Chapter 15
Atmospheric Refraction and Ether
"If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every
problem as a nail."
Abraham
Maslow
The Speed
of Light and Ether
The Hafele-Keating experiment
demonstrates that the "density" of ether varies by altitude. Because ether is a medium for light, one
might wonder whether the speed of light also varies by altitude. I believe it does, however, determining this
using atomic clocks would be extremely tricky because the "time"
measured by atomic clocks also varies by the density of ether and thus by
altitude, thus a person would have to isolate whether the "speed of
light" variation was due to a difference in the speed of light or a
difference in the speed of the atomic clocks (i.e. a difference in the "time"
registered by the atomic clocks at a higher altitude).
While it is well known that sound
(a wave) travels faster through denser mediums, sound is a physical bumping,
and light is an electromagnetic bumping, thus the properties of sound are not
necessarily the properties of light.
Nevertheless, there are two
experiments or phenomenon that do indicate that not only does the speed of
light vary by altitude (i.e. density of ether), but that in the denser ether
the speed of light is faster.
Atmospheric
Refraction
"Atmospheric refraction" is a type of aberration caused by the refraction of light as it
passes through our atmosphere. It is
most pronounced on the horizon, but is in affect everywhere except the zenith. It is generally believed that this type of
aberration is caused by the air in the atmosphere refracting light (i.e. hence
its name: "atmospheric" refraction).
This is somewhat logical, but ether provides another answer.
If the speed of light is faster in
a denser medium of ether (as would logically be expected), then as a light ray
from the sun got closer to the earth, the speed of light would increase.
Let us represent one thin slice of
a layer of ether density of ether drag by a thin, hollow sphere that surrounds
the earth, with its center at the center of the earth, and where the boundary
of the sphere is 10,000 kilometers above the surface of the earth. Now let us consider that the light from the
sun is 5 degrees above our horizon.
When this ray of light hits the imaginary sphere that we have
constructed in our minds, let us consider a 2D plane that is tangent to our
imaginary sphere at the point where this ray of light hits the sphere. Now let us consider a vector that is normal
to the tangental plane and passes through the center of the earth.
Snell's Law states that when a
beam of light hits the boundary of two substances, which carry light at
different speeds, and if the light is moving from the medium which offers a slower speed of light into the medium which offers the faster speed of light, the light will bend in a direction away from the normal vector. However, it
is well known in astronomy that the light actually bends towards the normal vector.
This, of course, is exactly the
opposite of what Snell's Law would predict if the speed of light is faster in
denser ether. There are several ways to
explain why the result is not what would be expected.
1) The speed of light is actually
is slower in the denser medium.
2) Atmospheric refraction is
actually caused by two factors, which have opposite effects, one being the
atmosphere and the other being ether, with the atmospheric component being the
more dominant of the two.
3) The speed of light is the same
in all densities, and all of atmospheric refraction is caused by the atmosphere.
Personally, I don't like any of
these explanations. However, there is
one explanation I do like.
Let us consider Snell's Law with
respect to air and water. Air and water
are called "mediums" for light when discussing Snell's Law, as I did
above. This is not true. Air and water are "obstructions" to light, not mediums for light.
Only ether is a medium for light.
Air and water are obstructions.
Thus, Snell's Law basically states, that when light travels from one
"lesser
obstruction" (lower index of
refraction) to one "greater
obstruction" (higher index of
refraction), the light will bend in the direction of the normal vector.
Ether, however, is the one and
only true "medium" for light. Thus, we might
have a modified Snell's Law for use where there is no significant obstruction,
only pure medium involved: "When light travels from one "lesser [dense] medium" (i.e. slower light, viewed from the aspect of the true medium, not
an obstruction) to one of "greater
[dense] medium," the light will bend
in the direction of the normal vector.
Since ether is a "catalyst" for light, not an obstruction, this make logical sense. The denser ether is the path of least
resistance and the light would favor the path of least resistance. This is especially true since the density
differences are very gradual, not abrupt.
Nevertheless, logic is not the determining factor.
"Logic is a system whereby one may go wrong
with confidence."
Charles F. Kettering
I call the actual bending of light
by different layers of ether drag density (towards from
the normal vector) the: "Density of
Medium Law." Whether the Density of Medium Law exists or
not will have to be determined by experiment at some time in the future.
The
Bending of the Light of Jupiter Occultations
If the Density of Medium Laws were
true, wouldn't occultations of light near Jupiter bend the light of the stars
significantly. Yes, but we would not
see this bending from where we are.
This is because the Density of Medium Laws would apply twice to the starlight that passes through Jupiter's ether drag. The first time it would bend light down
towards Jupiter, as it does on the earth.
However, our telescopes are not located on the surface of Jupiter. This means the light would have to exit the
ether drag of Jupiter in order to get to us (I don't know if we are inside of
Jupiter's ether drag, but probably not).
This means the light would have to go from the denser ether near the
surface of Jupiter to the less dense ether far from the surface of
Jupiter. This light would bend in the opposite direction of the first bend, offsetting the first bend. Thus, we would not observe either bend
because they offset each other.
