References

 

 

"The only thing we learn from history is that we learn nothing from history."

Friedrich Hegel

 

 

This is an article and 2 books that talk about our total velocity in space:

[1]         R. A. Muller, "The Cosmic Background Radiation and the New Aether Drift," Scientific American, Volume 238, No. 5, pages 64-74 (May, 1978).  This article has a truly amazing graphic on page 65.  This is an old article that estimates our net speed in the universe at 400 kps.

[2]         Eric Chaisson and Steve McMillan, Astronomy Today, 2nd edition, Prentice Hall, page 582.  This is an old book that also estimates our speed in the universe at 400 kps.

[3]         William J. Kaufmann, III (deceased) and Roger A. Freedman, Universe, 5th edition, W. H. Freeman and Company, page 707.  In the 4th edition, page 533, the speed of our solar system is estimated to be 390 kps, but in the 5th edition it is pegged at 370 kps.  I use the latest figure of 370 kps in this book.

 

[4]         U.S. Naval Observatory, Multiyear Interactive Computer Almanac 1990-2005, Willmann-Bell, Inc., page 119.

 

[5]         One of the interferometer experiments, an interferometer by Silvertooth, claimed to detect our total motion in space.  However, it is highly doubtful that the data of the Silvertooth experiment is credible.  Attempts to duplicate his data using his techniques have failed, and the author's own experiments totally contradict both his data and his conclusions.  His data also contradicts the results of numerous other interferometers.  I would not mention his experiment if it had not been published in Speculations in Science and Technology, Volume 10, Number 1, 1987, page 3ff

 

[6]         Janssen, Michael, Einstein for Everyone, "19th Century Ether Theory."  I do not know if this has been published.  According to Janssen, Augustin-Louis Cauchy was the first to propose "ether drag" in 1831, but George Gabriel Stokes became the champion of the ether drag theory as early as 1845 (pages 2-3).

 

[7]         Howard C. Hayden, Cynthia K. Whitney, "If Sagnac and Michelson-Gale, Why Not Michelson-Morley?" Galilean Electrodynamics, Nov/Dec 1990, page 71ff.  To see a copy of the original paper Michelson-Gale and Pearson wrote, it is reproduced (along with several other papers) in the book: A New Physics, by William Day, Foundation For New Directions, 93 Belmont St., Cambridge, MA 02138 (www.fnd.org)

 

These are the 4 key papers by Hafele or Hafele and Keating:

[8]         Hafele, J. C., "Relativistic Behaviour of Moving Terrestrial Clocks," Nature, Volume 227, July 18, 1970, pages 270-271.

[9]         Hafele, J. C., "Relativistic Time for Terrestrial Circumnavigations," American Journal of Physics, Volume 40, January 1972, pages 81-85.

[10]       Hafele, J. C. and Keating, Richard E., "Around-the-World Atomic Clocks: Predicted Relativistic Time Gains," Science, Volume 177, July 14, 1972, pages 166-168.

[11]       Hafele, J. C. and Keating, Richard E., "Around-the-World Atomic Clocks: Observed Relativistic Time Gains," Science, Volume 177, July 14, 1972, pages 168-170.

 

[12]       Einstein, Albert, Relativity, The Special and General Theory, Crown Publishers, Inc., 1961, see Chapter XXIII, which was originally written in 1920 (see comments on pages 129 and 131)

 

[13]       Ives, Herbert E. and Stilwell, G. R., "An Experimental Study of the Rate of a Moving Atomic Clock," Journal of the Optical Society of America, Volume 28, Number 7, July, 1938, page 215.  Ives mentions that Einstein was working with canal rays "over 30 years ago," which would have meant prior to 1908. Canal rays are a predecessor to today's atomic clocks.

 

[14]       See the official web site of the Nobel Foundation for this award at: http://www.nobel.se/physics/laureates/1919/press.html

 

[15]       Many people have used the works of Ayn Rand (Atlas Shrugged, etc.) to philosophically argue for the importance of "causality."  One of many books that does just that is The Philosophic Corruption of Physics by David Harriman, who is a physicist and philosopher.

 

[16]       Herbert, Nick, Faster Than Light, Superluminal Loopholes in Physics, Plume, pages 30-31.

