Sound can vibrate through many media and does not need air to work in
water. Then why would they have thought that light required aether in
the MMX when it had the air for a medium?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2025-06-22 23:57:35 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

Sound can vibrate through many media and does not need air to work in
water. Then why would they have thought that light required aether in
the MMX when it had the air for a medium?

When light is regarded as a wave then the electromagnetic field is
its medium.

Anyway, there are experiments that show that light does not behave
like a wave in any medium would.

Much of what is known about light was not known at the time of the
original MMX. But any explanation of MMX with light as a wave in
air is refuted by the Fizeau experiment, which Michelson and
Morley performed with a better accuracy that Fizeau had done.

--
Mikko

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 23 Jun 2025 8:00:48 +0000, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-06-22 23:57:35 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

Sound can vibrate through many media and does not need air to work in
water. Then why would they have thought that light required aether in
the MMX when it had the air for a medium?

When light is regarded as a wave then the electromagnetic field is
its medium.

The em field is not a medium as it has no mass. The em field related to
force.

Anyway, there are experiments that show that light does not behave
like a wave in any medium would.

The facts of refraction, interference, polarisation, coherence,
diffraction show the wave nature of light.

Bungles and hoaxes made in this matter (MMX analysis, lensing from solar atmosphere posed as GR proof) has for long been exposed by Arindam.

WOOF woof-woof woof woof-woof woof

Bertietaylor

Much of what is known about light was not known at the time of the
original MMX. But any explanation of MMX with light as a wave in
air is refuted by the Fizeau experiment, which Michelson and
Morley performed with a better accuracy that Fizeau had done.

--

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 23 Jun 2025 8:00:48 +0000, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-06-22 23:57:35 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

Sound can vibrate through many media and does not need air to work in
water. Then why would they have thought that light required aether in
the MMX when it had the air for a medium?

When light is regarded as a wave then the electromagnetic field is
its medium.

Anyway, there are experiments that show that light does not behave
like a wave in any medium would.

Much of what is known about light was not known at the time of the
original MMX. But any explanation of MMX with light as a wave in
air is refuted by the Fizeau experiment, which Michelson and
Morley performed with a better accuracy that Fizeau had done.

When sound goes against the wind it is slowed by it.

The Fizeau experiment is parsimoniously explained if we regard the water
as the medium of light.

The same for the MMX considering that the permittivity and permeability
of air is very similar to a vacuum.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2025-06-25 04:11:19 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

On Mon, 23 Jun 2025 8:00:48 +0000, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-06-22 23:57:35 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

Sound can vibrate through many media and does not need air to work in
water. Then why would they have thought that light required aether in
the MMX when it had the air for a medium?

When light is regarded as a wave then the electromagnetic field is
its medium.

Anyway, there are experiments that show that light does not behave
like a wave in any medium would.

Much of what is known about light was not known at the time of the
original MMX. But any explanation of MMX with light as a wave in
air is refuted by the Fizeau experiment, which Michelson and
Morley performed with a better accuracy that Fizeau had done.

When sound goes against the wind it is slowed by it.

Yes.

The Fizeau experiment is parsimoniously explained if we regard the water
as the medium of light.

No, in particular the part where the moving matter was air.
But even co-moving water increased and counter-moving water reduced
the speed clearly less than by the speed of water.

The same for the MMX considering that the permittivity and permeability
of air is very similar to a vacuum.

What is "the same"? That both water and air are good otical vacua?
Or that neither of them is?

--
Mikko

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 25 Jun 2025 8:14:09 +0000, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-06-25 04:11:19 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

On Mon, 23 Jun 2025 8:00:48 +0000, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-06-22 23:57:35 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

Sound can vibrate through many media and does not need air to work in
water. Then why would they have thought that light required aether in
the MMX when it had the air for a medium?

When light is regarded as a wave then the electromagnetic field is
its medium.

Anyway, there are experiments that show that light does not behave
like a wave in any medium would.

Much of what is known about light was not known at the time of the
original MMX. But any explanation of MMX with light as a wave in
air is refuted by the Fizeau experiment, which Michelson and
Morley performed with a better accuracy that Fizeau had done.

When sound goes against the wind it is slowed by it.

Yes.

The Fizeau experiment is parsimoniously explained if we regard the water
as the medium of light.

No, in particular the part where the moving matter was air.
But even co-moving water increased and counter-moving water reduced
the speed clearly less than by the speed of water.

The same for the MMX considering that the permittivity and permeability
of air is very similar to a vacuum.

What is "the same"? That both water and air are good otical vacua?
Or that neither of them is?

The fact that the speed of light changes in the direction of the flow of
water shows that water is the primary determinant and is the medium.

The question was, why did they think in the 19th century that the air
wasn't the medium in the MMX?

You beg the question of the medium since the electromagnetic field
requires one itself. The air provides one.

The fact that the medium determines the speed indicates that air is the
medium in the MMX.

What is the same is that air and water are sufficient media for light.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2025-06-27 20:25:22 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

On Wed, 25 Jun 2025 8:14:09 +0000, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-06-25 04:11:19 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

On Mon, 23 Jun 2025 8:00:48 +0000, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-06-22 23:57:35 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

Sound can vibrate through many media and does not need air to work in >>>>> water. Then why would they have thought that light required aether in >>>>> the MMX when it had the air for a medium?

When light is regarded as a wave then the electromagnetic field is
its medium.

Anyway, there are experiments that show that light does not behave
like a wave in any medium would.

Much of what is known about light was not known at the time of the
original MMX. But any explanation of MMX with light as a wave in
air is refuted by the Fizeau experiment, which Michelson and
Morley performed with a better accuracy that Fizeau had done.

When sound goes against the wind it is slowed by it.

Yes.

The Fizeau experiment is parsimoniously explained if we regard the water >>> as the medium of light.

No, in particular the part where the moving matter was air.
But even co-moving water increased and counter-moving water reduced
the speed clearly less than by the speed of water.

The same for the MMX considering that the permittivity and permeability
of air is very similar to a vacuum.

What is "the same"? That both water and air are good otical vacua?
Or that neither of them is?

The fact that the speed of light changes in the direction of the flow of water shows that water is the primary determinant and is the medium.

That the change of the speed of light changes much less than the
speed of water shows that the primary determinant is something else
and water is secondary.

The question was, why did they think in the 19th century that the air
wasn't the medium in the MMX?

The Fizeau experiment showed that motion of air has no observable
effect on the speed of light in air. The refraction of light on
entry to the atmosphere is the same in all directions, inclding the
leading and trailing side fo the atmosphere.

You beg the question of the medium since the electromagnetic field
requires one itself. The air provides one.

The constitutive parameters of air are very close to vacuum. If
measurements in different air densities are extrapolated to vacuum
one finds that electromagnetic phenomena do not requre air or
any other vacuum.

It was later found out that electromagnetic attraction keeps electrons
near to the nucleus (in comparison to other nuclei, but not in comparison
to the size of the nucleus). There is no air in an atom between electrons
and nucleus.

The fact that the medium determines the speed indicates that air is the medium in the MMX.

The fact that the medium does not much affect the speed indicates that
the primeary medium is something else.

What is the same is that air and water are sufficient media for light.

And so is vacuum.

--
Mikko

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)