0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Photons can now be sent one at a time, so if researchers observe an interference, it must be because they do split in two at the first mirror.
A single photon never generate doppler effect, redshift and interference.
If you use a single photon in MM experiment, one of the light will arrive to board at the moment T3 and the other will arrive at the moment T4 and you never see fringes.
QuoteIf you use a single photon in MM experiment, one of the light will arrive to board at the moment T3 and the other will arrive at the moment T4 and you never see fringes.In the two slit experiment, we can observe fringes with only one photon, so why not in the MM experiment?
Are there flaws in "special" relativity?
My simulations show that SR is wrong pretending that c is the same in all directions, but they also show that it is right about us not being able to measure our own speed through space, which also means that we can't measure c one way, and you think that SR is wrong all the way, which is not necessary for me to study it more closely. You probably have a fundamental reason to think this way, for instance a theory that you think is right and that contradicts SR. Is that so?
Your two points mean that c is not the same in all directions, and that's enough to say that SR is wrong, so why are you trying to prove that we can measure it with an experiment where light travels in only one direction? My simulations show that c is not the same in all directions, but they also show that we can't measure it one way without a faster than light device. Relativists don't like to discuss that point because they would finally have to admit that it is the two way speed of light that is always c, which means that, during a measure, light could very well be traveling faster one way and slower the other way. That's what Lorentz aether theory shows, and they admit that it gives the same numbers than SR, so what are they waiting to admit it is better?
A lake wave is effectively not always going at the same speed with regard to an observer that is moving with regard to it, and it is the same with light waves, except that in the case of light, we can't see the wave moving because we would need a faster than light wave to do so and we don't have it. In other words, we can use light to measure the speed of a lake wave, whereas there is nothing faster than light to measure the speed of the light wave. This is why we can easily measure the one way speed of the lake wave, whereas we can only measure the two way speed of light.
1- Your sheet surface is equivalent to the computer screen in my simulations. 2- On the screen, c is the same in all directions. 3- Einstein must have had a distorted mind to believe that light could mysteriously behave the way he pretended, and those who supported him also. Now we are stuck with that crazy idea that has nothing to do with logic. 4- Specialists on scientific forums go on repeating what they learned instead of analyzing it. Using simulations to show the way light moves is quite new though; apart those from David and me,5- I can't find any on the web, so it is probable that some scientists will accept them with time. Any scientist here that dare to confront that daemon? :0)
parlour trick.jpg (278.18 kB . 3168x1772 - viewed 1145 times)