@@deepbean Infinite field speeds are possible, including the speed of nearfield light!! Fields like: nearfield gravity, magnetic field, electric field, and even nearfield light are all instantaneous, and they are completely incompatible with Relativity, which says nothing travels faster than light. The main problem is that it invalidates the Relativity of Simultaneity argument. This is because instantaneous fields propagate instantaneously to all inertial reference frames, thereby preserving simultaneity in all the frames. If you look at the Lorentz transforms and make c=infinity, then gamma equals one, and the Lorentz transforms becomes the Galilean transform, where space and time are independent and absolute, and space and time are the same in all inertial frames of reference. Relativity is just an optical illusion, and because all of modern physics is based on Relativity, modern physics is fundamentally wrong and needs to be rethought. Relativity has a simple built in logical fallacy, and no theory based on a logical fallacy can be true, no matter how many experiments seem to prove it, or how many people say it is true. Below is a very simple logical argument highlighting the logical fallacy, using the same terminology Einstein used to derive Relativity. According to Relativity, observers on a moving train and on a stationary train platform will disagree on the size of the ""Train"" and the passage of time on the ""Train"". This is a complete logical contradiction if the size and the passage of time of the train are real. If the size of the train is real, then the ""Train"" can not be both contracted and not contracted. The same goes for the observed passage of time on the ""Train"". If these effects are observed, then the only possible conclusion is that it is an optical illusion. Things that are real must appear to be same from all frames of reference. If not, then by definition it is an illusion. Again the argument is very simple and it is the argument Einstein used to derive Relativity, and no acceleration is used in the argument. A train with length (L) traveling at constant velocity (v) relative a stationary observer on a station platform. According to Relativity, the stationary observer will see the train contracted (L/r, where r is the Relativistic gamma), whereas an observer on the train will see it not contracted (L). So the train is both contracted (L/r) and not contracted (L) depending on the observer. This is a complete contradiction (L not equal L/r) and can not be true if length is real. The same argument applies to passage of time on the Train, where both observers will disagree on the passage of time. If time is real, it can not be both dilated and not dilated (T not equal rT). If space and time are observed to be both large and small simultaneously for one inertial reference frame, such as the ""Train"", then it must be an optical illusion. This argument is only the tip of the iceberg. There is much more evidence including both theoretical and experimental, so please keep reading. Hi my name is Dr William Walker and I am a PhD physicist and have been investigating this topic for 30 years. It has been known since the late 1700s by Simone LaPlace that nearfield Gravity is instantaneous by analyzing the stability of the orbits of the planets about the sun. This is actually predicted by General Relativity by analyzing the propagating fields generated by an oscillating mass. In addition, General Relativity predicts that in the farfield Gravity propagates at the speed of light. The farfield speed of gravity was recently confirmed by LIGO. Recently it has been shown that light behaves in the same way by using Maxwell's equations to analyze the propagating fields generated my an oscillating charge. For more information search: William Walker Superluminal. This was experimentally confirmed by measuring radio waves propagating between 2 antennas and separating the antennas from the nearfield to the farfield, which occurs about 1 wavelength from the source. This behavior of gravity and light occurs not only for the phase and group speed, but also the information speed. This instantaneous nature of light and gravity near the source has been kept from the public and is not commonly known. The reason is that it shows that both Special Relativity and General Relativity are wrong! It can be easily shown that Instantaneous nearfield light yields Galilean Relativity and farfield light yields Einstein Relativity. This is because in the nearfield, gamma=1since c= infinity, and in the farfield, gamma= the Relativistic gamma since c= farfield speed of light. Since time and space are real, they can not depend on the frequency of light used. This is because c=wavelength x frequency, and 1 wavelength = c/frequency defines the nearfield from the farfield. Consequently Relativity is an optical illusion. Objects moving near the speed of light appear to contract in length and time appears to slow down, but it is just what you see using farfield light. Using nearfield light you will see that the object has not contracted and time has not changed. For more information: Search William Walker Relativity. Since General Relativity is based on Special Relativity, General Relativity must also be an optical illusion. Spacetime is flat and gravity must be a propagating field. Researchers have shown that in the weak field limit, which is what we only observe, General Relativity reduces to Gravitoelectromagnetism, which shows gravity can be modeled as 4 Maxwell equations similar in form to those for electromagnetic fields, yielding Electric and Magnetic components of gravity. This theory explains all gravitational effects as well as the instantaneous nearfield and speed of light farfield propagating fields. So gravity is a propagating field that can finally be quantized enabling the unification of gravity and quantum mechanics. The current interpretation of quantum mechanics makes no sense, involving particles that are not real until measured, and in a fuzzy superposition of states. On the other hand, the Pilot Wave interpretation of Quantum Mechanics makes makes much more sense, which says particles are always real with real positions and velocities. The particles also interact with an energetic quantum field that permeates all of space, forming a pilot wave that guides the particle. This simpler deterministic explanation explains all known quantum phenomena. The only problem is that the Pilot Wave is known to interact instantaneously with all other particles, and this is completely incompatible with Relativity, but is compatible with Galilean Relativity. But because of the evidence presented here, this is no longer a problem, and elevates the Pilot Interpretation to our best explanation of Quantum Mechanics. *UA-cam presentation of above argument: ua-cam.com/video/sePdJ7vSQvQ/v-deo.html *Paper it is based on: William D. Walker and Dag Stranneby, A New Interpretation of Relativity, 2023: vixra.org/abs/2309.0145
With taking length contraction as explanaition, we must consider it to be applied to everything - size of atoms, distances of interaction. And that makes physics constants and laws to be different and give different values at different velocity. No?
