# Analysis of the experiments “One-way measurement of the speed of light”

This webpage is a part of the published article “The Complete Set of Proofs for the Invalidity of the Special Theory of Relativity” in the Journal of Modern and Applied Physics.

#### Abstract

This page analyzes the experiments “One-way measurement of the speed of light”, which use the latest technological advances today. The results of all experiments show that the measured velocity of light in “East-to-West” direction is higher, and in the direction “West-to-East” is lower than the speed of the light in vacuum. The difference is equal to the linear velocity of the Earth’s surface at the latitude where the experiment is carried out. The so-named by modern physics “anisotropy of the speed of light”, in fact undoubtedly demonstrates that the speed of light in vacuum (in the reference system related to the stationary space) differs from the measured speed of light in the frame of reference related to the moving Earth’s surface. It means that the measured speed of light is not the same for all inertial systems, which is the basis of the special theory of relativity.

Content of the webpage:

1. The case “Eastward Transmission”. Analysis of the results of the measurement of the velocity of the electromagnetic signal by observers located in the two considered frames of reference

2. The case “Westward Transmission”. Analysis of the results of the measurement of the velocity of an electromagnetic signal by observers located in the two considered frames of reference

3. Conclusion

Newton’s law of universal gravitation states that in the Universe, any particle or body with a mass m1 attracts any other particle or body (with a mass m2) with a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses (m1 and m2), and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between their centers (r), where G is the gravitational constant:

The “empty space” does not have mass. Therefore, from Newton’s law of universal gravitation, it becomes clear that the “empty space” is stationary – that the vacuum is stationary. This is undeniable because the “empty space” is without mass and therefore gravitational forces do not attract it (the space does not rotate together with the Earth’s surface – only material bodies and molecules in the atmosphere are involved in the rotation).

The celestial bodies rotate into the surrounded stationary space and the measured speed of light in the frame of reference related to the Earth’s surface differs in directions “East-to-West” and “West-to-East” from the speed of light in vacuum and the difference is equal to the linear speed of the Earth’s surface at the latitude where the experiment is carried out.

However, the speed of light in vacuum depends on the intensity of the gravitational field and is constant in regions with a uniform intensity of gravitational field (like the region “near the Earth’s surface”).

The speed of light in vacuum “near the surface of the celestial body” remains practically the same during the travel of the celestial body through space because the intensity of the gravitational field is constant and is determined (dominated) by the mass of the celestial body. The speed of light in vacuum (in stationary “empty space”), in any particular time-spatial domain near a celestial body, is a local constant and remains practically the same during the travel of the celestial body through space:

Therefore, that is the reason why there is no variation in “the speed of light in vacuum when the Earth moves in orbit around the Sun and together with the Solar System in the Galaxy.

Actually, there are no “unexpected” or “inexplicable” results from the experiments related to the behavior and measurement of the speed of light carried out in the time-spatial region “near the surface of the Earth”. Moreover, the analyses of the “One-way Measurement of the Speed of Light” and “Michelson-Gale-Pearson” experiment, indisputably prove that the speed of light in the frame of reference, related to the moving Earth’s surface, differs from the speed of light in vacuum (related practically in this case to the “Earth-Centered Inertial (ECI) coordinate system”). The undeniable fact that the measured speed of light is not the same for all inertial frames of reference was proven as early as 1912 by the Sagnac experiment (see the analysis of the Sagnac experiment). The Michelson-Morley experiment is an exception because of the inappropriate conceptual design embedded in the construction of the Michelson interferometer. A real explanation of the Michelson-Morley experiment is presented in this sub-page.

The Global Positioning System (GPS), is a satellite-based radionavigation system that provides high-accuracy geolocation and time information anywhere on or near the Earth where there is an unobstructed line of sight to four or more GPS satellites.

Based on the GPS, Marmet makes measurements and reports in “GPS and the Constant Velocity of Light” that an electromagnetic signal takes about 28 nanoseconds longer when traveling eastward from San Francisco to New York than when traveling westward from New York to San Francisco (Marmet, 2000). Using GPS, Kelly also determined that an electromagnetic signal takes 414.8 nanoseconds more time to circumnavigate the Earth eastward near the equator than when traveling westward around the same path (Kelly, 2005). Both researchers concluded that the observed travel-time differences in different directions arise, because the electromagnetic radiation (the light) travels relative to the surface of the Earth at a speed (c-V) eastward, and at a speed (c+V) westward, where V is the linear speed of the Earth’s surface at the respective latitude, and c is the speed of light in vacuum.

