Light

[jehovajah]

This topic is going to be hard.
Arago's and Fresnel set up the mathematical basis for light. It turned out that electric and magnetic phenomenon obeyed the same rules.

The theory of light is encapsulated in the Fresnel Equations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fresnel_equations

The theory of electromagnetism is supposedly encapsulated in the four Heaviside — Maxwell equations and the telegraph equation for transmission lines.
http://www.ivorcatt.com/2810.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telegrapher's_equations

Steinmetz is supposed to have reduced these to a set of quaternion equations called versors.
http://www.gestaltreality.com/energy-synthesis/eric-dollard/and-in-the-beginning-versors-by-e-p-dollard-2012/
http://www.terrapapers.com/?p=26673

http://www.tuks.nl/David/The%20Telegraph%20Equation,%20Finale'/The%20Telegraph%20Equation,%20Finale.doc
I hope to explore the fractal patterns encapsulated in this important field of research

[jehovajah]

There is no easy introduction to this topic, but I suggest you select articles from this list
http://jehovajah.wordpress.com/archive/
The Geometric origin f Reflection, Refraction and Diffraction is a good start.

The operator I ceased to be imaginary when Newton and De Moivre and Cotes fully incorporated it into polynomial Geometry . It has taken 400 years for that to become widely known.

 In that time Grassmann and Hamilton showed its fundamental role in Physics and in light and electromagnetic theory. Hamilton corrected a flaw in Mahlus theory and showed that a light cone was possible in a birefringent material

Since then electromagnetic theory was sidelined by commercial interests.

[jehovajah]

Huygens wrote a curious treatise.
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=X9PKaZlChggC&pg=PP5&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
The main thing scientists refer to was his idea of a cascade transmission or propagation of light. It was perhaps the first conception of the familiar chain reaction in nuclear physics and chemistry.

The wave is represented not by geometric lines but by geometric circles. It was a curious construction and deserves more study. But essentially it attempts to combine Gimaldis concept of diffraction with Descartes and Newtons concept of sound propagating as a pressure through a medium.

There are only 2 forms of material or immaterial propagation pressure and ballistic projectile. However there were for methods of propagation. Direct, reflected, refracted and finally Diffracted. Huygens proposes only on 3, perhaps leaving direct as the conclusion to his investigation. Diffraction is covered in the treatment of polarisation by Huygens and it is diffraction an polarisation that seems to have led him to his cascade structure.

[jehovajah]

I entered into the subject of electromagnetism naively. I felt that there was a mechanical explanation for these behaviours. At least I felt that magnetism was the key.

What I thought I knew I only half remembered . What I did not know turned out to be the tip of a yawning chasm of ignorance. Still I was eager to set out on my journey over a fathomless deep.

Along the course I realised that I must embrace the fluid in which I moved like a rudderless yacht  and shift to a fluid dynmic paradigm. This was what has saved me from many a shipwreck, until at last I caught the glint of the light house beam, the Fresnel lens and the Grimaldi diffracter. These lights will guide me safely home.

http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Grimaldi.html

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=3n6cBJHiMgUC&pg=PA107&lpg=PA107&dq=grimaldis+light+treatise&source=bl&ots=IukSN7j1Ss&sig=E52ErH6mJAAMa4PNQIOGIsFM8Qc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Z3eBUrr4LsbR0QXYwYHYDw&ved=0CD8Q6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=grimaldis%20light%20treatise&f=false

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffraction

[jehovajah]

Despite my known great admiration of Newton his contribution to the theory of light has served to mark out the limits of his ability. This I believe was not a bad thing, and characteristically was true to Newtons Philosophical perspective and testimony to the soundness of his principles.

In this case he drew the wrong conclusions on balance. However, he demonstrated thst he had seriously empirically tested the propositions, a thing almost unheard of in renaissance Europe!  The Jesuit priesthood made sure doctrine and dogma were strengthened in the minds of all believers and that non believers were rigorously " converted!"

