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,
134
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
135
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.
136
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.
137
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
138
inside
of the telescope. Aberration must occur long before the
light gets to the
telescope.
139