Now we will analyze in the two aforementioned reference systems, both of the cases – the case “Eastward Transmission” and the case “Westward Transmission”. In both cases, the transmitter and the receiver are fixed on the Earth’s surface and are stationary in the reference system related to the Earth’s surface.

What the observers will see (located in the two aforementioned frames of reference)?

For the observer, situated in the frame of reference related to the Earth’s surface, the transmitting and receiving stations, fixed on the Earth’s surface, are stationary.

However, the observer situated in the approximately stationary in relation to the space ECI coordinate system, will observe how the Earth is rotating and that every point of the Earth’s surface is moving. They will see that the transmitting and receiving stations, positioned steadily on the ground surface, move eastward (along with the ground surface), at the linear speed V for the respective latitude.

1. The case “Eastward Transmission”. Analysis of the results of the measurement of the speed of an electromagnetic signal by observers located in the two frames of reference.

The case “Eastward Transmission”. Receiving station B is located precisely east of station A. Let the fixed position of station A and the fixed position of station B on the Earth’s surface at moment t are XA(t) and XB(t), respectively. The ground distance between station A and station B is equal to D.

Station A transmits an electromagnetic signal (light beam) eastward at time tI to station B, which receives it at time tF. The time interval of the light beam travel is (tF – tI). During this time interval, each point of the Earth’s surface has moved in the stationary space at a distance Δ=V(tF – tI), where V is the linear velocity of the Earth’s surface in the stationary space for the respective latitude.

#### Analysis of the results of the measurement of the speed of the electromagnetic signal (or of a light beam) by observers located in the two aforementioned frames of reference.

•  In the stationary in relation to the spaceEarth-centered inertial coordinate system” (the ECI frame of reference).

Observer-1, llocated in the frame of reference “stationary empty space”, will see how the fixed-on-the-ground transmission and reception stations are moving eastward in the stationary space with the linear speed V of the Earth’s surface for the respective latitude.

Observer -1 will find that the electromagnetic signal passes in the stationary “empty space” a definite distance – from position XA(tI) of station A at the moment of transmission tI to position XB(tF) of station B at the moment of receiving tF (see Fig. 4.1). They will measure that the distance travelled by the electromagnetic signal is equal to the distance between the two stations D on the ground, plus the distance Δ=V(tF – tI), which station B passes during the travel-time of the electromagnetic signal (tF – tI) with the speed V (the linear speed of the Earth’s surface in the stationary space at the respective latitude).

Therefore, observer-1 (located in the stationary in relation to the space frame of reference), measures the speed of the electromagnetic signal (which can be a light beam) and confirms that it is equal to c (the speed of light in vacuum):

In the frame of reference, related to the Earth’s surface.

Observer -2, positioned on the Earth’s surface, will see that the electromagnetic signal passes for the same interval of time (tF – tI), exactly the distance D (the distance between the fixed on the ground transmission and reception stations). Therefore, observer-2 (located in the frame of reference, related to the Earth’s surface), will measure the speed of the electromagnetic signal (or of the light beam) and obtain

Obviously, the measured speed by observer-2 is lower than the measured by the observer-1 (equation (3)), and the difference is equal to the linear velocity of the Earth’s surface at the respective latitude:

This theoretical result corresponds exactly to the results of the above-mentioned experiments made by Marmet and Kelly, using GPS:

the measured velocity of the electromagnetic signals in the reference system related to the Earth’s surface in the direction “from West to East” is equal to c2 = (cvacuum – V), where cvacuum is the speed of light in vacuum, and V is the linear speed of the Earth’s surface in the stationary space at the respective latitude.

2. The case “Westward Transmission”. Analysis of the results of the measurement of the speed of an electromagnetic signal by observers located in the two  frames of reference

The case “Westward Transmission”. The scenario is the same:

Station A transmits an electromagnetic signal (light beam) at time tI, but now westward to station B, which receives it at time tF. During this time interval, each point on the Earth’s surface promotes in stationary space at a distance Δ=V(tF – tI), where V is the linear speed for the corresponding latitude. The travel time interval of the signal is (tF – tI), but it is smaller than the travel time interval (tF – tI) of the electromagnetic signal in the case of “Eastward Transmission”. This is because, in this case, the receiving station approaches the transmitting station (not moves away from it):

#### Analysis of the results of the measurement of the speed of the electromagnetic signal (or of the light beam) by observers located in the two aforementioned frames of reference.

