1 Denitions: Inertial Frame of Reference (IF)
1 Denitions: Inertial Frame of Reference (IF)
1 Denitions: Inertial Frame of Reference (IF)
1 De nitions
ton's laws hold. The standard example is a frame of reference in empty space moving with uniform velocity wrt the xed stars. An IF moving with constant velocity wrt another IF is also an IF. Invariant, a quantity that does not change its value under a transformation, e.g. the length of a vector under a coordinate rotation. Covariant equations have the same form under a transformation, the physical content is the same, e.g. Newton's Laws of motion are covariant wrt a coordinate rotation. Special Relativity deals with physical phenomena true in all IFs, e.g. mechanics and electromagnetism. General Relativity deals with physical phenomena in accelerated frames of reference as well as IFs and is a theory of gravitation. Standard IFs S and S 0 will be de ned to be RH coordinate systems with S at rest and S 0 moving with a velocity v directed along the positive x-axis in S . We shall assume that S and S 0 coincide at t = 0 so that t = t0 = 0 and x = x0 = 0.
Inertial Frame of Reference (IF) is an unaccelerated frame of reference, in which New-
2 Galilean Relativity
Newton's laws of motion are covariant wrt coordinate rotations. They are also covariant wrt the Galilean transformation between IFs S and S 0 with constant relative velocity. For the standard IFs S and S 0 de ned above, the Galilean transformation is: x0 = x vt; y0 = y; z0 = z; t0 = t: By di erentiation we have that; dx0 = dx0 = dx v; dt0 dt dt
which gives the Newtonian law for relative velocity u0 = u v. Acceleration is unchanged since d2x0 = d2x : dt02 dt2 In Newtonian mechanics the mass of a body, m, is an invariant, hence 2x F = md dt2 in S; becomes 2 x0 0 F0 = m d dt02 in S : Thus F0 = F and Newton's law is covariant wrt the Galilean transformation. Since the laws of conservation of energy and momentum follow from Newton's laws they are also Galilean covariant. Notice also that the spatial and temporal intervals between two events r and t are separately invariant under the Galilean transformation.
3 The Problem
Although Newtonian mechanics is a Galilean covariant theory, electromagnetism is not. For example the force between two charges at rest is not the same as the force between the same two charges in uniform motion. Also the Galilean transformation predicts that the velocity of light will depend on the velocity of the source, viz. c0 = c v, and this is at variance with Maxwell's equations. At the end of the 19th Century there were three possible solutions to the puzzle: 1. Galilean relativity correct. Newtonian mechanics correct. EM in need of modi cation. 2. Galilean relativity correct for mechanics. EM correct but in a preferred frame of reference at rest wrt the aether. 3. No preferred frames. Maxwell's equations correct and satisfying a principle of relativity (not Galilean). Newtonian mechanics in need of modi cation. For a time the second proposal was the favourite but the failure to nd any experimental evidence for the aether led to Einstein's theory of special relativity (1905). Einstein based his theory on two fundamental postulates: The laws of physics are identical in all IFs | there are no preferred frames and there is no absolute motion. The speed of light in a vacuum is a universal constant c with the same value in any IF | c does not change with the motion of source or observer. All the physics of Special Relativity follows just from these two postulates.
Assume that the aether is moving wrt the apparatus with a velocity v parallel to AC as shown and that Galilean relativity is correct. Then: 2`C c : C Time A ! C ! A : tC = c `C v + c ` = 2 +v (c v 2 ) During the time t it takes for light to traverse the distance AB, the mirror B will 22 move a distance vt hence, c2t2 = `2 B + v t . The same is also true for the return path so: `B : Time A ! B ! A : tB = p 2 c2 v2 Hence the time di erence t is given by (for small v2=c2):
2 (I:1) t = tC tB = 2(`C c `B ) + v c3 (2`C `B ): The whole apparatus is now rotated through 90o so that v is now parallel to AB: 2 t0 = t0C t0B = 2(`C c `B ) + v c3 (`C 2`B ): Thus t 6= t0 and there should be a fringe shift n in the interference pattern, 0 2 (`C + `B ) n = c( t t ) = v : (I:2) c2
In the original Michelson-Morley (1887) experiment `B = `C = 11 m and = 600 nm. No shift was observed, giving a limit of n < 0:01 or v < 5 km/s to be compared, for example, with the Earth's orbital velocity of 30 km/s. The experiment has been repeated many times with null results of improving precision, some of which are shown in the Table.
On the basis of the electrodynamics of moving objects, Fitzgerald and Lorentz proposed that the length q of an object moving parallel q to the aether wind would be contracted by an amount 1 v2=c2 so that `C ! `C 1 v2=c2 and 2 t = tC tB = 2(`C c `B ) + v (I:3) c3 (`C `B ): Thus for equal arms t = 0, similarly t0 = 0, and no fringe shift would be expected. This idea was disproved by the experiment of Kennedy & Thorndike (1932) in which an interferometer with unequal arms was used. Assuming the contraction hypothesis, 2 2 1=2 (I:4) t ' 2 c (`C `B )(1 v =c ) : The apparatus itself was not rotated but a shift in fringe pattern would have been expected over a period of months as the Earth revolved around the Sun. None was however observed. b) Mossbauer Experiment: The Mossbauer e ect is the recoilless emission and absorption of photons from atoms locked into a crystal lattice. The experiment of Champeney, Isaak & Khan (1963) used the photons from the 14.4 keV excited state of 57Fe with a natural line width !=! 10 12 . The idea of the experiment is to look for a frequency shift between a photon source and a resonant absorber placed at opposite ends of a high speed rotator. We discuss this experiment in detail since it provides the most sensitive test of aether drift to date. The phase = k:x !t of an EM wave is an invariant wrt to the Galilean transformation (it is proportional to the number of wave crests passing a xed point in a xed time). Considering our standard IFs S and S 0 we have: k0:x0 !0t0 = k:x !t; or
k0:(x vt) !0t = k:x !t; hence :v ): k0 = k; !0 = !(1 nc (I:5) The shift in phase velocity is c0 = c n:v, where n is the unit vector along k. In addition the direction of the wave packet in the moving frame will be shifted to a direction m as seen from the xed frame (see panel (a) in gure above), cn v : m = jc n vj
To rst order in v=c this can be inverted to give: (I:6) n = 1 v:cm m + v c: If uS;A are the lab velocities of the source and absorber respectively and v is the aether velocity the corresponding velocities relative to the aether are vS;A = uS;A v. Using eq (I.5), we get ! !S !A = ! ( v A vS ):n = (uA uS ):n: c c Next refer n to the lab frame direction m to get, (I:7) !S !A = ! c (uA uS ):(m + v=c): In the experiment source and absorber were at the opposite ends of a rigid rotator (see panel (b) above) so (uA uS ):m = 0 hence ! = v:(u u )=c2 = 2 R sin( t)jv j; (I:8) A S ? ! c2 using variables de ned in panel (b) above and jv?j as the component of the aether velocity perpendicular to the axis of rotation. Two rotation speeds of 1257 and 7728 rads/s were used with R = 4 cm. The observed fractional width was 2 10 12 and no diurnal change was seen to within 1% giving jv?j = 1:6 2:8 m/s. This is clearly consistent with v?, i.e. null evidence for an aether wind.
2)
decay The best terrestrial limit comes from the experiment of Alvager et al (1964) in which photons from 0 decay were timed over an 80 m path length. The 0 velocity was 0.99975c and k was found to be ( 3 13) 10 5 , quite consistent with zero.
Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.
Alternative Proxies: