Why did Michelson believe the aether was moving?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
8
down vote

favorite












If a wave moves east towards California the wave-motion would be slower north-south. Is this the kind of way they were thinking about the aether as medium for light, of what was later, by Lorentz, styled a "dilation" (in the north-south motion)?







share|cite|improve this question


























    up vote
    8
    down vote

    favorite












    If a wave moves east towards California the wave-motion would be slower north-south. Is this the kind of way they were thinking about the aether as medium for light, of what was later, by Lorentz, styled a "dilation" (in the north-south motion)?







    share|cite|improve this question
























      up vote
      8
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      8
      down vote

      favorite











      If a wave moves east towards California the wave-motion would be slower north-south. Is this the kind of way they were thinking about the aether as medium for light, of what was later, by Lorentz, styled a "dilation" (in the north-south motion)?







      share|cite|improve this question














      If a wave moves east towards California the wave-motion would be slower north-south. Is this the kind of way they were thinking about the aether as medium for light, of what was later, by Lorentz, styled a "dilation" (in the north-south motion)?









      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Aug 30 at 22:02









      knzhou

      33.6k897169




      33.6k897169










      asked Aug 30 at 17:14









      Dwarf

      1285




      1285




















          4 Answers
          4






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          19
          down vote














          Why did Michelson believe the aether was moving?




          He didn't, he believed the Earth was moving. And the Sun, and maybe other things.



          In contrast, it was already understood that the aether was "universal", not necessarily moving or not moving on it's own, but whatever motion it had, it had to be the same motion everywhere.



          Why? Well let's say the aether was moving north on one half of the universe and south on the other; in this case the light from different parts of the sky would have different frequencies due to the Doppler effect. And they definitely weren't seeing that, quite the opposite, the frequencies were so constant that they were already used to determine the chemical makeup of different stars through spectroscopy.



          So if the aether is universal, then we have a great yardstick. It doesn't really matter if it's moving or now, we can just express our velocity in those terms, which is the whole idea of the Galilean transformation - speeds are relative. And since it's universal, we can use that to compare motion of different bodies.



          Now of course the easiest one to start with is the Earth, because that's where we keep all our stuff. And we're pretty sure the Earth is orbiting around the Sun, just as sure as we are that the aether isn't orbiting around the Sun. So there should be a relative velocity between the Earth and aether, it should vary depending on the time of day, and the exact magnitude should vary by season.



          And yet none of this happened. So then things got complicated. If the Earth isn't moving compared to the aether, then what...



          1. the Earth just isn't moving

          2. the aether is dragged around by the Earth

          3. the aether doesn't exist

          Option 1 was eliminated immediately, we're not that special. Option 2 resulted in lots of new work, but it all ultimately failed. And so... option 3.






          share|cite|improve this answer
















          • 5




            4. the aether distorts the dimensions of the experimental apparatus
            – amI
            Aug 30 at 22:35










          • With option 2 as I understood correctly Aether being dragged around by celestial bodies would result in light waves being produced by orbital motion correct as different regions of aether crashed together? And that definitely doesn't occur.
            – The Great Duck
            Aug 31 at 5:41


















          up vote
          10
          down vote













          Michelson and most physicists of the time thought that the (A)ether was moving relative to the Earth, or, amounting to the same thing, that the Earth was moving relative to the Ether. They had taken on board, from Copernicus, Galileo and their successors, that it was better to think of the Earth moving round the Sun, and not the other way about. So if the Ether was a universal medium permeating the solar system and beyond, it was natural to think of the Earth as moving through it.






          share|cite|improve this answer





























            up vote
            0
            down vote













            Michelson postulated that the earth and the ether were moving at different velocities; one was moving relative to the other. The first scenario had the earth move through and ether, while the second hand an ether wind blowing over earth. Nevertheless, he ultimately proved that there was no such ether. Since light reached the same point at the same time even though one travelled vertically and the other horizontally.






