info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
THE SPEED OF LIGHT IS NOT A CONSTANT
17 views
Skip to first unread message
Pentcho Valev
Jan 23, 2015, 12:29:57 PM1/23/15
to
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rM-fGNxxmSE
"A team of Scottish scientists has made light rays travel slower than the speed of light."
That is the end of Einstein of course but the fact that the speed of light is not constant has been obvious from the very beginning. It is easy to see that the speed of photons (relative to the observer) varies with the speed of the observer, as predicted by Newton's emission theory of light and in violation of Einstein's relativity. Consider a light source emitting a series of pulses the distance between which is d (e.g. d = 300000 km). A stationary observer (receiver) measures the frequency of the pulses to be f = c/d:
http://www.einstein-online.info/images/spotlights/doppler/doppler_static.gif
The observer starts moving with (small) speed v towards the light source - the measured frequency shifts from f = c/d to f' = (c+v)/d (Doppler effect):
http://www.einstein-online.info/images/spotlights/doppler/doppler_detector_blue.gif
Question: Why does the frequency shift from f = c/d to f' = (c+v)/d ?
Answer 1 (fatal for Einstein's relativity): Because the speed of the pulses relative to the observer shifts from c to c' = c+v.
Answer 2 (possibly saving Einstein's relativity): Because...
There is no reasonable statement that could become Answer 2.
"A team of Scottish scientists has made light rays travel slower than the speed of light."
That is the end of Einstein of course but the fact that the speed of light is not constant has been obvious from the very beginning. It is easy to see that the speed of photons (relative to the observer) varies with the speed of the observer, as predicted by Newton's emission theory of light and in violation of Einstein's relativity. Consider a light source emitting a series of pulses the distance between which is d (e.g. d = 300000 km). A stationary observer (receiver) measures the frequency of the pulses to be f = c/d:
http://www.einstein-online.info/images/spotlights/doppler/doppler_static.gif
The observer starts moving with (small) speed v towards the light source - the measured frequency shifts from f = c/d to f' = (c+v)/d (Doppler effect):
http://www.einstein-online.info/images/spotlights/doppler/doppler_detector_blue.gif
Question: Why does the frequency shift from f = c/d to f' = (c+v)/d ?
Answer 1 (fatal for Einstein's relativity): Because the speed of the pulses relative to the observer shifts from c to c' = c+v.
Answer 2 (possibly saving Einstein's relativity): Because...
There is no reasonable statement that could become Answer 2.
Pentcho Valev
Jan 24, 2015, 4:02:37 AM1/24/15
to
http://phys.org/news/2015-01-physicists-air.html
"Everyone knows that the speed of light in a vacuum is constant, but now it appears that there is a way to indirectly alter its speed - by running it through a special mask. Doing so apparently causes a change to the shape of the photon, making it move through a vacuum slower than an unaltered photon. (...) The mask, they explain, caused some of the photons in the group to move at a slight angle to the other's causing a slowdown for the group as a whole. Thus, their results are not going to upend one of the basic tenets of modern physics, it is more likely that future researchers will have to make sure lab or astronomical observations are not being impacted by shape changes that occur naturally."
Poor Einsteinians are desperately trying to save Einstein's relativity but are still hinting that light from astronomical objects might not be coming to us at the same speed.
Pentcho Valev
"Everyone knows that the speed of light in a vacuum is constant, but now it appears that there is a way to indirectly alter its speed - by running it through a special mask. Doing so apparently causes a change to the shape of the photon, making it move through a vacuum slower than an unaltered photon. (...) The mask, they explain, caused some of the photons in the group to move at a slight angle to the other's causing a slowdown for the group as a whole. Thus, their results are not going to upend one of the basic tenets of modern physics, it is more likely that future researchers will have to make sure lab or astronomical observations are not being impacted by shape changes that occur naturally."
Poor Einsteinians are desperately trying to save Einstein's relativity but are still hinting that light from astronomical objects might not be coming to us at the same speed.
Pentcho Valev
Pentcho Valev
Jan 24, 2015, 7:54:15 PM1/24/15
to
http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2015/01/23/Scientists-slow-down-light-particles/1191422035480/
"The speed of light is a limit, not a constant - that's what researchers in Glasgow, Scotland, say. A group of them just proved that light can be slowed down, permanently."
http://phys.org/news/2015-01-physicists-air.html
"Everyone knows that the speed of light in a vacuum is constant, but now it appears that there is a way to indirectly alter its speed - by running it through a special mask. (...) ...future researchers will have to make sure lab or astronomical observations are not being impacted by shape changes that occur naturally."