So it was that Galileo came to be under house arrest after breaching his license to discourse on matters of the heavenly bodies under gods hand. He had to write two essays putting the pros in one and the cons in the other against the topics of the movements of the planets . This much he was allowed to do, as Job was allowed to rail against aged and also for god. The decision as to what was Gods mighty work was left for the Church to decide!

Of course Galileo favoured one side of the discourse and let it be known, which resulted in his house arrest when the established church found out he was in breach of his license.

We come to Grimaldi, who being a Jesuit and a priest used experimentation to demonstrate Galileo to be in error. Of course we know that the terms of Galileos assertion were not met, and so experimental design was flawed and produced a flawed conclusion. But Grimldi sincerely helped to pioneer the empirical basis of science within the license of the Jesuit remit.

Unusually gifted and a great philosopher, it seems he got to close to the reformed pagan philosophers for the Jesuits to allow him to continue teaching philosophy. He was therefore moved to the certainty of mathematics!

Mathematics at this time was not a subject as it is today. The proper ubject was Astrology , and he therefore taught and advanced that subject again within the Jesuit license. Many on lesions were erroneous use to the limited communication and the small number of institutes of higher learning in Jesuit controlled regions. Thus there were few competent colleagues who could judge or discourse on these matters of Astrology regarding the telescope nd in particular the quality of the lenses.

However it is Grimaldies treatise on physico mathesis on light that was his revealing contribution.

 Newton was so inspired by news of it that he began his own investigation into light after Grimakdi had died and before his manuscript could be widely published. It is unlikely Newton ever read it himself, relying on Chinese whispers as to it's content!

Newtons Principia Mathematica echoes the title Physico Mathesis .

Grimaldi wrote under license the usual pro and con of the discourse. One treatise giving the pros for light as a substance, the other giving the pros for light as a quality.
 Of course he fird before publication, shortly after completing it. It was to prove a seminal work in the history of Optics and eventually in the history of sound and electro magnetics!

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=FzYVAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA2&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffraction

It is clear that Grimaldi supported the religious concept of the Aether, a kind of substantive space Ousia that is emanating from god.. The philosophical concept of motion in this Ousia is that of a pressure that travels through it at infinite speed. Descartes enunciated this view clearly. However Newton on learning of the split nature of light took it to mean that light was split into corpuscles, the corpuscular theory derives from the Atomist conceptions of Leucippius  and the conceptions of Alchemists who dealt in ratios and grains of materials. Newton was fast becoming a notable Alchdmist and so he naturally combined the 2 insights to come up with a ballistic corpuscle which travelled in a locus which could be signified by a geometric ray.

Among other empirical data tht confirmed him in his view was the dispersion of the sinle ray into a cone of many colours. This was naturally and convincingly explained as the corpuscles sorting out into this cone by fraction and refraction at the boundary of the medium.

Thus diffraction gave Newton the idea of corpuscles and dispersion, but the actual diffraction Grimaldi referred to Newton called inflexion.. This impressive of dispersing and recombining white light and the facility of explanation meant that Newton won over the Royal Society to his view, much to the annoyance Hooke and others who had carefully prepared microscopic evidence of Diffraction as confirming a wave explanation.

The wave  theory of sound plus this careful observational data on light was building up a wave theory of the Aether. However this was not based on a rigorous skeptical empirical basis which Newton believed was the way forward in philosophical discourse. So using his own method he concluded light was ballistic corpuscles travelling so fast they moved in a straight line. In addition the corpuscles were coloured and they moved in a combined way in white light but could br refracted into their own path by a prism and recombined by a reversing prism again by refraction.

Newtons model was the de facto model for a century, because no one could produce convincing experimental evidence to the contrary.nthe reason, as Hooke well knew was because few had access to microscopes to view the very small. Thus the concept of very small waves was harder to accept than very small particles bouncing about the place.

