NicoBenschop: (wsm-1596 2apr04)

http://members.chello.nl/~n.benschop (item #2) http://www.wikiworld.com/wiki/index.php/WsmFotonTest

http://www.egtphysics.net/Ron1/EtherDrift.htm - Spinning Mössbauer experiments (Ronald R. Hatch): "However, there are some significant lessons to be learned in the analysis process and some substantial indirect evidence for the presence of an ether drift. Thus, the CBR is not the only reason for believing that the speed of light is not isotropic on the surface of the earth."

NB : My first contribution to the section on 'Experiments' is to put the foton-decay hypothesis (of Mike Lewis and me: ref.#2, and many others;-) to the test, using the extremely sensitive (10^-15) Mössbauer effect (see wsm-1582). It may be just sensitive enough for 'tired-light' experiments at Earthly (+ Moon?-) scale.

Mike's suggestion of a halflife 4Pi/(h c^2) 2.10^17 sec ...(*) (= 6.5 billion yrs) would require at 1:10^15 detection level a travelled distance of some 200 light-seconds = 200 x 0.3x10^6 km = 60.10^6 km which is 40% of Sun-Earth distance. Folding the light path many times may reduce it to manageable scale. A light path through air should be avoided as much as possible, to exclude unpredictable transmission path properties.

(1) A very short and focussed laser pulse of say a few pico seconds can be used, bouncing back from the Moon - where a good corner reflector was deposited some years ago. (so Mössbauer is not required here). A standard coherent laser light can be used, and pico-second accurate electronic sensors resp. interference equipment: phase is important. In 'vacuüm' light/foton travels 0.3 x 10^9 m/sec, so 0.3 mm per pico second (= 10^-12 sec). For red laser light of roughly 1 micron wavelength (10^-6 m) that is a sequence, or 'wave-package', of 300 wave-periods. This was done, see : http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/SEhelp/ApolloLaser.html From the rountrip of 2 x 385000 km (in about 2 x 1.3 sec) just one photon comes back==== The distance measurement is ~1 cm

==

accurate... It turns out the Moon is receding 3.8 cm / year, due to tidal effect on Earth, although (probably) the ether friction effect was not considered as a factor at all.

Nico.B (12apr04) - An alternative way to estimate the energy loss of particles or fotons moving through ether/space is the following:

(2) It has been argued that, if ether friction occurs the Earth and other Solar planets are in danger of 'falling into the Sun' after long enough time, which somehow did not occur. Nor does it appear to occur - hence no ether friction (resp. no foton decay), and by Occam's Razor (simplest solution): no ether (hence Hubble's redshift must be a Doppler effect --> Big Bang by time reversal;-) ... However, the Sun's radiation is known to exert a pressure on any body in its neighbourhood (Dutch: 'stralings-druk'), pushing it away (centrifugal force). --- These two phenomena may cancel each other, yielding an equilibrium equation to estimate the ether friction loss, given the radiation pressure per unit area. As first estimate of the hypothetical ether friction one may take it proportional to planet mass, and the radiation pressure proportional to planet cross section and also to radiation intensity (dropping inverse quadratically with distance to the Sun). Still, one unknown is the ether density - influencing the ether friction, which presumably decreases with distance from the Sun, say by some 'gravity' effect (denser near a heavy body, possibly decreasing as inverse quadratic).

Nico B. (15apr04) - Regarding (2) there may be still another way to test for energy loss due to 'ether friction' :

(3) Unlike the Sun, the Earth does not emit intense radiation, so the Moon in its orbit is not pushed away from the Earth. If there is ether friction, the Moon's distance to Earth should reduce in time, albeit a very small amount per period (month). ... Moreover, the Sun radiation still does have effect outside the Earth's shadow, making the Moon orbit a bit asymmetric, but I think this effect on the Moon orbit should cancel out. - - - To estimate the accuracy of measuring such small effect on the Moon orbit radius, consider the following. Assume 'foton-decay' as in (#2) to be similar to 'ether-friction' of a heavy body moving through ether. Furthermore, the effect of a possibly greater ether density near a heavy body (Earth) is neglected (vs. intergalactic foton- / lightwave- travel). ...The average distance to the Moon is 384,000 km (see http://www.mtsu.edu/~pdlee/public2html/DistanceMoon.html ) That is about 4.10^8 m, travelled by light in some 1,3 sec. Notice 1 cm decrease of that distance is 1 part in 4 x 10^10 , thus for the proposed halftime of 2 x 10^17 sec (*) by assumed 'ether friction' this means 5 x 10^6 seconds. Now 1 month 30 x 24 x 3600 sec 30 x 90000 = 2.7 x 10^6 sec, so in a 2 month period the moon distance should reduce by 1 cm, with a measurement accuracy in the order of 1:10^11, hence a time measurement accuracy of 10 picosec per second : tough, but maybe possible (compare 1:10^15 for the Mössbauer effect). Many measurements per second (using a pulsed laser) could be done to average out statistical errors due to the atmosphere and other effects, repeated every month when the Moon is in 'the same' position w.r.t. Earth. ... See also (1) - Jet Propulsion Lab (Pasadena, Cal. US) did similar measurements in the 1990's. Other (ocean/tidal) effects appear to play an important role.

Any comments? -- Ciao, Nico.

I think you are crasy in this reguard. But I love you anyway. Exchanges is momentum between electrons are 100% elastic and reversible. Friction requires transverse operations. There is no friction in discrete events of momentum exchange between electrons or nothing would be left by now. Aether friction is contradicticted by non linear expansion, inflation. Nobody has the power to make the universe behave. -- JimScarver