Halton Arp would have been very interested in the mask effect - it could explain the anomalous redshift observations:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mf5y6PJR5lE
Halton Arp : victim of RATIONAL Scientific society
Pentcho Valev
"The speed of light is a limit, not a constant - that's what researchers in Glasgow, Scotland, say. A group of them just proved that light can be slowed down, permanently."
http://phys.org/news/2015-01-physicists-air.html
"Everyone knows that the speed of light in a vacuum is constant, but now it appears that there is a way to indirectly alter its speed - by running it through a special mask. (...) ...future researchers will have to make sure lab or astronomical observations are not being impacted by shape changes that occur naturally."
Halton Arp would have been very interested in the mask effect - it could explain the anomalous redshift observations:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mf5y6PJR5lE
Halton Arp : victim of RATIONAL Scientific society
Pentcho Valev
Pentcho Valev
Jan 26, 2015, 2:30:52 PM1/26/15
to
http://www.gla.ac.uk/news/headline_388852_en.html
"The work demonstrates that, after passing the light beam through a mask, photons move more slowly through space."
If something (the mask) can decrease the speed of photons, it is reasonable to assume that something else (quantum vacuum) can also do so:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20927994.100-vacuum-has-friction-after-all.html
NewScientist: "Vacuum has friction after all"
http://www.eleceng.adelaide.edu.au/thz/documents/davies_2001_cha.pdf
Paul Davies: "As pointed out by DeWitt, the quantum vacuum is in some respects reminiscent of the aether, and in what follows it may be helpful to think of space-time as filled with a type of invisible fluid medium, representing a seething background of vacuum fluctuations. Although the mechanical properties of this medium can be strange, and the image should not be pushed too far, it is sometimes helpful to envisage this "quantum aether" as possessing a type of viscosity."
http://www.nature.com/news/superfluid-spacetime-points-to-unification-of-physics-1.15437
Nature | Scientific American: "As waves travel through a medium, they lose energy over time. This dampening effect would also happen to photons traveling through spacetime, the researchers found."
Loss of energy/speed is the only reasonable cause for the Hubble redshift (in a static universe). Slowly but surely the Big Bang money-spinner is approaching its collapse.
Pentcho Valev
"The work demonstrates that, after passing the light beam through a mask, photons move more slowly through space."
If something (the mask) can decrease the speed of photons, it is reasonable to assume that something else (quantum vacuum) can also do so:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20927994.100-vacuum-has-friction-after-all.html
NewScientist: "Vacuum has friction after all"
http://www.eleceng.adelaide.edu.au/thz/documents/davies_2001_cha.pdf
Paul Davies: "As pointed out by DeWitt, the quantum vacuum is in some respects reminiscent of the aether, and in what follows it may be helpful to think of space-time as filled with a type of invisible fluid medium, representing a seething background of vacuum fluctuations. Although the mechanical properties of this medium can be strange, and the image should not be pushed too far, it is sometimes helpful to envisage this "quantum aether" as possessing a type of viscosity."
http://www.nature.com/news/superfluid-spacetime-points-to-unification-of-physics-1.15437
Nature | Scientific American: "As waves travel through a medium, they lose energy over time. This dampening effect would also happen to photons traveling through spacetime, the researchers found."
Loss of energy/speed is the only reasonable cause for the Hubble redshift (in a static universe). Slowly but surely the Big Bang money-spinner is approaching its collapse.
Pentcho Valev
Pentcho Valev
Jan 27, 2015, 8:35:37 PM1/27/15
to
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/417655/scitech/science/exclusive-this-pinay-physicist-can-slow-down-light-without-touching-it
"Although the maximum speed of light is a cosmological constant - made famous by Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity and E=mc^2 - it can, in fact, be slowed down: that's what optics do."
In Big Brother's world: Although 2+2=5 is an absolute truth - made famous by Big Brother's theory of arithmetic - 2+2=4 is also true: that's what experience says.
http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/o/orwell/george/o79n/chapter1.7.html
"In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable what then?"
