Sasho Salkoff
You are wrong, Mr. Einstein...

Even a beautiful mistake is still mistake
Movie 1/7
More than 100 years, one of the most important theories of the world physics is the Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity. It or otherwise associated with nearly all areas of human knowledge. Therefore, we must rethink and check it every day, since possible errors contained in it may return World Science years ago. It is no secret, that for the whole period of its existence, it is one of the most contested theories. Many scientists from around the world, tried to find arguments against it, but have been introduced no never achieved. Also true, that all they mostly are struggling with its logic, and this is very difficult due to the elegance of its mathematical models.
In this article, I will not examine the theory’s mathematical modeling, because I do not think that I can make any further contribution. Rather, I wish to draw your attention to one fundamental for this theory problem. For each familiar with the theory is aware that if you want to indicate its “point of support”, this will be the law about the constancy of the speed of light in a vacuum,
the constancy of the speed of light in a vacuum, according to which the speed of light in vacuum is constant in all directions and does not depend on the speed of the source or receiver. About the independence of the speed of light from the source speed due to wave properties of light, any doubts as to the truth of the allegations are unfounded. However, how matters stand about the question of the independence of the speed of light from the speed of the receiver? It is the result of a single experiment – the Michelson–Morley one. The principle, which both physicists use to carry out their experiment, is illustrated in movie 1/7.
More than 100 years, one of the most important theories of the world physics is the Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity. It or otherwise associated with nearly all areas of human knowledge. Therefore, we must rethink and check it every day, since possible errors contained in it may return World Science years ago. It is no secret, that for the whole period of its existence, it is one of the most contested theories. Many scientists from around the world, tried to find arguments against it, but have been introduced no never achieved. Also true, that all they mostly are struggling with its logic, and this is very difficult due to the elegance of its mathematical models. In this article, I will not examine the theory’s mathematical modeling, because I do not think that I can make any further contribution. Rather, I wish to draw your attention to one fundamental for this theory problem. For each familiar with the theory is aware that if you want to indicate its “point of support”, this will be the law about the constancy of the speed of light in a vacuum, according to which the speed of light in vacuum is constant in all directions and does not depend on the speed of the source or receiver. About the independence of the speed of light from the source speed due to wave properties of light, any doubts as to the truth of the allegations are unfounded. However, how matters stand about the question of the independence of the speed of light from the speed of the receiver? It is the result of a single experiment – the Michelson–Morley one. The principle, which both physicists use to carry out their experiment, is illustrated in movie 1/7.
Movie 2/7
If we shoot ? perfectly elastic ball, towards a reflector, the ball will travel through a shorter path when the system is at rest than if the system is moving parallel to the reflecting surface. This is the result of the fact that in the case of moving system, the ball will be held on a longer path. Therefore, based on this logic, Abraham Michelson and Edward Morley put their experiment in search of the broadcasting of the "aether wind", which should occur when the Earth moves along on its orbit arouIf we shoot ? perfectly elastic ball, towards a reflector, the ball will travel through a shorter path when the system is at rest than if the system is moving parallel to the reflecting surface. This is the result of the fact that in the case of moving system, the ball will be held on a long path. Therefore, based on this logic, Abraham Michelson and Edward Morley put their experiment in search of the broadcasting of the "aether wind", which
should occur when the Earth moves along on its orbit aroud the Sun. The system they use for the experiment is briefly described in movie 2/7. A ray of light is sent by a joined to the system source of white light through a half-silvered mirror that is used to split it into two rays traveling at right angles to one another. The first ray moves perpendicular, and the second ray – parallel to the Earth’s movement. After leaving the splitter, the rays traveled out to the ends of two long arms of equal length where they were reflected back into the middle on small mirrors. They then recombined on the far side of the splitter in an interferometer, producing a pattern of constructive and destructive interference based on the spent time to transit the arms. If the Earth is traveling through an aether medium, a ray reflecting back and forth parallel to the flow of ether (like the ball in the first movie) would take longer than a ray reflecting perpendicular to the aether because the time gained from traveling downwind is less than that lost traveling upwind. The result would be a delay in one of the light rays that could be detected when the rays were recombined through interference. Any slight change in the spent time would then be observed as a shift in the positions of the interference fringes. If the aether were stationary relative to the sun, then the Earth's motion would produce a fringe shift. However, Michelson and Morley do not observe any fringe shift, so the fatal conclusion on the independence of the speed of light from the speed of the receiver was drawn.