Fresnel and Arago's next advanced the theory of light. In the 1800 the power of the Jesuits was on the wane. Skeptical scientific method was advancing along the lines of Newtons approach. Kant had brokered a peace between the religious rationalists and the other dissenting factions around the Newtonian approach to gravity. All assented to rely upon empirical data as a basis for concluding the facts of any matter. The scientific method of determining the veracity of an observation was hammered out, and that seemed to be the way forward for honest, noble seekers after truth, and improvement of the common good through technological advance.

[jehovajah]

There is much in newtons Optiks that is truly revolutionary, but it does represent a theory based on a wrong conclusion as a premise.

Newtons reputation still holds sway today, and the wave corpuscular dualism discourse owes much to this respect for his genius. However I do not use the word wrong conclusion lightly. Fundamentally I conclude that Newton applied his method correctly to inadequate data. His conclusion is therefore inevitable. His mistaken interpretation of fringere in the reports of Grialdis work started a train of thought and experimentation not easily dismissed. His commitment to Alchemical ideals further confirmed his opinion, and the efficacy and simplicity of his exposition makes it the more readily acceptable.

However, the empirical data now widely throws doubt on his certainty. There is no reason to be certain about any natural phenomenon, where a simple or accurate model is adequate for the task in hand. However the more detailed observations may require a more detailed model, and this is what fresnel and Arago's provide
https://ia600508.us.archive.org/15/items/wavetheoryofligh00crewrich/wavetheoryofligh00crewrich.pdf

They perhaps mark the difference between scientists of faith, such as Huygens and Newton were, and theoreticians of empiricism.

The one explores the natural phenomenon from a faith world view, the other constructs a fith wold view from empirical examination nd model building. Both are faiths ultimately, and consequently become set and difficult to respond to new data,mthat is the human psychology of faith makes it difficult to thoroughly redesign a model if needed. That has to be the work of newer fresher minds, especially those uneducated in the Lores of one school or another.

The wave particle debate is a distraction from the past. We use models appropriate to the task. The undulatory model provides the most general concordance with data at present, but it does need revising thoroughly.

[jehovajah]

A work of theory is not like a work of art, which being done, stands in the senses of all animates until time erodes its form. The theory is firs obscured within the subjective processes of the mind that conceives it. It is then obscured between the covers of some publication or the format of some medium of record. It only lives in the breath and actions of animates as they acknowledge it.
This may suffice, because the author may never be known or attested to, due to the vicissitudes of life or the proclivities of men!
 It is perhaps more effective to write some menial sound bite or a engaging tile than to labour over a theory that will most likely be lost in the libraries and the byways of history.

The nature of life is to evolve, to iterate to some more amanable adaptation to the environment. The information gained through this evolution is therefore not all useful at any given time. But what we suspect to be true is that it is recorded ion the genetic material in virus form.

Our long evolutionary chain of DNA contains much unused code, we think. But we cannot know if that is the case or if that will always remain the case. We do know that the environment forces expression of genetic material, or at least that is the theory. Successful genetic adaptations survive in this record, and so a successful theory will mimic this behaviour, and may very well be an expression of genetic records of appropriate behaviours in the past likely to reoccur in the future.

 The problem with an undulatory theory is that one necessarily expects undulations! But we know that rotations and periodic or closed behaviours produce the same results. It is time to move beyond waves to rotations or closed loop behaviours.

[jehovajah]

The behaviour of light is divorced unnecessarily from other objects it comes into contact with in common thought, even though we know it burns and heats things. The luminiferous aether was considered to be a fluid , even compared to a liquid. Because the wave theory was downgraded no one had time to rethink about light " wetting" surfaces.

The diffraction of light had a very good correlation with the idea of an active surface. Active surfaces are usually considered in terms of electric and magnetic currents, but there is now a strong reason to drop the current in the wire model and think about the current of light flowing around the wire. In this case the active or wet surface provides conditions for polarisation and diffraction . It may also account for faction and refraction .