Yes and no. Some laws of physics already took the length contraction (and other SR consequences) into account, before the formulation of SR. The best example is Maxwell's equations for electromagnetism. Other laws are slightly changed, for example the laws of conservation of energy and momentum are now a combined single law of conservation of 4-momentum. Other laws are simply new, like mass being a form of energy. But crucially, these changed/new laws are the same in all inertial reference frames. A moving observer does not see any length contraction for objects moving with him.
Hello, my name is William. I am an American PhD physicist and I have been investigating propagating Electromagnetic fields for many years. My investigations revealed that these fields and the information in these fields propagate nearly instantaneously when they are created and reduce to the speed of light as they propagate into the farfield. For more information, Google search William Walker Superluminal. According to Albert Einstein, if the speed of light is not a constant, then his theories of Special and General Relativity are wrong. This can be seen in Einstein's time dilation result due to a moving observer: t=r t' and the length contraction result: L=L'/r, where t and L are reference to the stationary frame, and t' and L ' are reference to the moving frame, and r is the Relativistic gamma factor: r =1/Sqrt(1-(v/c)^2). These results are easily derived using Einstein's light clock thought experiment using simple algebra. But if propagating EM fields with infinite speed near the source are used in the derivation, then c = Infinity, and r=1. If propagating EM fields far from the source are used, then c = the speed of light, and r= the standard Relativistic gamma factor. What comes out of this is that the effects on time and space are completely different depending on whether one uses propagating fields near or far away from the source, which can't be true since time and space are real. So the conclusion must be that Einstein's Relativity is wrong and time and space do not change with respect to moving reference frames, Galilean Relativity is correct, and that Einstein's equations just enable us to back calculate to the correct answer, given the time delays observed by the propagating EM fields used in measuring the effects. For more information, Google search: William Walker Relativity. But these results do not account for the time dilation observed by moving atomic clocks in airplane experiments, but can be accounted for using variable light speed theory (VLS), originally proposed by Einstein 1911, and later improved by Robert Dicke in 1957. In this theory, spacetime is not curved by gravity as suggested by General Relativity, instead Newtons theory of gravity is correct and the many other known effects of gravity are due to the affect of gravity on the of light speed. For instance the observed bending of light by mass, which caused General Relativity to be accepted, can be explained, by the gravity generated by the mass, changing the speed of light, causing the light to bend around the mass. This effect is analogous to the bending of light in glass. Since lasers are used in atomic clocks to measure time, then the observed time dilation in atomic clocks in moving airplanes can be explained as due to the effects of light speed changes in the clocks due to changes in gravitation as the plane goes up and down. It should also be noted that several researchers have shown the relation E=mc^2 can be derived without Relativity using Newtonian mechanics, and the Michelson Morley experiment can be explained using the Doppler effect, ref Nathan Rapport 2021 In summary, this research shows that Einstein's theories are wrong and that time and space do not change with respect to moving observers, Galilean Relativity is correct, Newtons theory of gravity is correct, and many of the other effects of gravity can be explained as gravity simply changing the speed of light. The importance of this research is that it completely changes our understanding of time and space and gravity, and simplifies our theories. Perhaps this new understanding will finally enable researchers to finally unite Gravitational theory with quantum mechanics which have been incompatible since scientists accepted Einstein's theories for Special and General Relativity. For instance, Relativity is incompatible with quantum entanglement, which requires communication faster than light, but can perhaps can be explained by superluminal propagating fields between entangled particles. It should be mentioned that this superluminal effect is also observed in the propagating gravitational fields generated by an oscillating mass using Newtonian gravitational theory, and is nearly infinite near the source and reduces to speed of light far from the source. For more information, Google Search William Walker Gravitation. This matches very well with observations of the stability of the planets, which would not be possible if gravity propagates at light speed, and was originally proposed by Simone Laplace in his famous book: Mécanique Céleste in the late 1700's, where he estimated the speed of gravity to be 7x10^6 times greater than the speed of light. See: Wikipedia Speed of light. William Walker, 2 July 2023, Fjugesta, Sweden
I would have to look at your peer-reviewed scientific papers (I haven't found any, just pre-release arXiv ones). But you already made a couple of logical fallacies in this text alone. _"So the conclusion must be that Einstein's Relativity is wrong"_ - if the speed of light is constant in the far field, as you state yourself, then Relativity is correct in the far field. So you cannot conclude that it is completely wrong, just not fully applicable in some situations. _"Einstein's equations just enable us to back calculate to the correct answer,"_ - if Einstein's equations enable us to calculate the correct answer, then his equations are correct. _"Michelson Morley experiment can be explained using the Doppler effect"_ - the M-M null result cannot be explained using the Doppler effect, because the source and detector are stationary wrt. each other. _"Since lasers are used in atomic clocks to measure time"_ - atomic clocks do not use lasers to measure time. _"stability of the planets, which would not be possible if gravity propagates at light speed"_ - general relativity (with gravity changes propagating at light speed) has no problem at all with the "stability of the planets".
