[Physics] Constant light speed

[Tufail Abbas]

Tom,


Off-course, meaning of constancy speed of light is not so straightforward.

Constant speed of light has its roots in Maxwell equations, which is
inverse of c squared is equal to product of permittivity and permeability.
If c is variable then permeability and permittivity should also vary.
Before we declare that speed of light is not constant, we need a consistent
explanation along with implication of this variability of c over
permittivity and  permeability. Assuming that we do not have a consistent
explanation (or if you have then please share), we can only discuss the
meaning of this constant speed, and in this context di-sitter experiment
seems to be meaningful. Where we discuss velocity the first question that
is obvious is with respect to what. And here are some  statements trying to
find the answer to this question, to which I have commented below:

>>>>But if light is a constant WRT the medium or the gravitational field of
any nearby object, then the two stars would be seen in their "correct"
places at all times.


So speed of light is constant wrt medium( which is different from
gravitational field as per my point of view). Source and receiver made of
matter are both effectively at rest wrt background medium. This perfectly
explains the constancy. Speed of A(matter) wrt B(medium) is zero, speed of
C(light) wrt B is c. Hence speed of A wrt C is also c. I agree that this
bizarre effective rest , needs a physical explanation. But definitely an
intuitive explanation  exists for such a bizarre state of rest, despite the
relative velocity of motion.

>>>>The beam from the moving laser strikes the glass at a higher velocity
and its light waves will appear to have a frequency 10% higher. This
frequency will be preserved throughout the process. And the observer will
see the moving laser beam as having a higher frequency – a Doppler shift!
But the final velocity of both beams will be the same: c.

So the important point here is the variance of frewuency or energy content
per unit time. Let me try to explain, how this could happen. Let the
source(star) emits a constant amount of energy per unit area per unit time
t’, which is constant for all source, irrespective of the observed frequency
. Instead of thinking of Doppler Effect to possibly change the relative
travelling speed similar to the  case of sound waves, here the source can
be modelled as emitting photons consisting of sub-energy packets. All
energy sub-packets are released wrt medium at the instanraneous position of
source. So if the source is moving away, then number of energy sub-packets
travelling per unit length toward the receiver will reduce. These energy
sub-packets will be received by source into a packet of single photon
collected over a constant period of time t’. Time frequency 1/t’ of all
photons is same. What we see in equation hf, is measure of space frequency.
Long ago I answered this question on Quora.

https://www.quora.com/Why-does-a-strong-gravity-slow-down-time/answer/Tufail-Abbas-1


The answer though is not accurate but it only draws analogies, so not to be
taken too literally, but it gives an idea about what I am saying about
sub-packets. If the logic seems plausible or otherwise if it create more
doubts , then please provide feedback

Regards,

Tufail


On Jun 11, 2017 10:39 PM, "carmam at tiscali.co.uk" <carmam at tiscali.co.uk>
wrote:

Tufail, I disagree that the constancy of the speed of light has been
proved. It has only been inferred. Einstein's famous "trick" was to make
the speed of light a constant by decree, and then to measure everything
against that constancy (that standard). That trick forces us to measure
light as having a constant speed. Yet even relativists say that the speed
of light in a gravitational field varies - the stronger the field, the
slower the light. So even a relativist must admit that as light from a
distant star travels through the cosmos, passing stars or other large
masses on its way (to us), it must slow down and speed up. If it passes
close enough to a star, it will also bend. This bending can be simply the
star's corona (atmosphere) refracting the light, and we have plenty of
evidence of that here on Earth as we watch the sunset, and the changing
colours, especially the elusive green flash as the sun finally disappears.
If we are watching light from a distant star passing a closer one, the
light is refracted twice, once on the way in to the closer star, and once
again in the opposite sense when leaving the closer star. The net result is
cohesive light.
Experiments which "prove" that lightspeed is constant do no such thing, as
other effects can account for the same result. The one experiment which
sticks out in my mind in this matter is de Sitter's double star effect,
where it is said that if light was not a constant, then the light from both
the receding and approaching star would be seen together. They are not.
They are seen in their "correct" places. But if light is a constant WRT the
medium or the gravitational field of any nearby object, then the two stars
would be seen in their "correct" places at all times. If you are not
convinced by this, for a better and clearer understanding than my short
explanation above, go to :- http://www.alternativephysics.
org/book/DeSitterEffect.htm, an excellent web site by Bernard Burchell.

Tom Hollings.


----Original Message----
From: tufail.abbas at gmail.com
Date: 10/06/2017 19:21
To: "General Physics and Natural Philosophy discussion list"<physics at tuks.nl>,
<carmam at tiscali.co.uk>
Subj: Re: [Physics] gravity is NOT a force

Tom, please excuse me for a bit different description as I do not agree
with variation in speed of light. Constancy of speed of light has been
proved through many experiments, so I would prefer to discuss only about
meaning of this constancy. We are aware of so many different kind of
fields. I simply put them into two different category:

ANISOTROPIC FIELDS: Gravitational Field, Electromagnetic Field, Strong
Force Field, Weak Force Field.

THE ISOTROPIC FIELD: Yet undiscovered and/or not understood. It is only of
one kind, since we cannot have two different kind of Isotropy, similar to
the  argument that we cannot have two different kind of perfect
transparency. It can either be coloured or perfectly transparent. Since we
have not understood this field, we speculate our amazement with different
names: Aether,  Higgs Field, Spacetime, Isotropic Continuum, etc.

All Anisotropic Fields are local distortion of The Isotropic Field, caused
by  matter particles which is the source of local distortion/anisotropy. Or
in other worlds all fields(including The Isotropic Field) are not different
from matter particles but they are part of it. They are all extension of
matter particles. Similar is the case with photon (e/m field) , which has
no independent existence separate from matter.

Due to dynamic interaction between the extensions of matter particles,
 matter particles are always effectively at rest wrt large scale Isotropic
field. And extensions are always moving at velocity c wrt same  Isotropic
Field. So speed of light (extension) is constant with respect to matter
(source).

Regards,

Tufail Abbas
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.tuks.nl/pipermail/physics/attachments/20170612/f8b26dc8/attachment.html>