In this concept I have voided both charge and current in the wire. At the actual surface of the conductor or transparent material, the light on terraces with the surface geometry which is likely to be disjoint. The thin film of scattered light energy is sufficient to form a layer that diffracts incident and transmitted light .

Imagine now, that a cloth is ubbed over this surface. The disjoint structure is altered uffiidntly as to change the light pattern.mthe result is not onl polarised light but also energy effects we call electrostatic! Within the core of the material, light which is not reflected is absorbed or partially transmitted, and the effect is heat and magnetism.

The how and why I have to find empirical data to demonstrate, but the motive is the rapidly expanding spherically rotating energy ball we call a light flash! The expansion of the ball is associated with electric behaviours including surface reflection and capacitance in a capacitor, while the rotating behaviour which is within the spheroidal surface is associated with magnetic behaviours including polarisation , inductive heating and inductance in an transformer..

The rotation is enhanced by twisting the conductor into a coil, thus isolating what we associate with magnetic behaviours, while the spreading of the conductor  minimises the rotation but enhances the expansion of the light flash, and this we associate with electric behaviour. The reflection at the boundaries builds what we associate with capacitance.

These effects occur outside the conductor or in a thin layer near the surface of the conductor or dielectric. The space between these conducting guides is a store of light energy. String in a dielectric leads to dielectric stress and explosion, storing in a metal core leads to metallic heating and melting from the outside in.

Whichever way it is stored the eventual result is fire!

Fire is the most common electromagnetic phenomenon that we discount!

Fire is usually classed as a chemical reaction, but it is known that without the ignition the reaction will not occur. Thst spark is the electromagnetic fire that burns through the materials. As that electromagnetic energ is radiated the chemicals rearrange bonds to achieve a new stability in this light powered eldctromagnetic environment.

Of course light is only the visible part of the electromagnetic spectrum. Thus a lot more electromagnetic shenanigans occur in a chemical reaction hn we currently know or admit.

[jehovajah]

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/6MstJEAlNFs&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/6MstJEAlNFs&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1</a>

These will be the fundamental equations for light. Others will be derived from them.

Huygens cascade propagation of light will be modified to include damping terms for the spheroidal rotation, or magnetic behaviours. Thus light will expand out indefinitely but the total power per square metre of surface will diminish by the surface area of a sphere and a rotational damping constant.

Huygens propagation model will be thoroughly reviewed, but no sine wave motion is implied only rotation in the spherical surface as it advances.

Does light implode? That is a question to be investigated empirically..

The frequency of a light bubble represents the rotational frequency of the polarised light as it passes through a polarised filter. This frequency generates a wave length hrough polarisation. Thus the rotational frequency of light is the measure of its magnetic intensity. Thebgreayerbthe magnetic intensity the greater the penetrative ability of light.

Intensity as in sound is a function of sources, more sources greater intensity.

The rate of rotation is a function of how many coils light has to rotate round.  Clearly some structures have more "screws" or "coils" in them than others. These structures will tend to behave more like magnets. Crystals with smooth but long flat surfaces or plate like patterns will tend to behave like capacitors.

The same equations hold for sound. While sound is portrayed as a longitudinal wave due to Newtons experiments. There is in fact a transverse or spherical rotation mode to sound .

[jehovajah]

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/RC16MwzFq8A&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/RC16MwzFq8A&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1</a>

This simple capacitor inductor /circuit where the joule thief stores magnetic or rotating energy  and the capacitor stores reflected  expanding energy  illustrates how the materials polarise the light passing around the the circuit through the 3rd dielectric/ diamagnetic material the air  and aether.

