i found a word "extinction" in a book "Special Relativity" By French, A.P. 1971. It's written that from the incident light, the glass 0.005cm thick is enough to extinguish the memory of light source's motion. What ?? Is the light speed equalized in the medium ? If so, what about above thought experiment (on pillar made of glass) ? What about Fizeau experiment (Imagine an observer and the glass that move together) ??
It's written also that the air 0.1mm thick is enough to "extinction". Is the result of Michelson-Morley experiment explained (and only this explanation alone is reasonable ??) ? If so, bad dream (But, in encyclopedias of physics, the word "extinction" seems to mean other matter).
In a book "Teoria della relativita" By W.Pauli 1970, it's written as follows. "From view point of an observer who moves with moving medium, light must be considered that it's propagated (in this medium) at the speed c/n (always and to all direction at c/n)" (translated from Japanese edition). In the air, it may be the same. Why it's not an explanation for M-M experiment ? For what reason ? Note : With vacuum, the emission theory copes.
The notion of extinction seems to be about light speed (in the medium), as i expected. In a forum (in English), i was instructed a web-site below (See a heading "Optical Extinction"). i am grateful to Mr.cincirob.
There is Einstein's passage the same as above Pauli's. Therefore (probably) he say he didn't know M-M experiment. He may have no choice (but to say so).
Einstein's passage (the same as above Pauli's) is in his book : [Uber die spezielle und allgemine relativitatstheorie] 1916,1956 (in 1-13 : in this chapter on Fizeau experiment).
In short, he says that in the medium, the medium (very thing) is the reference frame of propagation of light. i repeat, it's the most reasonable explanation for the result of M-M experiment. Therefore, he doesn't want to refer to M-M experiment (probably). He pretends ignorance on it (probably).
i found a word "dispersion" in a book. It's written that light speed in the medium changes in accordance with frequency. It must be influential clearly in the Fizeau experiment. But no book seems to refer to it. Incomprehensible.
Sorry, i made mistake on yesterday's post. In a book (Theory of relativity : by Lajas Janossy), it's written that the result (revised by "dispersion") is published by P Zeeman.
There is a pillar made of glass (laid horizontally). Light ray (emitted from a light source that is fixed at the left end of the pillar) is passing through this glass (from the left to the right). In front of an observer (at a standstill), one pillar is moving to the right and another pillar is moving to the left at the same speed. To an observer, whether speed of light in the glass is different or not ? (How about, if another light source is fixed at the right end ?)
Allow me to rewrite above thought experiment (dated on 13 Oct) please.
There is a pillar made of glass (laid horizontally). A light ray (emitted from a light source that is fixed at the upper face of the glass) is propagated through the glass like letter V (reflected by a mirror : 30 degrees : from the left to the right). In front of an observer (at a stand-still), one pillar is moving to the right, another pillar is moving to the left at the same speed. To an observer, whether speed of light in the glass is different or not ? [Postscript] Galileo transformation seems to stand up. [Postscript] If another light ray is propagated from the right to the left (on the same path) ?
This is a thought experiment on Fizeau experiment. There is a pillar made of glass (laid horizontally). In this pillar, two laser lights (are propagated to the right and the left) are crossing like letter X. The state of interference fringes may be the same to all (including the one who moves relative to the pillar).
