cooper@pbsvax.DEC (Topher Cooper HLO2-3/M08 DTN225-5819) (08/03/85)
Ether theory is apparently not quite in the same category as phlogiston theory.
As I remember it Einstein argued that since his non-etherial theory, special
relativity SR made the same predictions as the Lorentz ether theory (LET),
the concept of ether was a redundant one, and under Occam's (sp?) razor,
should be disposed of.
In the July 8'th Physical Review Letters (Volume 55, #2, pp143-146), A.K.A.
Maciel and J Tiomno argue that this was premature. They claim that for a
particular formulation of LET there are not only predictions which differ
from SR, but that these differences are well within the range of modern
experimental techniques. Apparently, the differences would have been within
the capabilities of Michelson and Morley if they had used their apparatus
slightly differently.
According to the authors the experiments necessary to test their predicted
differences from SR, "have not yet been performed because experimental
physicists were looking for different effects and frequently their choice of
experimental arrangement induced a cancellation of the SR-violating effects
that we predict."
One experiment they cite, the "Marinov experiment" has results which "do agree
with LET but not with SR." It was this experiment which lead the authors to
reconsider LET. They apparently do not put great weight on these results,
however. One of their recommendations is : "... the Marinov experiment, ...
should be independently repeated even if to prove it wrong. Oddly enough
this experiment, which apparently raises more difficult technical problems than
the others mentioned here, has been carried out in a comparatively less
sophisticated laboratory."
I'm not sure how easy it would be to "de-etherialize" this version of LET, but,
as it stands, ether is still apprently part of the theory (or to put it another
way, the theory includes "a privileged inertial frame").
If I was betting, I would certainly put my money on SR, even at a 100-to-1,
but it does seem that no horse has yet crossed the finish line.
Topher Cooper
USENET: ...{allegra,decvax,ihnp4,ucbvax}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-pbsvax!cooper
ARPA/CSNET: cooper%pbsvax.DEC@decwrl
Disclaimer: This contains my own opinions, and I am solely responsible for
them.