Page:RayleighRefraction1902.djvu/6

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been validated.
the Æther cause Double Refraction?
683

is 1.2 × 10-10. The effect to be expected is of the order 10-8, so that there is nearly 100 times to spare. The above relates to the bisulphide of carbon. With the water the delicacy of the test was somewhat less.

When it is attempted to replace the liquid by solid matter, the difficulties of experiment are greatly increased. The best results that I have been able to obtain were with built up thicknesses of plate-glass. A sufficient thickness in one piece is liable to exhibit too much double refraction from the effect of internal strains. A number of triangular pieces of plate-glass, no larger than necessary, and about 6 mm. thick, were put together in a trough to a total thickness of about 110 mm. The interstices between the faces being filled up with bisulphide of carbon, the internal reflexions were sufficiently reduced. One difficulty is to get quit of motes and threads which adhere to the glass and become extraordinarily conspicuous. Advantage was thought to be derived from shaking up the bisulphide of carbon with strong sulphuric acid. At the best the residual motes and specks in the glass interfere very seriously with the observation, and the loss of light due to imperfect transparency operates in the same direction. The least load upon the upright strip that could be detected with certainty was now 100 grms., so that as compared with the observations upon liquid there was a loss of delicacy of four times. In addition to this, the effect to be expected is reduced in the proportion of 7:1, that being the ratio of lengths traversed by the light. Thus in all we lose 28 times as compared with the liquid. In the latter case we calculated a margin of 100 times, so that here there would remain a margin of about 3 times

A subsequent attempt was made to increase the total thickness of the combined glasses to about 220 mm., but no real advantage was gained. The loss of light and increase of disturbance from motes and residual double refraction prejudiced the delicacy in about the same proportion as the length of path was increased.

But although the results of the observations upon solids are very much less satisfactory than in the case of liquids, enough remains to justify us in concluding that even here there is no double refraction (of the order to be expected) due to motion through the aether.

Terling Place, Witham.