 

[17]       Rado, Steven, Aethro-Kinematics, Aethron Publishing Company, 1994, pages 254-258.  While I do not agree with everything in his book, his development of formulas for resistance caused by ether is exceptional.  See: http://www.aethro-kinematics.com/

 

[18]       Cocke, W.J., "Relativistic Corrections for Terrestrial Clock Synchronization," Physical Review Letters, Volume 16, Number 15, Page 662ff

 

[19]       http://home.planetinternet.be/~pin30390/ (go to: /belgacom.htm)  To my knowledge, information about his experiment has never been published.

 

[20]       Van Flandern, Tom, Dark Matter, Missing Planets & New Comets, North Atlantic Books, read his preface for a scathing denunciation of general relativity.

 

[21]       Agathangelidis, Antonis, "Implications of Hafele-Keating, Michelsom-Morley, & Michelson-Gale Experiments," Galilean Electrodynamics (GED), Vol 12, Number 3, May/June 2001, pages 43-49.  Antonis also wondered why the center of the sun was not chosen.  Antonis was not the first person to see a possible connection between the Hafele-Keating experiment and ether.  My awareness of the Hafele-Keating experiment came from the first edition of an extremely rare pro-ether book by Gordon L. Ziegler: Formulating the Universe.  This book is one of two books I know of that claim ether can easily explain the "Unified Theory."  It is now in its second edition.  It is virtually impossible that Agathangelidis knew of the Ziegler book, so it is fairly clear that they came to their conclusions independently.  Ziegler's current web site is at:

http://www.olywa.net/unifieduniverse/

Just before I finished writing the first edition of this book I got an email from Gordon Ziegler:

"The 1994 edition of Formulating the Universe, Volume I is on Google, the 1998 editions of Formulating the Universe, Volumes I and II are on Excite.  All of these, however, are grossly out of date, since I have made many corrections and revisions to the originals. Now, also, I have the beginnings of Volume III.  The current masters are not on the computer.  I plan on submitting them to be published.  I have yet a major revision to do.  You might want to wait until I get this new revision done ... Dr. [name withheld because I don't have his permission] in London reviewed the current three volumes and called them 'magnificent, brilliant.'"

 

[22]       Whitaker, Andrew, Einstein, Bohr and the Quantum Dilemma, Press Syndicate, University of Cambridge, pages 123-125.  This is the best source I have found for explaining the switch from the ether theory to the photon theory in 1923 and 1924.

 

[23]       I should warn the reader that doing this experiment was not as easy as it sounds, it is somewhat tricky to do it right.  See Appendix A for details on how to do the experiment.

 

[24]       Goldhaber, Alfred S., Nieto, Michael M., "The Mass of the Photon," Scientific American, Volume 234, Number 5, (May, 1976) pages 86ff

 

[25]       Special thanks to Jerry Wiant, the Project Engineer at MLRS who acted as a go-between for my many questions to the MLRS observers and himself.

See: http://almagest.as.utexas.edu/~rlr/mlrs.html

 

Three of the best articles I have found on the retro-reflector and Lunar Laser Ranging are the following:

[26]       James E. Faller (who designed the retro-reflector), E. Joseph Wampler, "The Lunar Laser Reflector," Scientific American, Volume 222, Number 3, March 1970, page 38ff.

[27]       C. O. Alley, P. L. Bender, J. E. Faller, et. al., "Laser Ranging Retroreflector," which is Chapter 7 in NASA Special Publication SP-214, 1969, called Apollo 11 - Preliminary Science Report.

[28]       Dickey, J.O., Bender, P.L., Wiant, J.R., et.al., "Lunar Laser Ranging: A Continuing Legacy of the Apollo Program," Science, Vol. 265, July 22, 1994, pages 482-490.

 

[29]       Ditchburn, R.W., Light, Dover Publications, 1991, page 561

 

[30]       Special thanks to Bob Sandy of the Astronomical Society of Kansas City.  I have studied Bob's detailed graphs of occultation “grazes” called “pictorial reductions.”  Grazes on the moon occur when a bright star grazes the north or south edge of the moon and the star’s light actually flickers on and off due to the star's light passing between and behind several mountains silhouetted on the edge of the moon.  Several astronomers, several miles from each other, observe the same occultation graze.  All observations are later plotted on a piece of paper showing a silhouette of the mountains.  Each astronomer videotapes their observations as atomic clock synchronized beeps (from radio station WWV or WWVB) are recorded on the videotape.  Both actual and predicted data are plotted on the "pictorial reduction."  Looking at the Bob's pictorial reductions and his videotapes, it is clear that the moon's ether drag does not bend the light of a star significantly, or at all, as its light grazes the moon.