            share|cite|improve this answer
















            • 1




              Sorry, but "Michelson postulated that the earth and the ether were moving at different velocities; one was moving relative to the other" is actually just the same thing said twice and doesn't really answer the question. The OP says he's aware that Michelson believed that there's relative motion and that the Michleson-Morely experiment disproved this with interferometers, but this answer doesn't mention the key point that this postulate was based on the intuitive model that the space between the sun and Earth was filled with ether because like sound, light needs some medium to travel through.
              – Chair
              Aug 31 at 8:17


















            up vote
            0
            down vote













            I believe there is a small misunderstanding as to what was moving.

            At the time of Michelson and Morley's experiment, it was postulated that an aether must exist for light to be able to propagate. It was also known that the earth revolves on its axis and moves around the sun.

            Since the experiment's apparatus was "attached" to the earth, its motion trough the aether, would be equivalent to the eather moving through the apparatus.

            In other words, by making the apparatus the "frame of reference," it gives the appearance that the aether is the one moving!






            share|cite|improve this answer




















              Your Answer




              StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
              return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
              StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
              StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
              );
              );
              , "mathjax-editing");

              StackExchange.ready(function()
              var channelOptions =
              tags: "".split(" "),
              id: "151"
              ;
              initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

              StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
              // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
              if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
              StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
              createEditor();
              );

              else
              createEditor();

              );

              function createEditor()
              StackExchange.prepareEditor(
              heartbeatType: 'answer',
              convertImagesToLinks: false,
              noModals: false,
              showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
              reputationToPostImages: null,
              bindNavPrevention: true,
              postfix: "",
              noCode: true, onDemand: true,
              discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
              ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
              );



              );













               

              draft saved


              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function ()
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f425748%2fwhy-did-michelson-believe-the-aether-was-moving%23new-answer', 'question_page');

              );

              Post as a guest






























              4 Answers
              4






              active

              oldest

              votes








              4 Answers
              4






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes








              up vote
              19
              down vote














              Why did Michelson believe the aether was moving?




              He didn't, he believed the Earth was moving. And the Sun, and maybe other things.



              In contrast, it was already understood that the aether was "universal", not necessarily moving or not moving on it's own, but whatever motion it had, it had to be the same motion everywhere.



              Why? Well let's say the aether was moving north on one half of the universe and south on the other; in this case the light from different parts of the sky would have different frequencies due to the Doppler effect. And they definitely weren't seeing that, quite the opposite, the frequencies were so constant that they were already used to determine the chemical makeup of different stars through spectroscopy.



              So if the aether is universal, then we have a great yardstick. It doesn't really matter if it's moving or now, we can just express our velocity in those terms, which is the whole idea of the Galilean transformation - speeds are relative. And since it's universal, we can use that to compare motion of different bodies.



              Now of course the easiest one to start with is the Earth, because that's where we keep all our stuff. And we're pretty sure the Earth is orbiting around the Sun, just as sure as we are that the aether isn't orbiting around the Sun. So there should be a relative velocity between the Earth and aether, it should vary depending on the time of day, and the exact magnitude should vary by season.



              And yet none of this happened. So then things got complicated. If the Earth isn't moving compared to the aether, then what...



              1. the Earth just isn't moving

              2. the aether is dragged around by the Earth

              3. the aether doesn't exist

              Option 1 was eliminated immediately, we're not that special. Option 2 resulted in lots of new work, but it all ultimately failed. And so... option 3.






              share|cite|improve this answer
















              • 5




                4. the aether distorts the dimensions of the experimental apparatus
                – amI
                Aug 30 at 22:35










              • With option 2 as I understood correctly Aether being dragged around by celestial bodies would result in light waves being produced by orbital motion correct as different regions of aether crashed together? And that definitely doesn't occur.
                – The Great Duck
                Aug 31 at 5:41















              up vote
              19
              down vote














              Why did Michelson believe the aether was moving?