@@renedekker9806 Much of the work has been presented at physics conferences, and published in the conference proceedings which are reviewed by the moderators. But the research has never been published in a journal due to the tremendous problems with publishing findings against established theories. See the references in my most recent paper below and references in these papers for more details. According to my findings, Relativity has value in predicting the optical illusion, but the effects on time and space are not real and can be proved by using instantaneous light which will show time and space are the same in all inertial frames. For example, a pencil placed in water appears to be broken and bent, but this is an optical illusion. Sure theory can predict the optical effect, but the pencil is not really broken and can be proved by examining the pencil. It is well known that General Relativity reduces to Gravitoelectromagnetism for weak gravitational fields, which is all that we observe. So Gravitoelectromagnetism like General Relativity predict all known gravitational effects including the instantaneous nearfield and speed of light farfield. But Gravitoelectromagnetism assumes space and time are absolute, where as Generativity assumes space and time are flexible. They both predict the instantaneous nearfield and speed of light c farfield. But Relativity assumes light only propagates at speed c and is not compatible with instantaneous field propagation, so if instantaneous light is real then Relativities effects on space and time are are just apparent and an optical illusion. Since General Relativity is based on Relativity then it must have the same problem. Consequently a better theory of gravity is Gravitoelectromagnetism. For more details see my short 15 min UA-cam presentation: *New Interpretation of Relativity: ua-cam.com/video/sePdJ7vSQvQ/v-deo.html And the paper it is based on: vixra.org/abs/2309.0145 References: -------------------- William D. Walker, PhD Thesis - Gravitational Studies, ETH Zurich, 1997 drive.google.com/file/d/10TfEEYIa7FyOAJAr2dwKCQKE7qnMfnNs/view?usp=drivesdk William D. Walker, Superluminal Electromagnetic and Gravitational Fields Generated in the Nearfield of Dipole Sources, 2006 arxiv.org/abs/physics/0603240 William D. Walker, Nearfield Electromagnetic Effects on Einstein Special Relativity, 2007 arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0702166 Z. Wang, ‘New Investigations on Superluminal Propagation of Electromagnetic Waves in Nondispersive Media’, Nov. (2003). arxiv.org/vc/physics/papers/0311/0311061v1.pdf J. C. Sten and A. Hujanen, ‘Aspects on the Phase Delay and Phase Velocity in the Electromagnetic Near-Field’, Progress In Electromagnetics Research, PIER 56, 67-80, (2006). www.researchgate.net/publication/254072994_Aspects_on_the_phase_delay_and_phase_velocity_in_the_electromagnetic_near-field Hans G. Shantz, "Near Field Phase Behavior", 2005 www.researchgate.net/publication/4199558_Near_field_phase_behavior
By mistake speed of light was concluded and advertised as an universal constant and remains constant regardless of the speed of its source or any observer. In fact light rides on Aether moving in sync with the solar system. And the MMX experiment didn’t conducted in intergalactic space responsible for the null result. The math is correct but the theory is wrong.
Aether is regarded as a fluid with no physical but electrical property. A fluid that attach and drag with matter, equal speed at the surface and reduced away from that surface. Continue out Aether speed will be relative to an averaged between sun and earth, it will then drag with the sun in general. At last it drag with the sun at the surface. A rough idea but a true representation is using gas on earth. The first layer gas molecule are attached with the surface of wing move in equal speed regardless of air speed. The gas layers higher up will begin to slip at a relative slower speed and eventually speed will equalized to ambient speed a mile out. Aether in deep space track with all matter in average which is regarded as a rest frame, universe or universal frame, the only frame that matters. Don’t be fooled by SR and GR. Light speed c in Aether is universal constant. Clocks can be synchronized in motion or not.
So I guess they found out that light travels at the same speed no matter which direction they were looking at, despite the earth clearly not standing still?
Infinite field speeds are possible, including the speed of nearfield light!! Fields like: nearfield gravity, magnetic field, electric field, and even nearfield light are all instantaneous, and they are completely incompatible with Relativity, which says nothing travels faster than light. The main problem is that it invalidates the Relativity of Simultaneity argument. This is because instantaneous fields propagate instantaneously to all inertial reference frames, thereby preserving simultaneity in all the frames. If you look at the Lorentz transforms and make c=infinity, then gamma equals one, and the Lorentz transforms becomes the Galilean transform, where space and time are independent and absolute, and space and time are the same in all inertial frames of reference. Relativity is just an optical illusion, and because all of modern physics is based on Relativity, modern physics is fundamentally wrong and needs to be rethought. Relativity has a simple built in logical fallacy, and no theory based on a logical fallacy can be true, no matter how many experiments seem to prove it, or how many people say it is true. Below is a very simple logical argument highlighting the logical fallacy, using the same terminology Einstein used to derive Relativity. According to Relativity, observers on a moving train and on a stationary train platform will disagree on the size of the ""Train"" and the passage of time on the ""Train"". This is a complete logical contradiction if the size and the passage of time of the train are real. If the size of the train is real, then the ""Train"" can not be both contracted and not contracted. The same goes for the observed passage of time on the ""Train"". If these effects are observed, then the only possible conclusion is that it is an optical illusion. Things that are real must appear to be same from all frames of reference. If not, then by definition it is an illusion. Again the argument is very simple and it is the argument Einstein used to derive Relativity, and no acceleration is used in the argument. A train with length (L) traveling at constant velocity (v) relative a stationary observer on a station platform. According to Relativity, the stationary observer will see the train contracted (L/r, where r is the Relativistic gamma), whereas an observer on the train will see it not contracted (L). So the train is both contracted (L/r) and