[Physics] Double Slit experiment and our motion through space

[Doug Marett]

Hi Gentlemen,

    I already accept that the experiment won't detect our motion through
space (I have already tried it )- I am just trying to explain why the
result would be the same whether there was an aether or not. In my mind
this is not that complicated - if we are  approaching the preferred frame,
then the speed of light becomes C-v in our frame  (where v is the velocity
of approach) and because v = freq. x wavelength, the wavelength must become
shorter, as is shown in the picture (since the frequency can't change
between the co-moving source and receiver). When the wavelengths shorten,
the fringes contract, but because the screen is also receding from the
preferred frame,the fringes have more time to expand and then they land on
the same place on the screen. SO this is really just about asking if we can
logically expect a shorter wavelength and a longer path, which would cancel
out in principle. Does that idea make sense in principle?
I modeled this in a straight forward Excel spreadsheet calculating the
point of intersection of two expanding circles that differ by 1 wavelength,
and the answer comes out to be the same to within 1 part in 300,000. So it
is not the calculation I am concerned with - it is whether this argument is
logically correct. : )

thanks,

Doug

On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Doug Marett <dm88dm at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
>     I am trying to develop a model to explain why a double slit experiment
> can't reveal our motion through space. Some people have argued that if we
> were moving through a preferred frame of reference for light, that the
> double slit fringe pattern would be broadened or narrowed depending on
> which direction we were pointing. I have attempted to counter this idea by
> suggesting that any motion of a co-moving source/observer through a
> preferred frame would cause both a change in the velocity of light and a
> change in the wavelength, in equal measure (in order to preserve v= f x
> lambda) and that this change in wavelength would be such that the
> interference fringes would contract or expand just enough to exactly land
> at the identical spot on the moving screen. I can attach a picture to
> illustrate this, if anyone can tell me if this seems correct or needs
> revision, it would be appreciated. I have also modelled it in Excel. I also
> have an explanation in the attached .pdf.
>
> Feedback would be appreciated.
>
> thanks,
>
> Doug Marett
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.tuks.nl/pipermail/physics/attachments/20171216/e2f9b8c7/attachment.html>