In these explanations the electron model is not used but implied, unnecessarily. The capacitor collects light energy and the lower rotational Infra red light energy and dynamically it's expanding nature reflectively oscillates on one plate, that is around one plate. The other plate does the same but a much slower rotational infrared is harvested. The dielectric is now under electromagnetic stress both by heat and light. It eventually relaxes that stress by emitting a burst of energy with a higher rotational component in the mix , which is partly guided round the wires and enters into the joule thief diamagnetic material and the space in and around it.. Here the energy builds up the magnetic or rotational energy to a level so that the guided energy entering the LED can fire the material of the LED at its surface emitting light

Some of the stress in the dielectric and diamagnetic materials is due to accommodating the variation in the speed of light through that material.

An electric current nor a charge in the wire or on its surface is not required to explain the behaviour of the "electromagnetic" expanding  rotating bubbles of energy in the aether.

Eric dollard does a similar much larger experiment using a similar circuit..
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/6BnCUBKgnnc&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/6BnCUBKgnnc&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1</a>

[jehovajah]

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/f5mA4l6xmGs&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/f5mA4l6xmGs&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1</a>

Professor Laithwaite explains Arago's disc motor . Faraday took Arago's experimental result and generated what was thought to be electricity. The spark was what was first used to determine electric power, and before that the galvanometer detected the energy in magnetic tems.

The spark of fire was the key evidence for electric behaviours, and was first observed with amber, then other material interacting together. The Leyden jar enabled energy o be collected and discharged in contact with conductors. It was thought this energy or charge passed through the conductor or along it. Volta thought along the wire there was  conducting atmosphere, Galvano did the same kinds of experiments but felt the chemical reaction had a bigger part in the explanation. He accepted the atmosphere around conductors but argued that chemical reaction supplied the real power.

Volta always claimed the power cme from the surrounding Aether. A committee of scientists decided in favour of Galvano's  explanation. They gave no consideration to the capacitative role of the electrolyte. The chemical reaction is in fact being catalysed by the electric atmosphere, and in this way the electrolyte stores nd releases bursts of energy.

Because Volta was over ruled it soon became fashionable to talk in metaphor about current  of electric ions flowing hrough pipes. This was in fact a development of Faradays explanation of hydrolysis.

Arago's experiment created a great stir among theoretical engineers. No chemical reaction was in sight, and no dielectric material was in sight. Only a magnetised needle. And yet the rotating disc was coupled to the magnetic needle upon rotation.

Oersted had written his theory of current producing sn electric field before the scientific community even heard that Arago's had found this coupling with rotation at about the same time. Again a committee was happy with the current of ions flowing in a conductor , so they had to model the behaviour by so called currents in the rotating disc producing magnetic coupling. These were Faradays induction laws and later Lenz 's laws.

However, Arago's was demonstrating that the rotating atmosphere around a conductor was magnetic, and that the triboelectric effect of the air rubbing against the conductor produced a magnetic flux. Rubbing a second conductor against the rotating disc produced a discharge like amber when rubbed by appropriate material. Arago's was demonstrating the Tribo electric/ tribomagnetic properties of materials. A current was not necessarily flowing in a wire but energy was surrounding a conductor and was diffracted by rotation. In addition, rubbing allowed this energy to conduct along the outer surface of a conductor.

Arago's did not as far as I know do the conceptual work of Faraday, and he went on to study light. He does no seem to have had or put forward another explanation of his disc, but Volta's conjecture was certainly given credence by Arago's experiment.

The Wilmhurst machine uses this principle of Arago's and the Tribo magnetic as well as Tribo electric effect to generate electric and magnetic energy.the van De Graff generator uses the same rotational element and Tribo electric and Tribo magnetic effects to generate a high capacitance low inductance effect on a spherical conductor.

The experimenters with coils and moving magnetic could also generate these same sparks, but because by then they had mostly accepted the current in the wire model, and the wire generating a magnetic field thereby, they could not think that the motion of rotation was the key factor, and this was a surface diffraction effect of an "atmospheric energy" about all materials.

Furthermore the Tribo contact was minimised by the Galvanic explanation of current.mfew pay attention to the sparking that occurs at voltaic  battery terminals, or even today's cells. This effect is designed to be minimal, and the triboelectric and Tribo magnetic induction is whisked away in the concept of conduction.