Pentcho Valev
"Although the maximum speed of light is a cosmological constant - made famous by Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity and E=mc^2 - it can, in fact, be slowed down: that's what optics do."
In Big Brother's world: Although 2+2=5 is an absolute truth - made famous by Big Brother's theory of arithmetic - 2+2=4 is also true: that's what experience says.
http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/o/orwell/george/o79n/chapter1.7.html
"In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable what then?"
Pentcho Valev
Pentcho Valev
Jan 31, 2015, 7:55:13 PM1/31/15
to
Light in vacuum can be slowed but Divine Albert's Divine Theory remains unaffected:
http://skullsinthestars.com/2015/01/31/so-whats-up-with-that-slower-than-light-light/
"There is no fundamental rewriting of Einstein's relativity or even, in general, significant changes to the speed of light. (...) So what is new about this experiment? In it, the researchers measured the speed of single photons that had been appropriately structured, and found that single photons are also slowed."
Similar wisdom:
http://o.castera.free.fr/pdf/One_more_derivation.pdf
Jean-Marc Levy-Leblond: "The evidence of the nonzero mass of the photon would not, as such, shake in any way the validity of the special relalivity. It would, however, nullify all its derivations which are based on the invariance of the photon velocity."
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20026801.500-why-einstein-was-wrong-about-relativity.html
Why Einstein was wrong about relativity, 29 October 2008, Mark Buchanan, NEW SCIENTIST: "...a photon with mass would not necessarily always travel at the same speed. Feigenbaum's work shows how, contrary to many physicists' beliefs, this need not be a problem for relativity."
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.research/msg/44d3ebf3b94d89ad
Tom Roberts: "As I said before, Special Relativity would not be affected by a non-zero photon mass, as Einstein's second postulate is not required in a modern derivation (using group theory one obtains three related theories, two of which are solidly refuted experimentally and the third is SR). So today's foundations of modern physics would not be threatened."
Suitable hymns:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lE-I2I4i00
DIVINE EINSTEIN. "No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein not Maxwell, Curie, or Bohr! His fame went glo-bell, he won the Nobel - He should have been given four! No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein, Professor with brains galore! No-one could outshine Professor Einstein! He gave us special relativity, That's always made him a hero to me! No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein, Professor in overdrive!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PkLLXhONvQ
We all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. Yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. Everything is relative, even simultaneity, and soon Einstein's become a de facto physics deity. 'cos we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. We all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. Yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity.
Pentcho Valev
http://skullsinthestars.com/2015/01/31/so-whats-up-with-that-slower-than-light-light/
"There is no fundamental rewriting of Einstein's relativity or even, in general, significant changes to the speed of light. (...) So what is new about this experiment? In it, the researchers measured the speed of single photons that had been appropriately structured, and found that single photons are also slowed."
Similar wisdom:
http://o.castera.free.fr/pdf/One_more_derivation.pdf
Jean-Marc Levy-Leblond: "The evidence of the nonzero mass of the photon would not, as such, shake in any way the validity of the special relalivity. It would, however, nullify all its derivations which are based on the invariance of the photon velocity."
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20026801.500-why-einstein-was-wrong-about-relativity.html
Why Einstein was wrong about relativity, 29 October 2008, Mark Buchanan, NEW SCIENTIST: "...a photon with mass would not necessarily always travel at the same speed. Feigenbaum's work shows how, contrary to many physicists' beliefs, this need not be a problem for relativity."
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.research/msg/44d3ebf3b94d89ad
Tom Roberts: "As I said before, Special Relativity would not be affected by a non-zero photon mass, as Einstein's second postulate is not required in a modern derivation (using group theory one obtains three related theories, two of which are solidly refuted experimentally and the third is SR). So today's foundations of modern physics would not be threatened."
Suitable hymns:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lE-I2I4i00
DIVINE EINSTEIN. "No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein not Maxwell, Curie, or Bohr! His fame went glo-bell, he won the Nobel - He should have been given four! No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein, Professor with brains galore! No-one could outshine Professor Einstein! He gave us special relativity, That's always made him a hero to me! No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein, Professor in overdrive!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PkLLXhONvQ
We all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. Yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. Everything is relative, even simultaneity, and soon Einstein's become a de facto physics deity. 'cos we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. We all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. Yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity.
Pentcho Valev
0 new messages