not contracted (L) depending on the observer. This is a complete contradiction (L not equal L/r) and can not be true if length is real. The same argument applies to passage of time on the Train, where both observers will disagree on the passage of time. If time is real, it can not be both dilated and not dilated (T not equal rT). If space and time are observed to be both large and small simultaneously for one inertial reference frame, such as the ""Train"", then it must be an optical illusion. This argument is only the tip of the iceberg. There is much more evidence including both theoretical and experimental, so please keep reading. Hi my name is Dr William Walker and I am a PhD physicist and have been investigating this topic for 30 years. It has been known since the late 1700s by Simone LaPlace that nearfield Gravity is instantaneous by analyzing the stability of the orbits of the planets about the sun. This is actually predicted by General Relativity by analyzing the propagating fields generated by an oscillating mass. In addition, General Relativity predicts that in the farfield Gravity propagates at the speed of light. The farfield speed of gravity was recently confirmed by LIGO. Recently it has been shown that light behaves in the same way by using Maxwell's equations to analyze the propagating fields generated my an oscillating charge. For more information search: William Walker Superluminal. This was experimentally confirmed by measuring radio waves propagating between 2 antennas and separating the antennas from the nearfield to the farfield, which occurs about 1 wavelength from the source. This behavior of gravity and light occurs not only for the phase and group speed, but also the information speed. This instantaneous nature of light and gravity near the source has been kept from the public and is not commonly known. The reason is that it shows that both Special Relativity and General Relativity are wrong! It can be easily shown that Instantaneous nearfield light yields Galilean Relativity and farfield light yields Einstein Relativity. This is because in the nearfield, gamma=1since c= infinity, and in the farfield, gamma= the Relativistic gamma since c= farfield speed of light. Since time and space are real, they can not depend on the frequency of light used. This is because c=wavelength x frequency, and 1 wavelength = c/frequency defines the nearfield from the farfield. Consequently Relativity is an optical illusion. Objects moving near the speed of light appear to contract in length and time appears to slow down, but it is just what you see using farfield light. Using nearfield light you will see that the object has not contracted and time has not changed. For more information: Search William Walker Relativity. Since General Relativity is based on Special Relativity, General Relativity must also be an optical illusion. Spacetime is flat and gravity must be a propagating field. Researchers have shown that in the weak field limit, which is what we only observe, General Relativity reduces to Gravitoelectromagnetism, which shows gravity can be modeled as 4 Maxwell equations similar in form to those for electromagnetic fields, yielding Electric and Magnetic components of gravity. This theory explains all gravitational effects as well as the instantaneous nearfield and speed of light farfield propagating fields. So gravity is a propagating field that can finally be quantized enabling the unification of gravity and quantum mechanics. The current interpretation of quantum mechanics makes no sense, involving particles that are not real until measured, and in a fuzzy superposition of states. On the other hand, the Pilot Wave interpretation of Quantum Mechanics makes makes much more sense, which says particles are always real with real positions and velocities. The particles also interact with an energetic quantum field that permeates all of space, forming a pilot wave that guides the particle. This simpler deterministic explanation explains all known quantum phenomena. The only problem is that the Pilot Wave is known to interact instantaneously with all other particles, and this is completely incompatible with Relativity, but is compatible with Galilean Relativity. But because of the evidence presented here, this is no longer a problem, and elevates the Pilot Interpretation to our best explanation of Quantum Mechanics. *UA-cam presentation of above argument: ua-cam.com/video/sePdJ7vSQvQ/v-deo.html *Paper it is based on: William D. Walker and Dag Stranneby, A New Interpretation of Relativity, 2023: vixra.org/abs/2309.0145
Minskowski introduced the light cones in his treatment of special relativity,which ironically dear old Albert struggled at first to understand i still don't didn't do hyperbolic angles etc.The same minskowski who called Einstein good for nothing as he skipped classes and was irreverent to his professors and lecturers ie a rebel.
Yup! Minkowski introduced the geometric conception of space-time, to the initial resistance of Einstein, which would later also prove highly useful to general relativity.
The time coordinate is just a number, yes, and it's exact value is of course arbitrary. However, when we set the same starting value for all observers, it is nevertheless true that the end value can tell us something about the physics of the system. This is why relativity (described by the Lorentz transforms) differs from Newtonian physics (described by the Galilean transforms).
@@deepbean You are changing the numbers, and you don't have an alternative to a theory that changes your numbers BEFORE you look at it in a serious way. PLUS, it is the only theory you have EVER known. Paradigms are known to be difficult, but somehow you are immune?
@@jnhrtmn No theory/paradigm is immune to revision or refutation, and I'm certainly not claiming that privilege for relativity theory. However, it is not the case that relativistic effects are a case of just "changing the numbers", any more than Newtonian mechanics is based on "changing the numbers". They both produce numbers that happen to agree with experimental observations in particular domains, which is why they are both accepted and widely applied in those domains. However, I agree with you that relativity theory may be superseded, and in fact, Einstein himself spent many years trying to replace it with a grand unified theory that could account for quantum effects. With these videos, I'm not treating relativity as the be-all-and-end-all of physics; merely as a highly successful theory.
@@deepbeanIt gets the right answer, so there is never going to be a reason to refute it. It is all math that tells you a different story than what you ACTUALLY SAW. Light speed does not look constant. Math provides a rote memory path into something, and people mistake that rote for understanding.