              He didn't, he believed the Earth was moving. And the Sun, and maybe other things.



              In contrast, it was already understood that the aether was "universal", not necessarily moving or not moving on it's own, but whatever motion it had, it had to be the same motion everywhere.



              Why? Well let's say the aether was moving north on one half of the universe and south on the other; in this case the light from different parts of the sky would have different frequencies due to the Doppler effect. And they definitely weren't seeing that, quite the opposite, the frequencies were so constant that they were already used to determine the chemical makeup of different stars through spectroscopy.



              So if the aether is universal, then we have a great yardstick. It doesn't really matter if it's moving or now, we can just express our velocity in those terms, which is the whole idea of the Galilean transformation - speeds are relative. And since it's universal, we can use that to compare motion of different bodies.



              Now of course the easiest one to start with is the Earth, because that's where we keep all our stuff. And we're pretty sure the Earth is orbiting around the Sun, just as sure as we are that the aether isn't orbiting around the Sun. So there should be a relative velocity between the Earth and aether, it should vary depending on the time of day, and the exact magnitude should vary by season.



              And yet none of this happened. So then things got complicated. If the Earth isn't moving compared to the aether, then what...



              1. the Earth just isn't moving

              2. the aether is dragged around by the Earth

              3. the aether doesn't exist

              Option 1 was eliminated immediately, we're not that special. Option 2 resulted in lots of new work, but it all ultimately failed. And so... option 3.






              share|cite|improve this answer
















              • 5




                4. the aether distorts the dimensions of the experimental apparatus
                – amI
                Aug 30 at 22:35










              • With option 2 as I understood correctly Aether being dragged around by celestial bodies would result in light waves being produced by orbital motion correct as different regions of aether crashed together? And that definitely doesn't occur.
                – The Great Duck
                Aug 31 at 5:41













              up vote
              19
              down vote










              up vote
              19
              down vote










              Why did Michelson believe the aether was moving?




              He didn't, he believed the Earth was moving. And the Sun, and maybe other things.



              In contrast, it was already understood that the aether was "universal", not necessarily moving or not moving on it's own, but whatever motion it had, it had to be the same motion everywhere.



              Why? Well let's say the aether was moving north on one half of the universe and south on the other; in this case the light from different parts of the sky would have different frequencies due to the Doppler effect. And they definitely weren't seeing that, quite the opposite, the frequencies were so constant that they were already used to determine the chemical makeup of different stars through spectroscopy.



              So if the aether is universal, then we have a great yardstick. It doesn't really matter if it's moving or now, we can just express our velocity in those terms, which is the whole idea of the Galilean transformation - speeds are relative. And since it's universal, we can use that to compare motion of different bodies.



              Now of course the easiest one to start with is the Earth, because that's where we keep all our stuff. And we're pretty sure the Earth is orbiting around the Sun, just as sure as we are that the aether isn't orbiting around the Sun. So there should be a relative velocity between the Earth and aether, it should vary depending on the time of day, and the exact magnitude should vary by season.



              And yet none of this happened. So then things got complicated. If the Earth isn't moving compared to the aether, then what...



              1. the Earth just isn't moving

              2. the aether is dragged around by the Earth

              3. the aether doesn't exist

              Option 1 was eliminated immediately, we're not that special. Option 2 resulted in lots of new work, but it all ultimately failed. And so... option 3.






              share|cite|improve this answer













              Why did Michelson believe the aether was moving?




              He didn't, he believed the Earth was moving. And the Sun, and maybe other things.



              In contrast, it was already understood that the aether was "universal", not necessarily moving or not moving on it's own, but whatever motion it had, it had to be the same motion everywhere.



              Why? Well let's say the aether was moving north on one half of the universe and south on the other; in this case the light from different parts of the sky would have different frequencies due to the Doppler effect. And they definitely weren't seeing that, quite the opposite, the frequencies were so constant that they were already used to determine the chemical makeup of different stars through spectroscopy.



