Abstract
THE chief objection which can be raised at the present time to the hypothesis of a continuous decrease of the velocity of light is that it is only justified if we admit that the work of Michelson and Newcomb in the last century is unreliable. Now, their determinations made in 1882 agree so closely, although made independently, with different instruments and a somewhat different technique, that, in my opinion, they are probably very accurate.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Astr. Nachr., No. 5520: 1927. L'Astronomie, November 1927.
NATURE, 133, 759, May 19, 1934.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
DE BRAY, M. Velocity of Light. Nature 133, 948–949 (1934). https://doi.org/10.1038/133948c0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/133948c0
This article is cited by
-
Failures of the global measurement system. Part 2: institutions, instruments and strategy
Accreditation and Quality Assurance (2010)
-
The Velocity of Light
Nature (1934)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.