@@jnhrtmn In relativity theory, the math is not a source of truth in and of itself. It was used to discover the logical implications of Einstein's two postulates, both of which were grounded in prior physics, such as electromagnetic theory. So instead of questioning the math, you'd have to question the postulates, since, given the postulates, the math just elaborates what the logical conclusions.
Simply great.... explained with great clarity
Excellent work! Great animations. Great information! I really look forward to more
Thanks for your comment Drew!
@@deepbean Infinite field speeds are possible, including the speed of nearfield light!! Fields like: nearfield gravity, magnetic field, electric field, and even nearfield light are all instantaneous, and they are completely incompatible with Relativity, which says nothing travels faster than light. The main problem is that it invalidates the Relativity of Simultaneity argument. This is because instantaneous fields propagate instantaneously to all inertial reference frames, thereby preserving simultaneity in all the frames. If you look at the Lorentz transforms and make c=infinity, then gamma equals one, and the Lorentz transforms becomes the Galilean transform, where space and time are independent and absolute, and space and time are the same in all inertial frames of reference.
Relativity is just an optical illusion, and because all of modern physics is based on Relativity, modern physics is fundamentally wrong and needs to be rethought. Relativity has a simple built in logical fallacy, and no theory based on a logical fallacy can be true, no matter how many experiments seem to prove it, or how many people say it is true. Below is a very simple logical argument highlighting the logical fallacy, using the same terminology Einstein used to derive Relativity.
According to Relativity, observers on a moving train and on a stationary train platform will disagree on the size of the ""Train"" and the passage of time on the ""Train"". This is a complete logical contradiction if the size and the passage of time of the train are real. If the size of the train is real, then the ""Train"" can not be both contracted and not contracted. The same goes for the observed passage of time on the ""Train"". If these effects are observed, then the only possible conclusion is that it is an optical illusion. Things that are real must appear to be same from all frames of reference. If not, then by definition it is an illusion.
Again the argument is very simple and it is the argument Einstein used to derive Relativity, and no acceleration is used in the argument. A train with length (L) traveling at constant velocity (v) relative a stationary observer on a station platform. According to Relativity, the stationary observer will see the train contracted (L/r, where r is the Relativistic gamma), whereas an observer on the train will see it not contracted (L). So the train is both contracted (L/r) and not contracted (L) depending on the observer. This is a complete contradiction (L not equal L/r) and can not be true if length is real. The same argument applies to passage of time on the Train, where both observers will disagree on the passage of time. If time is real, it can not be both dilated and not dilated (T not equal rT). If space and time are observed to be both large and small simultaneously for one inertial reference frame, such as the ""Train"", then it must be an optical illusion.
This argument is only the tip of the iceberg. There is much more evidence including both theoretical and experimental, so please keep reading. Hi my name is Dr William Walker and I am a PhD physicist and have been investigating this topic for 30 years. It has been known since the late 1700s by Simone LaPlace that nearfield Gravity is instantaneous by analyzing the stability of the orbits of the planets about the sun. This is actually predicted by General Relativity by analyzing the propagating fields generated by an oscillating mass. In addition, General Relativity predicts that in the farfield Gravity propagates at the speed of light. The farfield speed of gravity was recently confirmed by LIGO.
Recently it has been shown that light behaves in the same way by using Maxwell's equations to analyze the propagating fields generated my an oscillating charge. For more information search: William Walker Superluminal. This was experimentally confirmed by measuring radio waves propagating between 2 antennas and separating the antennas from the nearfield to the farfield, which occurs about 1 wavelength from the source. This behavior of gravity and light occurs not only for the phase and group speed, but also the information speed. This instantaneous nature of light and gravity near the source has been kept from the public and is not commonly known. The reason is that it shows that both Special Relativity and General Relativity are wrong! It can be easily shown that Instantaneous nearfield light yields Galilean Relativity and farfield light yields Einstein Relativity. This is because in the nearfield, gamma=1since c= infinity, and in the farfield, gamma= the Relativistic gamma since c= farfield speed of light. Since time and space are real, they can not depend on the frequency of light used. This is because c=wavelength x frequency, and 1 wavelength = c/frequency defines the nearfield from the farfield. Consequently Relativity is an optical illusion. Objects moving near the speed of light appear to contract in length and time appears to slow down, but it is just what you see using farfield light. Using nearfield light you will see that the object has not contracted and time has not changed. For more information: Search William Walker Relativity.
Since General Relativity is based on Special Relativity, General Relativity must also be an optical illusion. Spacetime is flat and gravity must be a propagating field. Researchers have shown that in the weak field limit, which is what we only observe, General Relativity reduces to Gravitoelectromagnetism, which shows gravity can be modeled as 4 Maxwell equations similar in form to those for electromagnetic fields, yielding Electric and Magnetic components of gravity. This theory explains all gravitational effects as well as the instantaneous nearfield and speed of light farfield propagating fields. So gravity is a propagating field that can finally be quantized enabling the unification of gravity and quantum mechanics.
The current interpretation of quantum mechanics makes no sense, involving particles that are not real until measured, and in a fuzzy superposition of states. On the other hand, the Pilot Wave interpretation of Quantum Mechanics makes makes much more sense, which says particles are always real with real positions and velocities. The particles also interact with an energetic quantum field that permeates all of space, forming a pilot wave that guides the particle. This simpler deterministic explanation explains all known quantum phenomena. The only problem is that the Pilot Wave is known to interact instantaneously with all other particles, and this is completely incompatible with Relativity, but is compatible with Galilean Relativity. But because of the evidence presented here, this is no longer a problem, and elevates the Pilot Interpretation to our best explanation of Quantum Mechanics.