              So if the aether is universal, then we have a great yardstick. It doesn't really matter if it's moving or now, we can just express our velocity in those terms, which is the whole idea of the Galilean transformation - speeds are relative. And since it's universal, we can use that to compare motion of different bodies.



              Now of course the easiest one to start with is the Earth, because that's where we keep all our stuff. And we're pretty sure the Earth is orbiting around the Sun, just as sure as we are that the aether isn't orbiting around the Sun. So there should be a relative velocity between the Earth and aether, it should vary depending on the time of day, and the exact magnitude should vary by season.



              And yet none of this happened. So then things got complicated. If the Earth isn't moving compared to the aether, then what...



              1. the Earth just isn't moving

              2. the aether is dragged around by the Earth

              3. the aether doesn't exist

              Option 1 was eliminated immediately, we're not that special. Option 2 resulted in lots of new work, but it all ultimately failed. And so... option 3.







              share|cite|improve this answer












              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer










              answered Aug 30 at 19:45









              Maury Markowitz

              1,904216




              1,904216







              • 5




                4. the aether distorts the dimensions of the experimental apparatus
                – amI
                Aug 30 at 22:35










              • With option 2 as I understood correctly Aether being dragged around by celestial bodies would result in light waves being produced by orbital motion correct as different regions of aether crashed together? And that definitely doesn't occur.
                – The Great Duck
                Aug 31 at 5:41













              • 5




                4. the aether distorts the dimensions of the experimental apparatus
                – amI
                Aug 30 at 22:35










              • With option 2 as I understood correctly Aether being dragged around by celestial bodies would result in light waves being produced by orbital motion correct as different regions of aether crashed together? And that definitely doesn't occur.
                – The Great Duck
                Aug 31 at 5:41








              5




              5




              4. the aether distorts the dimensions of the experimental apparatus
              – amI
              Aug 30 at 22:35




              4. the aether distorts the dimensions of the experimental apparatus
              – amI
              Aug 30 at 22:35












              With option 2 as I understood correctly Aether being dragged around by celestial bodies would result in light waves being produced by orbital motion correct as different regions of aether crashed together? And that definitely doesn't occur.
              – The Great Duck
              Aug 31 at 5:41





              With option 2 as I understood correctly Aether being dragged around by celestial bodies would result in light waves being produced by orbital motion correct as different regions of aether crashed together? And that definitely doesn't occur.
              – The Great Duck
              Aug 31 at 5:41











              up vote
              10
              down vote













              Michelson and most physicists of the time thought that the (A)ether was moving relative to the Earth, or, amounting to the same thing, that the Earth was moving relative to the Ether. They had taken on board, from Copernicus, Galileo and their successors, that it was better to think of the Earth moving round the Sun, and not the other way about. So if the Ether was a universal medium permeating the solar system and beyond, it was natural to think of the Earth as moving through it.






              share|cite|improve this answer


























                up vote
                10
                down vote













                Michelson and most physicists of the time thought that the (A)ether was moving relative to the Earth, or, amounting to the same thing, that the Earth was moving relative to the Ether. They had taken on board, from Copernicus, Galileo and their successors, that it was better to think of the Earth moving round the Sun, and not the other way about. So if the Ether was a universal medium permeating the solar system and beyond, it was natural to think of the Earth as moving through it.






                share|cite|improve this answer
























                  up vote
                  10
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  10
                  down vote









                  Michelson and most physicists of the time thought that the (A)ether was moving relative to the Earth, or, amounting to the same thing, that the Earth was moving relative to the Ether. They had taken on board, from Copernicus, Galileo and their successors, that it was better to think of the Earth moving round the Sun, and not the other way about. So if the Ether was a universal medium permeating the solar system and beyond, it was natural to think of the Earth as moving through it.