The chemical battery requires a catalytic explanation to its contribution to power, but the origin of power in chemical reactions is consistent with these chemical states being induced by external electromagnetic radiation interaction in the past. The role of rotation is crucial in making these spatially distributed distinctions in energy and how it is stored and released.
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/DFa-IymyWHM&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/DFa-IymyWHM&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1</a>

[jehovajah]

http://async.org.uk/IvorCatt+DavidWalton.html

This link should reveal the long time theoretical proposition of Ivor Catt, with empirical data to up port his hypothetical direction.

Although I put it in these terms I am more than satisfied as to the soundness of this model. However, it is at a very early stage of development, due to the established electromagnetic theory committees blocking its publication and call for further collaborative research.

[jehovajah]

There is empirical data that light and all electromagnetic phenomenon represent the passage of " energy" dense regions through "energy light " regions. The boundary effect is similar to the terminal velocity phenomenon experience by falling objects, powered yachts, rocket powered vehicles etc. they all generate an intensed instability in the direction of motion that results in an oscillation that radiates out from the boundary and alo in toward the denser region.

The oscillation is characteristic of the mediums  and this is what is observed in attendance with the motile object. .

Catt can demonstrate a step of voltage dimensioned energy moving around the conducting wave guides. There is no oscillating wave form and yet the circuit emits frequencies and oscillating wave forms in the radio spectrum.

There are also differing voltage energy traces that travel at different Leeds in the same wave guide, use to the energy pulse encountering 2 forms of inductance, and thus 2 media: tha air and the copper .

The longitudinal propagation of light may not outstrip the speed of the energ dense region, but the transverse propagation is not so constrained. The variation in the transverse cross section occurs at the boundaries where a wave guide or antennae is utilised.

[jehovajah]

This series of classical demonstrations provides basic empirical data .mit is important to note that the demonstrations are designed to support established theoretical ideas. There is nothing bad about this as long as the empirical data is not tampered with. Some of the mathematical explanation of instrument design is therefore suspect until checked out.


http://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL74058E54264993C8

Note how difficult it is to find words to explain the empirical dat, nd realise that the premises for the descriptions go a long way back in our language history.

Thinking in terms of light Energy in dynamic behaviour around a surface may help you to think outside the box.

[jehovajah]

The speed of light was measured before 1801 . It was still considered as a ballistic phenomenon. So the movement of the light source could be added to the speed of light in the Galilean sense.

However young and Fresnel and Arago's established the undulatory explanation of light propagation. Ths was finally established by Arago's colleagues when they measured the speed of light as slower in a denser medium in exactly the amount required to refract light, and account for diffraction.

Newton had proposed attractive forces causing the light to speed up on entry into a denser medium and slow down in a les dense one, but quite how this refracted light I have yet to discover. On the face of it this should result in light refracting in the opposite way to that observed.

The aether was the assumed medium of undulation, but of course it was a potentially special aether, the luminiferous aether. This was an attempt to distance the scientific or physical notion of aether from the widely held religious or occult versions by the same name..

Arago's demonstrated that undulations were propagated more slowly in dense media, and it was assumed that the aether penetrated less easily into denser media. At the same time the aether was being constructed as a kind of fluid, and the theoretical formulations could not decide whether the aether was absolute and stationary, or relative and in motion.

The aether concept was in fact in disarray. Everyone believed in some form of aether but no one actually knew what it was.

In this context the Michelson Morley experiment has little to do with defining the aether. It's design was to see if light travelled at different speeds in if fervent directions, one with an additional velocity component and one without.

The results were said to be null. The experimental design has been ingloriously reviewed and re evaluated, and the results are still said to be null.

At the time this presented a problem for the specific aether hypothesis that was being tested. It later was generalised as a problem for all aether concepts.

Physics was in disarray. The successes of the time were in jeopardy of being untenable. So when Einstein proposed several unusual explanations of experimental results , which turned out to be measurable and verifiable in 1905, it was with alacrity that his other insights were lapped up and presented as a solution!