*UA-cam presentation of above argument:
ua-cam.com/video/sePdJ7vSQvQ/v-deo.html
*Paper it is based on: William D. Walker and Dag Stranneby, A New Interpretation of Relativity, 2023: vixra.org/abs/2309.0145
Best video, clear explanation and in 10 minutes both time dilation and length contraction! Keep up the good work!
With taking length contraction as explanaition, we must consider it to be applied to everything - size of atoms, distances of interaction. And that makes physics constants and laws to be different and give different values at different velocity. No?
Yes and no. Some laws of physics already took the length contraction (and other SR consequences) into account, before the formulation of SR. The best example is Maxwell's equations for electromagnetism. Other laws are slightly changed, for example the laws of conservation of energy and momentum are now a combined single law of conservation of 4-momentum. Other laws are simply new, like mass being a form of energy.
But crucially, these changed/new laws are the same in all inertial reference frames. A moving observer does not see any length contraction for objects moving with him.
This makes a lot of sense.
Hello, my name is William. I am an American PhD physicist and I have been investigating propagating Electromagnetic fields for many years. My investigations revealed that these fields and the information in these fields propagate nearly instantaneously when they are created and reduce to the speed of light as they propagate into the farfield. For more information, Google search William Walker Superluminal.
According to Albert Einstein, if the speed of light is not a constant, then his theories of Special and General Relativity are wrong. This can be seen in Einstein's time dilation result due to a moving observer: t=r t' and the length contraction result: L=L'/r, where t and L are reference to the stationary frame, and t' and L ' are reference to the moving frame, and r is the Relativistic gamma factor: r =1/Sqrt(1-(v/c)^2). These results are easily derived using Einstein's light clock thought experiment using simple algebra. But if propagating EM fields with infinite speed near the source are used in the derivation, then c = Infinity, and r=1. If propagating EM fields far from the source are used, then c = the speed of light, and r= the standard Relativistic gamma factor. What comes out of this is that the effects on time and space are completely different depending on whether one uses propagating fields near or far away from the source, which can't be true since time and space are real. So the conclusion must be that Einstein's Relativity is wrong and time and space do not change with respect to moving reference frames, Galilean Relativity is correct, and that Einstein's equations just enable us to back calculate to the correct answer, given the time delays observed by the propagating EM fields used in measuring the effects. For more information, Google search: William Walker Relativity.
But these results do not account for the time dilation observed by moving atomic clocks in airplane experiments, but can be accounted for using variable light speed theory (VLS), originally proposed by Einstein 1911, and later improved by Robert Dicke in 1957. In this theory, spacetime is not curved by gravity as suggested by General Relativity, instead Newtons theory of gravity is correct and the many other known effects of gravity are due to the affect of gravity on the of light speed. For instance the observed bending of light by mass, which caused General Relativity to be accepted, can be explained, by the gravity generated by the mass, changing the speed of light, causing the light to bend around the mass. This effect is analogous to the bending of light in glass. Since lasers are used in atomic clocks to measure time, then the observed time dilation in atomic clocks in moving airplanes can be explained as due to the effects of light speed changes in the clocks due to changes in gravitation as the plane goes up and down. It should also be noted that several researchers have shown the relation E=mc^2 can be derived without Relativity using Newtonian mechanics, and the Michelson Morley experiment can be explained using the Doppler effect, ref Nathan Rapport 2021
In summary, this research shows that Einstein's theories are wrong and that time and space do not change with respect to moving observers, Galilean Relativity is correct, Newtons theory of gravity is correct, and many of the other effects of gravity can be explained as gravity simply changing the speed of light. The importance of this research is that it completely changes our understanding of time and space and gravity, and simplifies our theories. Perhaps this new understanding will finally enable researchers to finally unite Gravitational theory with quantum mechanics which have been incompatible since scientists accepted Einstein's theories for Special and General Relativity. For instance, Relativity is incompatible with quantum entanglement, which requires communication faster than light, but can perhaps can be explained by superluminal propagating fields between entangled particles.
It should be mentioned that this superluminal effect is also observed in the propagating gravitational fields generated by an oscillating mass using Newtonian gravitational theory, and is nearly infinite near the source and reduces to speed of light far from the source. For more information, Google Search William Walker Gravitation. This matches very well with observations of the stability of the planets, which would not be possible if gravity propagates at light speed, and was originally proposed by Simone Laplace in his famous book: Mécanique Céleste in the late 1700's, where he estimated the speed of gravity to be 7x10^6 times greater than the speed of light. See: Wikipedia Speed of light.
William Walker, 2 July 2023, Fjugesta, Sweden
I would have to look at your peer-reviewed scientific papers (I haven't found any, just pre-release arXiv ones). But you already made a couple of logical fallacies in this text alone.
_"So the conclusion must be that Einstein's Relativity is wrong"_ - if the speed of light is constant in the far field, as you state yourself, then Relativity is correct in the far field. So you cannot conclude that it is completely wrong, just not fully applicable in some situations.
_"Einstein's equations just enable us to back calculate to the correct answer,"_ - if Einstein's equations enable us to calculate the correct answer, then his equations are correct.