                  share|cite|improve this answer














                  Michelson and most physicists of the time thought that the (A)ether was moving relative to the Earth, or, amounting to the same thing, that the Earth was moving relative to the Ether. They had taken on board, from Copernicus, Galileo and their successors, that it was better to think of the Earth moving round the Sun, and not the other way about. So if the Ether was a universal medium permeating the solar system and beyond, it was natural to think of the Earth as moving through it.







                  share|cite|improve this answer














                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer








                  edited Aug 30 at 20:16

























                  answered Aug 30 at 18:02









                  Philip Wood

                  6,8393615




                  6,8393615




















                      up vote
                      0
                      down vote













                      Michelson postulated that the earth and the ether were moving at different velocities; one was moving relative to the other. The first scenario had the earth move through and ether, while the second hand an ether wind blowing over earth. Nevertheless, he ultimately proved that there was no such ether. Since light reached the same point at the same time even though one travelled vertically and the other horizontally.






                      share|cite|improve this answer
















                      • 1




                        Sorry, but "Michelson postulated that the earth and the ether were moving at different velocities; one was moving relative to the other" is actually just the same thing said twice and doesn't really answer the question. The OP says he's aware that Michelson believed that there's relative motion and that the Michleson-Morely experiment disproved this with interferometers, but this answer doesn't mention the key point that this postulate was based on the intuitive model that the space between the sun and Earth was filled with ether because like sound, light needs some medium to travel through.
                        – Chair
                        Aug 31 at 8:17















                      up vote
                      0
                      down vote













                      Michelson postulated that the earth and the ether were moving at different velocities; one was moving relative to the other. The first scenario had the earth move through and ether, while the second hand an ether wind blowing over earth. Nevertheless, he ultimately proved that there was no such ether. Since light reached the same point at the same time even though one travelled vertically and the other horizontally.






                      share|cite|improve this answer
















                      • 1




                        Sorry, but "Michelson postulated that the earth and the ether were moving at different velocities; one was moving relative to the other" is actually just the same thing said twice and doesn't really answer the question. The OP says he's aware that Michelson believed that there's relative motion and that the Michleson-Morely experiment disproved this with interferometers, but this answer doesn't mention the key point that this postulate was based on the intuitive model that the space between the sun and Earth was filled with ether because like sound, light needs some medium to travel through.
                        – Chair
                        Aug 31 at 8:17













                      up vote
                      0
                      down vote










                      up vote
                      0
                      down vote









                      Michelson postulated that the earth and the ether were moving at different velocities; one was moving relative to the other. The first scenario had the earth move through and ether, while the second hand an ether wind blowing over earth. Nevertheless, he ultimately proved that there was no such ether. Since light reached the same point at the same time even though one travelled vertically and the other horizontally.






                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      Michelson postulated that the earth and the ether were moving at different velocities; one was moving relative to the other. The first scenario had the earth move through and ether, while the second hand an ether wind blowing over earth. Nevertheless, he ultimately proved that there was no such ether. Since light reached the same point at the same time even though one travelled vertically and the other horizontally.







                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer










                      answered Aug 31 at 6:55









                      QuIcKmAtHs

                      2,2704828




                      2,2704828







                      • 1




                        Sorry, but "Michelson postulated that the earth and the ether were moving at different velocities; one was moving relative to the other" is actually just the same thing said twice and doesn't really answer the question. The OP says he's aware that Michelson believed that there's relative motion and that the Michleson-Morely experiment disproved this with interferometers, but this answer doesn't mention the key point that this postulate was based on the intuitive model that the space between the sun and Earth was filled with ether because like sound, light needs some medium to travel through.
                        – Chair
                        Aug 31 at 8:17













