The "failure" of Michelson Morley 1880s was spectacurely explained by the real conntraction of one of the arms of the interferometer according to the Fitzgerald-Lorentz length contraction.
If the contraction is a visual illusion and not a real contraction, how then can MM1880s be explained?
All the observers of the MM1880s interferometer experiments were stationary with the interferometer. The interferometer could not be relatively contracted whether the contraction is a real contraction according to Lorentz or a visual illusion according to Einstein.
Read my lips. The arm could not be observed to be contracted by observers stationary with the interferometer.
And especially if the contraction was a visual illusion caused by deviations of photon travel time.
Right, Pete?
Right, James R?
If the contraction is a visual illusion and not a real contraction, how then can MM1880s be explained?
All the observers of the MM1880s interferometer experiments were stationary with the interferometer. The interferometer could not be relatively contracted whether the contraction is a real contraction according to Lorentz or a visual illusion according to Einstein.
Read my lips. The arm could not be observed to be contracted by observers stationary with the interferometer.
And especially if the contraction was a visual illusion caused by deviations of photon travel time.
Right, Pete?
Right, James R?