If we shoot ? perfectly elastic ball, towards a reflector, the ball will travel through a shorter path when the system is at rest than if the system is moving parallel to the reflecting surface. This is the result of the fact that in the case of moving system, the ball will be held on a longer path. Therefore, based on this logic, Abraham Michelson and Edward Morley put their experiment in search of the broadcasting of the "aether wind", which should occur when the Earth moves along on its orbit arouIf we shoot ? perfectly elastic ball, towards a reflector, the ball will travel through a shorter path when the system is at rest than if the system is moving parallel to the reflecting surface. This is the result of the fact that in the case of moving system, the ball will be held on a long path. Therefore, based on this logic, Abraham Michelson and Edward Morley put their experiment in search of the broadcasting of the "aether wind", which should occur when the Earth moves along on its orbit aroud the Sun. The system they use for the experiment is briefly described in movie 2/7. A ray of light is sent by a joined to the system source of white light through a half-silvered mirror that is used to split it into two rays traveling at right angles to one another. The first ray moves perpendicular, and the second ray – parallel to the Earth’s movement. After leaving the splitter, the rays traveled out to the ends of two long arms of equal length where they were reflected back into the middle on small mirrors. They then recombined on the far side of the splitter in an interferometer, producing a pattern of constructive and destructive interference based on the spent time to transit the arms. If the Earth is traveling through an aether medium, a ray reflecting back and forth parallel to the flow of ether (like the ball in the first movie) would take longer than a ray reflecting perpendicular to the aether because the time gained from traveling downwind is less than that lost traveling upwind. The result would be a delay in one of the light rays that could be detected when the rays were recombined through interference. Any slight change in the spent time would then be observed as a shift in the positions of the interference fringes. If the aether were stationary relative to the sun, then the Earth's motion would produce a fringe shift. However, Michelson and Morley do not observe any fringe shift, so the fatal conclusion on the independence of the speed of light from the speed of the receiver was drawn.
Movie 3/7
This conclusion, I call the "fatal", since it launched the law about the constancy of the speed of light in a vacuum - the base on which all the relativity theory is built. That is why I closely analyze this experiment because responsibility for creating the theory falls on it. As already mentioned in the Michelson–Morley experiment, the beam, which moves perpendicular to the movement of the Earth, provides behavior as the ball from movie 1/7, as shown in the third movie.
Movie 4/7
Therefore, we must expect that when the system is in motion, ray’s trajectory will be longer. However, the first postulate of the independence of light speed from the source asserts otherwise. Einstein himself notes, "The light forgets about the source in the time of leaving", which means that the ray there is no reason to test the impact of whether a system is in movement or is at rest. Moreover, this can mean only one – ray’s path will not be such. Sure enough, if we refer to the postulate of the independence of the speed of light from the speed of the source, path of the ray will be as shown in the fourth movie. This means that the ray will not travel along longer path as expected by Abraham Michelson, but the same path when the system is at rest.
In this situation, we have not anything but to accept that the experiment is unproductive, because it cannot be expected to neither confirm nor refute
the independence of the speed of light from the speed of the receiver. This in turn puts the theory of relativity in a very delicate situation, as it turns out that it is built on flawed experiment. This, of course, does not mean that the theory is wrong, but anyway, we will need to confirm the law of constancy of the speed of light through the experiment, different from the Michelson–Morley one.
Therefore, we must expect that when the system is in motion, ray’s trajectory will be longer. However, the first postulate of the independence of light speed from the source asserts otherwise. Einstein himself notes, "The light forgets about the source in the time of leaving", which means that the ray there is no reason to test the impact of whether a system is in movement or is at rest. Moreover, this can mean only one – ray’s path will not be such. Sure enough, if we refer to the postulate of the independence of the speed of light from the speed of the source, path of the ray will be as shown in the fourth movie. This means that the ray will not travel along longer path as expected by Abraham Michelson, but the same path when the system is at rest.
In this situation, we have not anything but to accept that the experiment is unproductive, because it cannot be expected to neither confirm nor refute the independence of the speed of light from the speed of the receiver.
This in turn puts the theory of relativity in a very delicate situation, as it turns out that it is built on flawed experiment. This, of course, does not mean that the theory is wrong, but anyway, we will need to confirm the law of constancy of the speed of light through the experiment, different from the Michelson–Morley one.
