Sagnac Revisited and Expanded
Establish or Demolish Theory
In 1913 Georges Sagnac a French physicist proved that one of the key predictions of Einstein’s theory of Special Relativity is false. The proponents of Einstein have convinced the mainstream science community that Sagnac’s findings are valid only in movement which is rotational or accelerating.
This FECORE project will perform an experiment which can show that the findings of Georges Sagnac in 1913 are applicable in all reference frames. The point of this is not to so much that we can convert the entire mainstream science to reject Einstein with this experiment alone but to prove that the mainstream explanation of Sagnac is false. This will help other scientists who are already questioning the sacred cow theories to publish their finding as well.
By the late 1800s many scientists had observed that light exhibits properties of a wave. A wave requires a medium to travel through. Sound for example can travel through gas, liquids or solids. But it can’t travel through a vacuum. Yet light was observed to travel through a space with no medium.
Scientists then theorized that there is an aether which fills all space and it is this aether which allows light to propagate even in the absence of any physical substance.
In an attempt to discover more about the aether Albert A. Michelson and Edward Morley conducted an experiment in 1887 to detect if the earth was moving through a stationary aether or if the aether was being dragged along by the earth. The experiment was based on their belief that the earth moves in a sideways or east/west direction at 108,000 km or 67,108 mph around the sun and this would mean the earth is moving very fast relative to the aether. Therefore light moving east or west would be traveling in the same direction as the aether and light moving north and south would be moving perpendicular to the aether. The experiment consisted of a single source of light which was split into two paths. Both paths are of identical length and the path leads them to recombine on a plate which will show an interference pattern if they are out of phase. This would indicate that the beams had made the trip in different times.
Above is a simplified example of the set up.
The actual tests were performed in spring and summer of 1887 and the results published in November of that year. The results were that there was no detectable movement of earth relative to the aether.
This created a problem because in their minds it was not possible that the aether could be in lock step with the earth in a circular orbit. They never spoke of the possibility of the earth not moving. They never performed the test in a known moving frame. These men were on the forefront of research in this area. They and other scientists had to find a way to explain why the light beams showed no change even though according to the standard theory the light beams were moving over 100,000 kph through the aether. The search lead to the theories of Albert Einstein who in 1905 published a paper named On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies. Einstein’s theory says the speed of light is constant regardless of the movement of the source in relation to the target. It also says there is no aether. This was how the 1887 Michelson Morley results were explained.
To the present day mainstream science says there is no aether, that light propagates without a medium. But in the early 1900’s this explanation was not accepted by all physicists working in the field.
A French physicist named Georges Sagnac decided to prove that the speed of light is in fact influenced by the motion of the source relative to the target. He did what Michelson Morley should have done. He made measurements as they did in a non moving frame. Which showed no changes between the two paths. Then the exact same apparatus was rotated and the observation repeated. The speed of light relative to the target did change.
The Sagnac experiment has been replicated several times always with the same results. This has caused a century long debate about it. So what does the mainstream science say about this contradiction of Einstein’s theory? How do they explain it?
First the findings of Sagnac have not really been accepted as a valid test. It is called the Sagnac effect. This relegates it to an aberration or an anomaly. An apologist and close friend of Einstein, Max von Laue is said to have predicted the Sagnac effect by saying in his writings that Special Relativity applied only in an inertial motion frame. An inertial motion frame is a body at rest or in linear motion at a constant speed. This he said was a “valid frame of reference”. But that a motion which was accelerating or rotational was “not valid”. They say the theory of Special Relativity does not apply to rotational motion.
So why does light act differently in a straight line of travel than it does when the source and target are on a rotating system? And if the earth is in constant rotational motion about an axis and by orbiting around the sun how can any light in any experiment on earth ever be said to be traveling in an “inertial reference frame”? Therefore light traveling any place from a source on the earth to any target on earth should always show the “Sagnac effect.” Yet the 1887 Michelson Morley observations never did.
This is the sort of blatant nonsense which passes for science when preserving a theory is more important than finding the facts.
In researching the explanation of this debate there is mention of an experiment in 2003 named “Modified Sagnac experiment for measuring travel-time difference between counter-propagating light beams in a uniformly moving fiber” performed at St. Cloud State University, St Cloud, Minnesota, US. The link to information on this experiment is here. (If you think that the mainstream is unaware of this study I suggest you click the link and see which agency catalogued the information.)
The abstract of this experiment states that there is a time travel difference in the two light paths moving in an inertial reference frame or in a circular path.
Why then did this not end the debate in favor of Sagnac? Again this is why FECORE has been established, to provide an alternative to the dogma passing as science today.
If a university professor were to alert ten thousand people by credible observations that Einstien’s theory is wrong he would lose his job.The FECORE as an independent group can bring together the expertise and resources to perform the experiment, demonstrate the facts and disseminate that information to tens of thousands and the experiment is not refuted by the firing of some scientist.