_"Michelson Morley experiment can be explained using the Doppler effect"_ - the M-M null result cannot be explained using the Doppler effect, because the source and detector are stationary wrt. each other.
_"Since lasers are used in atomic clocks to measure time"_ - atomic clocks do not use lasers to measure time.
_"stability of the planets, which would not be possible if gravity propagates at light speed"_ - general relativity (with gravity changes propagating at light speed) has no problem at all with the "stability of the planets".
@@renedekker9806 Much of the work has been presented at physics conferences, and published in the conference proceedings which are reviewed by the moderators. But the research has never been published in a journal due to the tremendous problems with publishing findings against established theories. See the references in my most recent paper below and references in these papers for more details.
According to my findings, Relativity has value in predicting the optical illusion, but the effects on time and space are not real and can be proved by using instantaneous light which will show time and space are the same in all inertial frames. For example, a pencil placed in water appears to be broken and bent, but this is an optical illusion. Sure theory can predict the optical effect, but the pencil is not really broken and can be proved by examining the pencil.
It is well known that General Relativity reduces to Gravitoelectromagnetism for weak gravitational fields, which is all that we observe. So Gravitoelectromagnetism like General Relativity predict all known gravitational effects including the instantaneous nearfield and speed of light farfield. But Gravitoelectromagnetism assumes space and time are absolute, where as Generativity assumes space and time are flexible. They both predict the instantaneous nearfield and speed of light c farfield. But Relativity assumes light only propagates at speed c and is not compatible with instantaneous field propagation, so if instantaneous light is real then Relativities effects on space and time are are just apparent and an optical illusion. Since General Relativity is based on Relativity then it must have the same problem. Consequently a better theory of gravity is Gravitoelectromagnetism. For more details see my short 15 min UA-cam presentation:
*New Interpretation of Relativity:
ua-cam.com/video/sePdJ7vSQvQ/v-deo.html
And the paper it is based on:
vixra.org/abs/2309.0145
References:
--------------------
William D. Walker, PhD Thesis - Gravitational Studies, ETH Zurich, 1997
drive.google.com/file/d/10TfEEYIa7FyOAJAr2dwKCQKE7qnMfnNs/view?usp=drivesdk
William D. Walker, Superluminal Electromagnetic and Gravitational Fields
Generated in the Nearfield of Dipole Sources, 2006
arxiv.org/abs/physics/0603240
William D. Walker, Nearfield Electromagnetic Effects on Einstein Special
Relativity, 2007 arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0702166
Z. Wang, ‘New Investigations on Superluminal Propagation of
Electromagnetic Waves in Nondispersive Media’, Nov. (2003).
arxiv.org/vc/physics/papers/0311/0311061v1.pdf
J. C. Sten and A. Hujanen, ‘Aspects on the Phase Delay and Phase
Velocity in the Electromagnetic Near-Field’, Progress In
Electromagnetics Research, PIER 56, 67-80, (2006).
www.researchgate.net/publication/254072994_Aspects_on_the_phase_delay_and_phase_velocity_in_the_electromagnetic_near-field
Hans G. Shantz, "Near Field Phase Behavior", 2005
www.researchgate.net/publication/4199558_Near_field_phase_behavior
If the train were moving away from the tree, would it be elongated instead of being contracted?
By mistake speed of light was concluded and advertised as an universal constant and remains constant regardless of the speed of its source or any observer.
In fact light rides on Aether moving in sync with the solar system. And the MMX experiment didn’t conducted in intergalactic space responsible for the null result.
The math is correct but the theory is wrong.
What about the earth orbiting around the sun? Would this not produce a relative speed to the aether?
Aether is regarded as a fluid with no physical but electrical property. A fluid that attach and drag with matter, equal speed at the surface and reduced away from that surface. Continue out Aether speed will be relative to an averaged between sun and earth, it will then drag with the sun in general. At last it drag with the sun at the surface.
A rough idea but a true representation is using gas on earth. The first layer gas molecule are attached with the surface of wing move in equal speed regardless of air speed. The gas layers higher up will begin to slip at a relative slower speed and eventually speed will equalized to ambient speed a mile out.
Aether in deep space track with all matter in average which is regarded as a rest frame, universe or universal frame, the only frame that matters. Don’t be fooled by SR and GR. Light speed c in Aether is universal constant. Clocks can be synchronized in motion or not.
So I guess they found out that light travels at the same speed no matter which direction they were looking at, despite the earth clearly not standing still?
Light takes time to get information to you. Time dilation is just an optical illusion caused by the phenomenon of a limited light speed
(ct)^2=cos(2*arctan(i*v/c))
Thanks
Infinite field speeds are possible, including the speed of nearfield light!! Fields like: nearfield gravity, magnetic field, electric field, and even nearfield light are all instantaneous, and they are completely incompatible with Relativity, which says nothing travels faster than light. The main problem is that it invalidates the Relativity of Simultaneity argument. This is because instantaneous fields propagate instantaneously to all inertial reference frames, thereby preserving simultaneity in all the frames. If you look at the Lorentz transforms and make c=infinity, then gamma equals one, and the Lorentz transforms becomes the Galilean transform, where space and time are independent and absolute, and space and time are the same in all inertial frames of reference.
Relativity is just an optical illusion, and because all of modern physics is based on Relativity, modern physics is fundamentally wrong and needs to be rethought. Relativity has a simple built in logical fallacy, and no theory based on a logical fallacy can be true, no matter how many experiments seem to prove it, or how many people say it is true. Below is a very simple logical argument highlighting the logical fallacy, using the same terminology Einstein used to derive Relativity.
