, so it would be quite strange if > no one would have done it. Turns out the issue was studied already almost > two hundred years ago - see Arago-Fresnel laws. > > [0] > But anyways, here is one recent experiment:http://arxiv.org/abs/1003.2729 > > Specifically see the figure 3 on page 5. > > Now that the prediction of your aether theory (actually your declaration, > supposedly somehow based on the theory), namely that L and R light will > produce differing interference patterns, has been experimentally shown > wrong we will do as any sane scientist will do: scrap the theory and start > something new - right? > http://arxiv.org/abs/1003.2729 "The results of Fig. 2 seem to indicate a slight polarization dependent transversal shift. This could be traced back to a systematic beam displacement during adjustments of the Babinet compensator. The results of Fig. 3 were obtained after resolving this problem." The polarization dependent transversal shift is exactly what I predicted.
From: mpc755 on 9 May 2010 19:39 On May 9, 2:39 pm, Esa Riihonen <e...(a)riihonen.net.not.invalid> wrote: > mpc755 kirjoitti: > > > Post a link to the experiment or keep your baseless assumptions to > > yourself. > > This is quite basic and easy experiment, so it would be quite strange if > no one would have done it. Turns out the issue was studied already almost > two hundred years ago - see Arago-Fresnel laws. > > [0] > But anyways, here is one recent experiment:http://arxiv.org/abs/1003.2729 > > Specifically see the figure 3 on page 5. > > Now that the prediction of your aether theory (actually your declaration, > supposedly somehow based on the theory), namely that L and R light will > produce differing interference patterns, has been experimentally shown > wrong we will do as any sane scientist will do: scrap the theory and start > something new - right? > 'Generalized Arago-Fresnel laws: The EME-flow-line description' http://arxiv.org/abs/1003.2729 "The results of Fig. 2 seem to indicate a slight polarization dependent transversal shift. This could be traced back to a systematic beam displacement during adjustments of the Babinet compensator. The results of Fig. 3 were obtained after resolving this problem." Polarization dependent transversal shift is exactly what I predicted.
From: mpc755 on 9 May 2010 19:50 On May 9, 2:39 pm, Esa Riihonen <e...(a)riihonen.net.not.invalid> wrote: > mpc755 kirjoitti: > > > > Post a link to the experiment or keep your baseless assumptions to > > yourself. > > This is quite basic and easy experiment, so it would be quite strange if > no one would have done it. Turns out the issue was studied already almost > two hundred years ago - see Arago-Fresnel laws. > > [0] > But anyways, here is one recent experiment:http://arxiv.org/abs/1003.2729 > > Specifically see the figure 3 on page 5. > > Now that the prediction of your aether theory (actually your declaration, > supposedly somehow based on the theory), namely that L and R light will > produce differing interference patterns, has been experimentally shown > wrong we will do as any sane scientist will do: scrap the theory and start > something new - right? > 'Generalized Arago-Fresnel laws: The EME-flow-line description' http://arxiv.org/abs/1003.2729 "The results of Fig. 2 seem to indicate a slight polarization dependent transversal shift. This could be traced back to a systematic beam displacement during adjustments of the Babinet compensator. The results of Fig. 3 were obtained after resolving this problem. Fig. 2 and more convincingly Fig. 3 show that the interference pattern does not depend on the state of polarization of the incident laser light." Polarization dependent transversal shift is exactly what I predicted. The interference pattern depends on the state of the polarization of the incident laser light. The experimenters incorrectly adjusted the Babinet compensator to get their desired results.
From: mpc755 on 10 May 2010 01:57
On May 9, 2:39 pm, Esa Riihonen <e...(a)riihonen.net.not.invalid> wrote: > mpc755 kirjoitti: > > > Post a link to the experiment or keep your baseless assumptions to > > yourself. > > This is quite basic and easy experiment, so it would be quite strange if > no one would have done it. Turns out the issue was studied already almost > two hundred years ago - see Arago-Fresnel laws. > > [0] > But anyways, here is one recent experiment:http://arxiv.org/abs/1003.2729 > > Specifically see the figure 3 on page 5. > > Now that the prediction of your aether theory (actually your declaration, > supposedly somehow based on the theory), namely that L and R light will > produce differing interference patterns, has been experimentally shown > wrong we will do as any sane scientist will do: scrap the theory and start > something new - right? > 'Generalized Arago-Fresnel laws: The EME-flow-line description' http://arxiv.org/abs/1003.2729 "The results of Fig. 2 seem to indicate a slight polarization dependent transversal shift. This could be traced back to a systematic beam displacement during adjustments of the Babinet compensator. The results of Fig. 3 were obtained after resolving this problem. Fig. 2 and more convincingly Fig. 3 show that the interference pattern does not depend on the state of polarization of the incident laser light." Polarization dependent transversal shift is exactly what I predicted. The interference pattern depends on the state of the polarization of the incident laser light. The experimenters incorrectly adjusted the Babinet compensator to get their desired results. 'Spin Hall effect of Photons in a Static Gravitational Field' http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/0603/0603227v4.pdf "However, even in the absence of torsion, we found two new semiclassical equations of motion including Berry phase contributions for both dynamical variables, predicting that the photon does not follow the null geodesic due to its spinning nature." |