Movie 5/7
The above considerations call into serious question the correctness of the law of constancy of the speed of light. So I have set about to construct a new experimental launcher, which is not built on the principles of Michelson’s interferometer which relies on the existence of the "aether wind" on Earth in its orbital motion. However, the assumption is very risky, because we cannot be sure how the eventual “aether” will interact with matter, with gravity, and with forces whose parameters may not even suspect. Moreover, this a priori makes experiment very "contaminated". Therefore, I decided that more properly would be instead to look “aether wind”, tool itself to be moved in relation to the surface of the Earth. Thus, comparing the results when the appliance is at rest and in motion, we can be sure that if aether exists, we can establish its presence.
So, the logic of the experiment, which I built, is the following.
Let us imagine a system where at one end a laser is mounted (movie 5/7). The light from a laser beam falls exactly in the center of the screen at the opposite end of the system. If the appliance moved perpendicular to the light beam, in the presence of an aether environment will be a shift of the point at which the beam falls on the screen.
The above considerations call into serious question the correctness of the law of constancy of the speed of light. So I have set about to construct a new experimental launcher, which is not built on the principles of Michelson’s interferometer which relies on the existence of the "aether wind" on Earth in its orbital motion. However, the assumption is very risky, because we cannot be sure how the eventual “aether” will interact with matter, with gravity, and with forces whose parameters may not even suspect. Moreover, this a priori makes experiment very "contaminated". Therefore, I decided that more properly would be instead to look “aether wind”, tool itself to be moved in relation to the surface of the Earth. Thus, comparing the results when the appliance is at rest and in motion, we can be sure that if aether exists, we can establish its presence.
So, the logic of the experiment, which I built, is the following.
Let us imagine a system where at one end a laser is mounted (movie 5/7). The light from a laser beam falls exactly in the center of the screen at the opposite end of the system. If the appliance moved perpendicular to the light beam, in the presence of an aether environment will be a shift of the point at which the beam falls on the screen.
Movie 6/7
For such a shift can be recognized, however, will need super precision equipment, which is not currently within reach of modern technology. Therefore, we will slightly change the system, to monitor the effect. Let us imagine two parallel mirrors, as shown in the movie 6/7. When you run a light beam at an angle to them, the outcome he would fall in point M. When we adduce the system in motion, the point at which the beam will fall in output will move from M to M1.
Movie clip 7/7
Using that logic, I designed the system shown in the movie clip 7/7. A laser beam is sent through a half-silvered mirror that is used to split it into two rays. The first beam is directed between the two mirrors and after multiple reflections within the lens of the interferometer. The second one points straight to the lens of the interferometer, where both rays were recombined through interference. When we start to move the device at a sufficiently high speed, multiple variations in reflections of the (the effect shown in movie 6/7) beam will lead to a shift in the positions of the interference fringes. Of course, if only aether exists. So designed experiment was carried out in terrestrial conditions in a car moving at a speed of 200 kilometers per hour. The obtained result was surprising. The shifts in the positions of the interference fringes indicate that the speed of light is in direct proportion depending on the speed of the receiver.
Of course, I am aware that in terrestrial conditions and at relatively low speed of 200 km per hour, I cannot be completely sure of the outcome of the experiment. However, I am sure of one thing: "This is a pressing need to repeat the experiment in orbital conditions where speed, which can be achieved, is much greater". However, if the result obtained is the same again, I think no one doubts that much of modern physics will have to be revisited.
Using that logic, I designed the system shown in the movie clip 7/7.
A laser beam is sent through a half-silvered mirror that is used to split it into two rays. The first beam is directed between the two mirrors and after multiple reflections within the lens of the interferometer. The second one points straight to the lens of the interferometer, where both rays were recombined through interference. When we start to move the device at a sufficiently high speed, multiple variations in reflections of the (the effect shown in movie 6/7) beam will lead to a shift in the positions of the interference fringes. Of course, if only aether exists.
So designed experiment was carried out in terrestrial conditions in a car moving at a speed of 200 kilometers per hour. The obtained result was surprising. The shifts in the positions of the interference fringes indicate that the speed of light is in direct proportion depending on the speed of the receiver.
Of course, I am aware that in terrestrial conditions and at relatively low speed of 200 km per hour, I cannot be completely sure of the outcome of the experiment. However, I am sure of one thing: "This is a pressing need to repeat the experiment in orbital conditions where speed, which can be achieved, is much greater". However, if the result obtained is the same again, I think no one doubts that much of modern physics will have to be revisited.