Yes, a lot of people get screwed with minor details (i have pointed these out in my notes, shameless self-promotion) like "that the mm expt was to test the existance of the aether" which is obiously wrong, it was "to measure the velocity of the earth relative to the aether."Yep, what squar3root said, its to measure the velocity of the Earth relative to the aether. I've seen alot of people say its to test the existence of the aether, and that also is wrong. If they assumed the aether model to be correct, the results they were predicting was that there should have been an change in interference pattern when the apparatus was rotated 90*, however there the result obtained did not agree with the hypothesis, hence a null result.
Lolwhat?Yes, a lot of people get screwed with minor details (i have pointed these out in my notes, shameless self-promotion) like "that the mm expt was to test the existance of the aether" which is obiously wrong, it was "to measure the velocity of the earth relative to the aether."
another misconception that i see among students was that it "was not a valid experiment"
i think people are being confused with accuracy/validity/realiablity.
the mm experiment was a VALID experiment because it was repeated many times and yields the same results. but keep in mind that you can repeat an experiment 1000 times and get the same results but the calibration of the equiptnment was wrong
PS - nice username
that part you put in bold: the mm experiment was valid because it had consistent results (i don't know what you can understand about this - can you include a specific question)Lolwhat?
Anyway, why/how measure earth's velocity relative to aether? This doesn't make much sense to me...
Why would reliable result constitute to a valid experiment? It was valid because the experiment design took into account the hypothesised properties of aether, and would effectively test for the aim of the experiment (determine its existence). - accuracy, validity and reliability are all inextricably linkedWhy would reliable result constitute to a valid experiment? It was valid because the experiment design took into account the hypothesised properties of aether, and would effectively test for the aim of the experiment (determine its existence).
What was the aim of the experiment? To test the existence of aether right? (If not, then please explain).
If the experiment was designed to measure the relative velocity of earth to aether, how is this testing the existence of aether?
ty ty.PS - nice username
I don't think that this is truety ty.
Also isn't repeating the experiment make it reliable? Validity is whether or not the method actually tests the aim, and that variables were controlled?
To my knowledge, back in the days in which the MM experiment was performed it was considered valid and reliable as well, however nowadays the experiment is not considered valid anymore because due to the principle of relativity, c is the same in all frames of reference, so regardless whether or not the aether existed or not, a null result would be produced regardless everytime.
yes, and the MM experiment helped show thisEinstein's principle of relativity and special theory of relativity explained the results of the MM experiment. If light travels at the same speed in all frames of reference, then regardless the MM experiment will receive a null result everytime so it can never measure Earth's velocity relative to the aether.