•  In the stationary in relation to the space “Earth-centered inertial coordinate system” (the ECI frame of reference).

Observer-1, situated in the stationary in relation to the space frame of reference, will see again that the fixed on the ground transmission and reception stations are moving eastward in the stationary space at the linear speed V of the surface of the Earth for the corresponding latitude. However, in this case, they will find that the distance, traveled by the electromagnetic signal, will be equal to the distance D between the two stations on the ground, minus the distance Δ=V(tF – tI). Here, Δ is the distance that station B passes during the travel-time of the electromagnetic signal (tF – tI) with the linear speed V of the Earth’s surface in the stationary space at the respective latitude.

Therefore, observer-1, situated in the stationary (in relation to the surrounding space) frame of reference, will measure the speed of the electromagnetic signal (the light beam) and will confirm again that it is equal to cvacuum (the speed of light in vacuum):

•  In the frame of reference, related to the Earth’s surface:

Observer-2, positioned on the Earth’s surface, will see again that the electromagnetic signal will pass for the same interval of time (tF – tI) exactly the distance D (the distance between the fixed on the ground transmission and reception stations). Therefore, observer-2 (located in the frame of reference, related to the Earth’s surface), will measure a higher speed of the electromagnetic signal (or of the light beam):

Obviously, the speed measured by observer-2 (equation (7)) is greater than that measured by observer-1 (equation (6)), and the difference with the speed of light in vacuum is again equal to the linear speed of the Earth’s surface in the stationary space at the respective latitude:

This theoretical result again accurately corresponds to the results of the above-mentioned experiments performed by Marmet and Kelly, using GPS data, which revealed the following:

The measured speed of the electromagnetic signals in the reference system related to the Earth’s surface in the direction “from east to west” is equal to c2=(cvacuum +V),

where cvacuum is the speed of light in vacuum, and V is the linear speed of the Earth’s surface in the stationary space at the respective latitude.

3. Conclusion

The experiments “One-way measurement of the speed of light” are actually irrefutable proof that the measured speed of light in a local time-spatial region with a uniform intensity of the gravitational field is not the same for all inertial frames of reference.

On the experiments “One-way measurement of the speed of light”:

Modern physics is trying to accept the unacceptable “logical circular reference” – claiming that the “one-way” measurement of the speed of light from source to detector cannot be measured independently of a convention on how to synchronize the clocks of the source and detector! Here it is essential to realize that if we choose a suitable convention for synchronizing the source clock and the detector clock (which, of course, will not correspond to physical reality), it can be “mathematically proven” not only that the measured speed of light in the east-west and west-east direction is the same, but also anything we would want!

Many scientists have given evidence that the “Light Speed Invariance is a Remarkable Illusion” (Gift, 2010). However, this is avoided from being formally discussed by physical society.

Nowadays, the value of the speed of light in vacuum is recommended by the CGPM (Conférence Générale des Poids et Mesures), in the following way:

“[CGPM] recommends the use of the resulting value for the speed of propagation of electromagnetic waves in vacuum c = 299 792 458 metres per second.” (15th meeting of the CGPM, Resolution 2, 1975).

An important NOTE can be made to BIPM (Bureau international des poids et mesures):

It is clear that if we are located on the Earth’s surface (in the frame of reference related to the Earth’s surface) and we have to measure the “speed of light in vacuum”: it must take the arithmetic mean of the measured speed of light in two opposite directions (from East to West) and (from West to East).

This note also relates to the currently accepted definition of the base unit of length “meter” through the speed of light:

“The metre is the length of the path traveled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299 792 458 of a second.” (17th meeting of the CGPM, Resolution 1, 1983).

CONSEQUENCE. The definition of the base unit of length “meter” through the unregulated measurement of the speed of light in vacuum, carries the problem over the whole area of applied physics and technology!

=> to the parent webpage

If you haven’t read the analysis of the “Sagnac experiment” yet, it is worth to read it here!

If you haven’t read the analyses of the “Michelson-Gale-Pearson” experiment yet, it is worth to read it here!

Revealing the fact concerning the inappropriate conceptual design, embedded in the construction of the Michelson interferometer, however, indisputably shows that the claim “the speed of light is the same in all inertial frames of reference” is a great delusion and the “Michelson-Morley experiment” is actually the primary root cause for the biggest blunder in physics of the 20th century – the special theory of relativity.

Furthermore, the analysis of the article “On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies”, where Einstein published the special theory of relativity shows exactly where and how the claim “the speed of light is the same in all inertial frames of reference” was applied …