Content uploaded by Hanna Edwards
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Hanna Edwards on Aug 11, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
The Co-Moving Drag Effect
Hanna Edwards
Absolute Motion Sensing, Lake Albert, New South Wales, Australia, AMSensing@icloud.com
Apr 11, 2022
Abstract
When an EM signal travels through a cable which rigidly connects a source
and observer, it experiences an altered refractive index by the cable’s co-
motion with the observer relative to the signal. The present work examines
this effect.
Keywords— Absolute Motion, Motion Sensing, Optics, Fresnel Drag Effect
Introduction
The original approach to this topic was made by Augustin-Jean Fresnel who proposed
that light was ”a vibration in a universal fluid” known as the ether [1]. Fresnel further
proposed that the presence of an optic medium implies a greater ether density, with its
motion affecting the speed of light propagating through it.
These propositions fundamentally agree with the worldview presented in Edwards(2019)
[2], which proposes a fabric of space in which light is a travelling- and restmatter a stand-
ing disturbance. Consequently absolute motion can be defined as motion relative to an
EM signal, whilst rest reference values are defined at rest in the fabric. If we understand
energy as quantifying an amount of change over space and time, the presence of a pat-
tern of change increases the energy density in a given volume- and hence the density of
the fabric of space. As the propagation velocity of a travelling disturbance is set by the
density of its medium, the presence of restmatter implies a lowered propagation velocity
as it implies a greater density.
Within this worldview which fundamentally aligns with Fresnel’s, we want to relive
Fresnel’s drag effect derivation - the closest description of which was found in a book by
Whittaker from 1910 with the title ”A history of the theories of aether and electricity”
[3].
(((Something to ponder/discuss: if we consider the derivation of Fresnel’s drag coeffi-
cient 1−1/n2by Laub [4] which changes the speed of propagation to c/n±v(1−1/n2), the
formula appears to appreciate the velocity of the medium vas seen by an observer whilst
employing first order approximations in its derivation. Cite more relativistic derivations.
At the same time, experiments aimed at probing Fresnel’s theory by Fizeau, Harress or
Pogany were not designed to measure the laboratory motion through the ether [3,4,5]
whilst the experiment by Fizeau, which measured Fresnel’s drag coefficient to a close
agreement, was based on the velocity of a medium relative to the observer (and source).
1
– probably due to the abs motion vector almost cancelling in sagnac-like experiments , do
the math similar to LHC to first see for yourself and then prove your assumption Hanna
!!
Also discuss that Maxwell discovered his famous relationship AFTER Fresnel guessed(?)
the squarred relationship - but also that considering Argo-like experiment a factor 1−1/n2
was born by demand (look up in conspiracy of light homepage - yup that awesome guy
you are now in contact with ;-) you are patching this here up for ;-)) )))
So to relive a derivation in Fresnel’s sense, the here presented drag effect models a sit-
uation where the medium remains fixed between source and observer, to describe a drag
effect born by the co-motion of the medium with the observer relative to the signal.
To examine this co-moving drag effect, let us consider an EM wave travelling into-
versus out of the direction a cable travels. In either case, the propagating wave encounters
the same absolute amount of molecules during its passage. However in the first case it
encounters less molecules per unit time - and in the second more. In the first case it will
therefore perceive a reduced refractive index nand hence a faster cn1> cn- and in the
second an increased refractive index nand hence a slower cn2< cn(Fig.1).
Fig.1: The effect of absolute motion of an optical medium onto the
speed of light passing through it with cn2< cn< cn1.
Theory
In 1865 Maxwell published his famous work where he derived the speed of light from what
became known as ”Maxwell’s equations” as
c=1
õoo
from which he deduced that ”light is an electromagnetic disturbance propagated through
the field” as the value matched that measured for light [Maxwell ref]. As this statement
of Maxwell’s again fundamentally agrees with the worldview presented in Edwards,2019
we are basing our revival of Fresnel’s drag effect derivation on the following context and
definition of the refractive index nas
µ
µoo
=c2
c2
n
=n2
where in the sense of our worldview we consider µ as representing the to the speed of
light effective ether density in our optic medium at absolute rest and µooas the ether
2
density of free space. Then it holds that
µ =µoo∗n2
From here it follows that µxxwith
µxx=µ −µoo=µoo∗(n2−1)
represents the contribution by the molecules of the optic medium to the ether density as
relevant to the speed of light through the optic medium. Alternatively we can think of
the ether density concerning the speed of light in our optic medium µ to compose from
the contributions of the fabric of space and the molecules of the optic medium
µ =µoo+µxx
To this point we agree with Fresnel’s original derivation as presented by Whittaker [3].
As the next step we have to put our optic medium into absolute motion. Let us do so into
the same direction as the signal. This only concerns the part µxxto move through the
fabric at an absolute speed v. Whittaker appears to suggest that the following question
was ask: ”If we give the molecule-part µxx=µoo∗(n2−1) the speed v, what equivalent
speed f∗vwould this entail for µ =µoo∗n2such that the following equation holds”
µoo∗(n2−1) ∗v=µoo∗n2∗f∗v
We directly see that
f= (1 −1
n2)
which is Fresnel’s famous drag coefficient. From there, as presented by Whittaker [3] the
derivations continues to conclude that therefore the speed of light cn∗through an optic
medium moving at absolute speed vaway from the signal is
cn∗=cn+ (1 −1
n2)v
as opposed to its speed cnthrough the same medium if it were at absolute rest. This could
be reasoned in that the RHS of the equation µoo∗(n2−1) ∗v=µoo∗n2∗(1 −1
n2)v
describes a mathematical equivalence with a speed (1 −1
n2)vat which the entire ether
moves, if the molecule-part on the LHS moves at speed v, to yield this identical result.