                      • 1




                        Sorry, but "Michelson postulated that the earth and the ether were moving at different velocities; one was moving relative to the other" is actually just the same thing said twice and doesn't really answer the question. The OP says he's aware that Michelson believed that there's relative motion and that the Michleson-Morely experiment disproved this with interferometers, but this answer doesn't mention the key point that this postulate was based on the intuitive model that the space between the sun and Earth was filled with ether because like sound, light needs some medium to travel through.
                        – Chair
                        Aug 31 at 8:17








                      1




                      1




                      Sorry, but "Michelson postulated that the earth and the ether were moving at different velocities; one was moving relative to the other" is actually just the same thing said twice and doesn't really answer the question. The OP says he's aware that Michelson believed that there's relative motion and that the Michleson-Morely experiment disproved this with interferometers, but this answer doesn't mention the key point that this postulate was based on the intuitive model that the space between the sun and Earth was filled with ether because like sound, light needs some medium to travel through.
                      – Chair
                      Aug 31 at 8:17





                      Sorry, but "Michelson postulated that the earth and the ether were moving at different velocities; one was moving relative to the other" is actually just the same thing said twice and doesn't really answer the question. The OP says he's aware that Michelson believed that there's relative motion and that the Michleson-Morely experiment disproved this with interferometers, but this answer doesn't mention the key point that this postulate was based on the intuitive model that the space between the sun and Earth was filled with ether because like sound, light needs some medium to travel through.
                      – Chair
                      Aug 31 at 8:17











                      up vote
                      0
                      down vote













                      I believe there is a small misunderstanding as to what was moving.

                      At the time of Michelson and Morley's experiment, it was postulated that an aether must exist for light to be able to propagate. It was also known that the earth revolves on its axis and moves around the sun.

                      Since the experiment's apparatus was "attached" to the earth, its motion trough the aether, would be equivalent to the eather moving through the apparatus.

                      In other words, by making the apparatus the "frame of reference," it gives the appearance that the aether is the one moving!






                      share|cite|improve this answer
























                        up vote
                        0
                        down vote













                        I believe there is a small misunderstanding as to what was moving.

                        At the time of Michelson and Morley's experiment, it was postulated that an aether must exist for light to be able to propagate. It was also known that the earth revolves on its axis and moves around the sun.

                        Since the experiment's apparatus was "attached" to the earth, its motion trough the aether, would be equivalent to the eather moving through the apparatus.

                        In other words, by making the apparatus the "frame of reference," it gives the appearance that the aether is the one moving!






                        share|cite|improve this answer






















                          up vote
                          0
                          down vote










                          up vote
                          0
                          down vote









                          I believe there is a small misunderstanding as to what was moving.

                          At the time of Michelson and Morley's experiment, it was postulated that an aether must exist for light to be able to propagate. It was also known that the earth revolves on its axis and moves around the sun.

                          Since the experiment's apparatus was "attached" to the earth, its motion trough the aether, would be equivalent to the eather moving through the apparatus.

                          In other words, by making the apparatus the "frame of reference," it gives the appearance that the aether is the one moving!






                          share|cite|improve this answer












                          I believe there is a small misunderstanding as to what was moving.

                          At the time of Michelson and Morley's experiment, it was postulated that an aether must exist for light to be able to propagate. It was also known that the earth revolves on its axis and moves around the sun.

                          Since the experiment's apparatus was "attached" to the earth, its motion trough the aether, would be equivalent to the eather moving through the apparatus.

                          In other words, by making the apparatus the "frame of reference," it gives the appearance that the aether is the one moving!







                          share|cite|improve this answer












                          share|cite|improve this answer



                          share|cite|improve this answer










                          answered Sep 5 at 23:09









                          Guill

                          1,67366




                          1,67366



























                               

                              draft saved


                              draft discarded















































                               


                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function ()
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f425748%2fwhy-did-michelson-believe-the-aether-was-moving%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                              );

                              Post as a guest













































































                              Comments

                              Popular posts from this blog

                              What does second last employer means? [closed]

                              List of Gilmore Girls characters

                              One-line joke