Lorentz, a crazy experimentalist who always redacted his equations to fit the data,exploring a different elliptical geometry was able to make things agree with observations if he adopted a few simple geometrical rules. Light was to be constant in sledding, and then like Doppler suggested for sound wavelengths could shorten or elongate.

Einstein derived a similar principle, but instead of making it physical he made it a fundamental principle. The difference is, fundmental principles are the foundation of experimental design, and not questioned!

Einsteins reasoning is faulty if taken as derived from Galileos mathematical rules. However, he did not take the mathematics he took the principle: physics should be the same in any frame of reference if they are in uniform relative motion.

The consequence of this is that certain distinct formulas are forced to fit in observably different situations. Then to make it all seemingly work, the Doppler shift is plied. In that scenario lengths alter if measured in different frames. This means time alters and these two fundamental dimensions applied to momentum and mass lead to wired contractions in physical measurements.

This seemed to work, and during the war years the scientists were more concerned about blowing the enemies brains out than any deep analysis of why.

In the meantime Einstein decided to tackle gravity relativistic ally, and got in a muddle. He could not resolve it and so he buried it under arcane mathematics.

This was good and bad. The aether was replaced by a complex mathematical model of its behaviour, and so he preserved the Aether in mathematical form during turbulent times. Later he would make an impassioned plea for the return of the aether into physics. The bad was that his muddle made it ifficulties to resolve the new quantum physics with his new theiry. And quantum physicists, seeing the freedom of mathematics presented their theories in arcane mathematics too.

Feynman freely admitted that he did not know what he was calculating but the calculations were proven right by experiment!.

The Doppler effect is a real physical phenomenon. Wave lengths and frequency do alter, lthough which is which is debate able. This means that clocks will run at different Peres because the the extra velocity component does physically slow things down, but to extrapolate that to living longer and going less rapidly is a stretch too far. If a chemical reaction acts at a slower speed then a system is more likely to fail than o slow down to accommodate!

The polarisation of light is another important non isolated factor.

If a bullet is accelerated in a train it will have greater or less kinetic energy depending on which frame it is measured in. When it hits its target it depends in which frame the target is positioned. If the train is moving and the target is not thn the target will reflect this in how deep the bullet penetrates. This will reflect whether the train is moving toward or away from the target..

Now it is usually assumed that the light is reflected from a mirror . This means that if light is moving toward a mirror with n additional velocity, if the mirror reflects it it also has this additional velocity on return. However if the light is absorbed nd re radiated it loses this afditional velocity and returns at a slower speed. . Similarly if light is radiating with a reduced velocity due to the source moving. On re radition it returns with a greater peed!

However, that is the ballistic explanation. In the medium of propagation light will indeed be constant , but it will have a different frequency depending on the frame in which It is measured. On retaliation the light will have a given frequency which again depends on the frame in hich it is measured.

Combining these 2 effects the interpretation of the null result has never been thus analysed.

For example, a wave with an additional velocity component cannot be generated in a closed system. This is clear because the medium in which the light travels is also moving at the speed of the source and the reflectin and polarising mirror. If the incident light is absorbed and retaliated. Any additional velocity is lost, and again the wave is travelling in a medium that is in the same reference frame as the source nd receiver.

When Fred Hoyle measured light from galaxies and saw the red shift and bloe shift he immediately used the oppler nalysis. . So we know that light in a vacuum oes have a fixed speed. But when we bounce a laser off the moon we have an opportunity to measure 2 different frames of reference where the intervening medium is not moving in the same reference frames as the earth and moon.

The light that comes back does show variation and changes as described. However this is usually averaged out and massaged to remove" experimental error!
http://www.fesg.bv.tum.de/91872-bD1lbg-~fesg~forschung~llr.htmlhttp://www.mcise.uri.edu/sadd/mce565/Ch12.pdf