Lorentz Dispersion Term
Clasically - i.e. Lorentz believed in the ether.
Make own section or better include in the above.
Discussion
Application to experiments - own plus look at conspiracy of light webpage.
Sagnac-like experiments [4-5, 10-14] are independent of the refractive index and are
known to follow the formula ∆t=2vL
c2which describes the time difference between 2
counterpropagating signals where vis the tangential velocity of rotation of the loop and
Lthe total length of the fibre.
3
The Fresnel’d drag coefficient has been laudated for this by Knopf [4] the following way.
Let us first consider the refractive index such that
∆t=2vL
c2/n2=2vLn2
c2
. We do however postulate the existence of a drag effect xsuch that
∆t=2vLn2∗(1 −x)
c2
which implies the assumption that the present effect is reduced by a drag effect which is
to be subtracted from it. We directly see that if
x= 1 −1/n2
we derive
∆t=2vL
c2
However this derivation is not bottom up physically derived. But:
∆t=L
cn∗ −v−L
cn∗+v
When we substitute
cn∗=cn+ (1 −1
n2)v
and
cn∗=cn−(1 −1
n2)v
for each direction respectively we get
∆t=L
c/n +v−v/n2−v−L
c/n −v+v/n2+v=L
c/n −v/n2−L
c/n +v/n2
=2Lv/n2
c2/n2−v2/n4=2Lv
c2−v2/n2
Which for v << c approximates to
2Lv
c2
...
Conclusion
Fresnel on right track
4
Acknowledgements
Joern
Dirk
for helping me obtain papers and find research i was after
References
1. Fresnel, A. (1818) ”Lettre D’Augustin Fresnel A Francois Arago ”Sur L’Influence Du
Mouvement Terrestre Danse Quelques Phenomenes D’Optique” Annales de chimie
et de physique, 9: 57
2. Edwards, H. (2019) ”The Absolute Meaning of Motion to the Optical Path” Results
in Physics, 14: 102410
3. Whittaker, E.T. (1910) ”A HISTORY OF THE THEORIES OF AETHER AND
ELECTRICITY”, Dublin University Press Series, Hodges, Figgis, & Co., LTD.,
DUBLIN
4. Laub, J. (1907) ”Zur Optik der bewegten K¨orper”, Annelen der Physik, 328: 738–744
5. Drezet, A. (2005) ”The physical origin of the Fresnel Drag of light by a moving
dielectric medium” The European Physical Journal B, 45(1): 103-110
add 2 more from Dirk and Lorentz for intro theory and contradictions as of which
theory is right as of correct predictions
6. Cassini, A.; Levinas, M. L. (2019) ”Einstein’s reinterpretation of the Fizeau experi-
ment: How it turned out to be crucial for special relativity” Studies in History and
Philosophy of Modern Physics, 65: 55-72
7. Knopf, O. (1920) ”Die Versuche von F. Harress ueber die Geschindigkeit des Lichtes
in bewegten Koerpern” Annalen der Physik, 4(62): 389-447
8. Pogany, P. (1928) ”Ueber die Wiederholung des Harresschen Versuches” Annalen
der Physik, 4(85): 244-256
9. Lineweaver, C.H. (1996) “The CMB Dipole: the Most Recent Measurement and
some History” arxiv: astro-ph/9609034
10. Edwards, H. (2022) ”Experimental Evidence of Lorentz Variance Breaking in Dif-
ferent Astronomical Orientations” (Cross-Reference)
11. Cahill, R.T. (2006) “The Roland De Witte 1991 Detection of Absolute Motion and
Gravitational Waves” Progress in Physics, 3: 60-65.
12. Sagnac, G. (1913) “The Luminiferous Ether Demonstrated by the Effect of the
Relative Motion of the Ether in an Interferometer in Uniform Rotation” Comptes
Rendus de l’Academie des Sciences, 157: 708-710
13. Sagnac, G. (1913) “Regarding the Proof for the Existence of a Luminiferous Ether
Using a Rotating Interferometer Experiment” Comptes Rendus de l’Academie des
Sciences, 157: 1410-1413
5
14. Pascoli, G. (2017). “The Sagnac effect and its interpretation by Paul Langevin” C.
R. Physique, 18: 563-569
15. Wang, R.; Zheng, Y.; Yao, A.; Langley, D. (2003) “Modified Sagnac experiment
for measuring travel-time difference between counter-propagating light beams in a
uniformly moving fiber” Physics Letters A, 312: 7-10
16. Wang, R.; Zheng, Y.; Yao, A. (2004) “Generalized Sagnac Effect” Physical Review
Letters, 93: 143901.
17. Maxwell, James Clerk (1865). ”A dynamical theory of the electromagnetic field”
(PDF). Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. 155: 459–512
6