In reality it is possible the
light from Jupiter does bend very slightly, but certainly not what would be
expected from a single bend due to the Density of Medium Laws. The second bend may not completely offset
the first bend, if, for example: the core of Jupiter may not be perfectly
spherical, or the River Effect Laws may play a part. I don't know.
The
Bending of Light That Passes Near the Sun
Another question that might arise
is whether the bending of light that passes next to the sun is caused by the
Density of Medium Law. First of all, I
am not sure that anyone has proven that light that passes next to the sun does
bend. The original experiment that
claimed to detect this phenomenon was seriously flawed and only coincidentally
came up with the "right" numbers to support Einstein. Nevertheless, assuming such is the case (due
to far more modern experiments of a different nature), since the earth is
probably inside of the sun's ether drag, it is possible that ether is what
causes that phenomenon. Let me explain.
Unlike the case with Jupiter,
where two bendings of light offset each other, because we are probably inside
the sun's ether drag, we would see the light before it
completely straightens out (by a second complete bending) after it has passed
near the sun's surface. In other words,
the light actually bends twice, but we see the light before the second bend
completely offsets the first bend, thus the net of the two bends (one completed
and one incomplete) is a slight bend. I
do not necessarily claim this is the case, I simply mention that it might be
the case and explain how it might be the case.
Since we have been talking about
two bends, it might be emphasized that in the case of the earth's atmospheric
refraction, the light bends the first time, but because the person or telescope
is sitting on the surface of the earth, the first bending is observed before
the second bend even begins.
The Speed
of Light From Jupiter:
There is an experiment that
measures the speed of light in the solar system. In this case it is the measurement of the speed of light between
Jupiter and the earth.
Imagine that there are three
people looking at Jupiter. Each of them
has a watch and all of their watches are synchronized. Person number one is stationary on the path
of the orbit of our earth, at the point where our orbit is closest to Jupiter
(at the instant the light leaves Jupiter).
Person number three is stationary on the path of the orbit of earth, at
the point where our orbit is furthest away from Jupiter (at the instant the
light leaves Jupiter). Person number
two is halfway between the other two, which would be near the sun or possibly
even inside of the sun.
Now consider the moment of time
that a specific moon of Jupiter goes into the shadow of Jupiter (or casts its
shadow on Jupiter's surface). If light
travels at an infinite velocity all three people will observe the shadow at
exactly the same time. On the other
hand, we know that if person #1 observes this phenomena at 1:00PM, that person
#2 will observe it at about 1:08PM and that person #3 will observe it at about
1:16PM. These, of course, are
approximations.
Knowing that the orbits of the
moons of Jupiter are constant and predictable, scientists can measure the speed
of light between Jupiter and the earth by writing down the time that the shadow
of Jupiter starts to cover this specific moon (usually the moon Io) in its
orbit. By calculating this time in many
experiments, each relative to where the earth is in its orbit, very accurate
measurements of the speed of light in our solar system can be determined.
Since the first of these experiments
was done in 1676 by Romer, far better computer models of the solar system have
been built, and far better approximations of the speed of light in our solar
system have been calculated.
According to Ditchburn[29-page 301], the speed of light from Jupiter
to the earth is 0.5% slower than the speed of light in a vacuum on the surface
of the earth. On the surface, this
observation is an indication that the speed of light is faster on the surface
of the earth, than it is in space, meaning the speed of light is faster if the
ether is denser. But it is not quite as
simple as that. Consider the following
problems in making such a simple assumption.
First, I do not know whether the
0.5% figure is accurate based on modern equipment and modern celestial mechanics
formulas. When was this data
collected? What figure would be arrived
at today, using the best of astronomy and celestial mechanics? I do not know.
Second, it is obvious that the sun creates its own ether drag, but we don't know how far into the solar
system its ether drag goes, thus we don't know the density of the sun's ether
drag between our earth and Jupiter, compared to the density of ether on the
surface of the earth, though the sun's ether drag between the Earth and Jupiter
is probably less.
Third, Jupiter also creates its own
massive ether drag, but we don't know how far into the solar system its ether
drag goes (i.e. we don't know how close it gets to us), or how dense it is
between the two planets.
Fourth, the density of the ether
drag of both the sun and Jupiter, varies significantly according to the
relative "altitude" from these objects. These figures are not available.
Fifth, it is not known whether the
speed of light on the surface of Jupiter is faster or slower than the speed of
light on the surface of the earth, all we know is the density of the ether will
be greater on the surface of Jupiter.
Nevertheless, in spite of all of
the criticisms, it is reasonable that the average density
of ether between the surface of the earth and the surface of Jupiter, is less
than the density of ether on the surface of the earth. Thus it is logical to say that the less the
density of ether is, the slower is the speed of light, if the experiment is
verified.
Comments
There
has been a considerable amount of speculation in this chapter and the prior
chapter. Most of the speculation is
caused by experimenters not looking for what I want them to look for, thus the
data that I need does not exist in a form I can use. The most important thing to remember from these two chapters is
that aberration of starlight undoubtedly occurs at the boundary of our ether
drag. Considering my two
experiments on the path of light, it is absolutely impossible that aberration
occurs inside of the earth's ether drag, meaning inside of the telescope. Aberration must occur long before the light
gets to the telescope.