Einstein's Relativity Disproved Before It Was Created

[Pentcho Valev]

"Emission theory, also called emitter theory or ballistic theory of light, was a competing theory for the special theory of relativity, explaining the results of the Michelson–Morley experiment of 1887...The name most often associated with emission theory is Isaac Newton. In his corpuscular theory Newton visualized light "corpuscles" being thrown off from hot bodies at a nominal speed of c with respect to the emitting object, and obeying the usual laws of Newtonian mechanics, and we then expect light to be moving towards us with a speed that is offset by the speed of the distant emitter (c ± v)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emission_theory

What does that mean? If, in their preliminary calculations, Michelson and Morley had used c'=c±v, not c'=c (speed of light independent of speed of the emitter, as the aether concept requires), they would have predicted the null result and the experiment would have confirmed their prediction. But they used c'=c, predicted a different outcome, and the experiment refuted it. So c'=c was proved wrong in 1887, no?

The experiment became compatible with c'=c a few years later, after miraculous fudge factors ("contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations") were introduced:

"Moreover, if light consists of particles, as Einstein had suggested in his paper submitted just thirteen weeks before this one, the second principle seems absurd: A stone thrown from a speeding train can do far more damage than one thrown from a train at rest; the speed of the particle is not independent of the motion of the object emitting it. And if we take light to consist of particles and assume that these particles obey Newton's laws, they will conform to Newtonian relativity and thus automatically account for the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment without recourse to contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations. Yet, as we have seen, Einstein resisted the temptation to account for the null result in terms of particles of light and simple, familiar Newtonian ideas, and introduced as his second postulate something that was more or less obvious when thought of in terms of waves in an ether." Banesh Hoffmann, Relativity and Its Roots, p.92 https://www.amazon.com/Relativity-Its-Roots-Banesh-Hoffmann/dp/0486406768

 

[Pentcho Valev]

John Norton: "In addition to his work as editor of the Einstein papers in finding source material, Stachel assembled the many small clues that reveal Einstein's serious consideration of an emission theory of light; and he gave us the crucial insight that Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley experiment as evidence for the principle of relativity, whereas later writers almost universally use it as support for the light postulate of special relativity. Even today, this point needs emphasis. The Michelson-Morley experiment is fully compatible with an emission theory of light that contradicts the light postulate." http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/1743/2/Norton.pdf

Two implications:

1. In 1887, prior to the introduction of preposterous fudge factors (length contraction etc.), the Michelson-Morley experiment proved c'=c±v, Newton's variable speed of light, and disproved c'=c, the constant speed of light ("light postulate": the speed of light is independent of the speed of the source).

2. Theoretical physicists ("later writers") are dishonest.

 

[Jzz]

"Emission theory, also called emitter theory or ballistic theory of light, was a competing theory for the special theory of relativity, explaining the results of the Michelson–Morley experiment of 1887...The name most often associated with emission theory is Isaac Newton. In his corpuscular theory Newton visualized light "corpuscles" being thrown off from hot bodies at a nominal speed of c with respect to the emitting object, and obeying the usual laws of Newtonian mechanics, and we then expect light to be moving towards us with a speed that is offset by the speed of the distant emitter (c ± v)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emission_theory

What does that mean? If, in their preliminary calculations, Michelson and Morley had used c'=c±v, not c'=c (speed of light independent of speed of the emitter, as the aether concept requires), they would have predicted the null result and the experiment would have confirmed their prediction. But they used c'=c, predicted a different outcome, and the experiment refuted it. So c'=c was proved wrong in 1887, no?

The experiment became compatible with c'=c a few years later, after miraculous fudge factors ("contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations") were introduced:

"Moreover, if light consists of particles, as Einstein had suggested in his paper submitted just thirteen weeks before this one, the second principle seems absurd: A stone thrown from a speeding train can do far more damage than one thrown from a train at rest; the speed of the particle is not independent of the motion of the object emitting it. And if we take light to consist of particles and assume that these particles obey Newton's laws, they will conform to Newtonian relativity and thus automatically account for the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment without recourse to contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations. Yet, as we have seen, Einstein resisted the temptation to account for the null result in terms of particles of light and simple, familiar Newtonian ideas, and introduced as his second postulate something that was more or less obvious when thought of in terms of waves in an ether." Banesh Hoffmann, Relativity and Its Roots, p.92 https://www.amazon.com/Relativity-Its-Roots-Banesh-Hoffmann/dp/0486406768

Petcho Valev

Thank you for sharing that thoughtful post. You're absolutely right to revisit the classical emission theory and to study how it relates to the Michelson–Morley experiment. In classical physics, light—like any wave—was believed to require a medium for its propagation. This medium, referred to as the aether, was thought to carry light waves much like air carries sound. In such a framework, the speed of the wave is fixed by the properties of the medium, not by the motion of the source or observer. This is standard wave behavior. (c = constant)

The emission theory (or ballistic theory) proposed something simpler: that light consists of particles emitted at speed c relative to the source. So, if a light source moves at speed v, then the light would be observed traveling at c ± v, just like a ball thrown from a moving train. This model aligns with Newtonian mechanics.

By contrast, the prevailing assumption in the aether framework—and later in relativistic theories—was that the speed of light is always measured as c, regardless of how fast the emitter or observer is moving (c = constant). This proposition includes mathematical work arounds like length contraction and time dilation to preserve (c = constant) The inability to detect the aether experimentally caused physicists to adopt such artifices even though these adjustments lacked physical mechanisms and were not intuitive. In the end Einstein dismissed the aether saying there was no need for it.

The Michelson–Morley experiment predicted a shift in interference patterns based on Earth's motion through this aether but found none—a "null result.". If they had followed the classical view of the aether they would have had a positive prediction instead of a ‘null’ result.

But this raises a deeper issue: if light is a wave, how can it have a fixed speed in a vacuum with no medium? Every known wave—sound, water, mechanical—requires a medium, and its speed is determined by that medium, not by the motion of the source. So the idea of a wave traveling through “nothing” at a fixed speed, unaffected by the emitter’s motion, remains highly questionable. But wait dark matter that allows for precisely that (i.e., electromagnetic radiation travelling through a seeming vacuum at a constant speed)also remains undetected even after a 100 years of investigation. Augmented Newtonian Dynamics (AND) Theory, describes an undetectable medium through which electromagnetic radiation can travel at constant speed and also states its origin, energy etc.