According to Relativity, observers on a moving train and on a stationary train platform will disagree on the size of the ""Train"" and the passage of time on the ""Train"". This is a complete logical contradiction if the size and the passage of time of the train are real. If the size of the train is real, then the ""Train"" can not be both contracted and not contracted. The same goes for the observed passage of time on the ""Train"". If these effects are observed, then the only possible conclusion is that it is an optical illusion. Things that are real must appear to be same from all frames of reference. If not, then by definition it is an illusion.
Again the argument is very simple and it is the argument Einstein used to derive Relativity, and no acceleration is used in the argument. A train with length (L) traveling at constant velocity (v) relative a stationary observer on a station platform. According to Relativity, the stationary observer will see the train contracted (L/r, where r is the Relativistic gamma), whereas an observer on the train will see it not contracted (L). So the train is both contracted (L/r) and not contracted (L) depending on the observer. This is a complete contradiction (L not equal L/r) and can not be true if length is real. The same argument applies to passage of time on the Train, where both observers will disagree on the passage of time. If time is real, it can not be both dilated and not dilated (T not equal rT). If space and time are observed to be both large and small simultaneously for one inertial reference frame, such as the ""Train"", then it must be an optical illusion.
This argument is only the tip of the iceberg. There is much more evidence including both theoretical and experimental, so please keep reading. Hi my name is Dr William Walker and I am a PhD physicist and have been investigating this topic for 30 years. It has been known since the late 1700s by Simone LaPlace that nearfield Gravity is instantaneous by analyzing the stability of the orbits of the planets about the sun. This is actually predicted by General Relativity by analyzing the propagating fields generated by an oscillating mass. In addition, General Relativity predicts that in the farfield Gravity propagates at the speed of light. The farfield speed of gravity was recently confirmed by LIGO.
Recently it has been shown that light behaves in the same way by using Maxwell's equations to analyze the propagating fields generated my an oscillating charge. For more information search: William Walker Superluminal. This was experimentally confirmed by measuring radio waves propagating between 2 antennas and separating the antennas from the nearfield to the farfield, which occurs about 1 wavelength from the source. This behavior of gravity and light occurs not only for the phase and group speed, but also the information speed. This instantaneous nature of light and gravity near the source has been kept from the public and is not commonly known. The reason is that it shows that both Special Relativity and General Relativity are wrong! It can be easily shown that Instantaneous nearfield light yields Galilean Relativity and farfield light yields Einstein Relativity. This is because in the nearfield, gamma=1since c= infinity, and in the farfield, gamma= the Relativistic gamma since c= farfield speed of light. Since time and space are real, they can not depend on the frequency of light used. This is because c=wavelength x frequency, and 1 wavelength = c/frequency defines the nearfield from the farfield. Consequently Relativity is an optical illusion. Objects moving near the speed of light appear to contract in length and time appears to slow down, but it is just what you see using farfield light. Using nearfield light you will see that the object has not contracted and time has not changed. For more information: Search William Walker Relativity.
Since General Relativity is based on Special Relativity, General Relativity must also be an optical illusion. Spacetime is flat and gravity must be a propagating field. Researchers have shown that in the weak field limit, which is what we only observe, General Relativity reduces to Gravitoelectromagnetism, which shows gravity can be modeled as 4 Maxwell equations similar in form to those for electromagnetic fields, yielding Electric and Magnetic components of gravity. This theory explains all gravitational effects as well as the instantaneous nearfield and speed of light farfield propagating fields. So gravity is a propagating field that can finally be quantized enabling the unification of gravity and quantum mechanics.
The current interpretation of quantum mechanics makes no sense, involving particles that are not real until measured, and in a fuzzy superposition of states. On the other hand, the Pilot Wave interpretation of Quantum Mechanics makes makes much more sense, which says particles are always real with real positions and velocities. The particles also interact with an energetic quantum field that permeates all of space, forming a pilot wave that guides the particle. This simpler deterministic explanation explains all known quantum phenomena. The only problem is that the Pilot Wave is known to interact instantaneously with all other particles, and this is completely incompatible with Relativity, but is compatible with Galilean Relativity. But because of the evidence presented here, this is no longer a problem, and elevates the Pilot Interpretation to our best explanation of Quantum Mechanics.
*UA-cam presentation of above argument:
ua-cam.com/video/sePdJ7vSQvQ/v-deo.html
*Paper it is based on: William D. Walker and Dag Stranneby, A New Interpretation of Relativity, 2023: vixra.org/abs/2309.0145
Minskowski introduced the light cones in his treatment of special relativity,which ironically dear old Albert struggled at first to understand i still don't didn't do hyperbolic angles etc.The same minskowski who called Einstein good for nothing as he skipped classes and was irreverent to his professors and lecturers ie a rebel.
Yup! Minkowski introduced the geometric conception of space-time, to the initial resistance of Einstein, which would later also prove highly useful to general relativity.
Time is a sequence marker in math. Show me something more than that. Dimensions 1 and 2 don't exist on their own without math.
The time coordinate is just a number, yes, and it's exact value is of course arbitrary. However, when we set the same starting value for all observers, it is nevertheless true that the end value can tell us something about the physics of the system. This is why relativity (described by the Lorentz transforms) differs from Newtonian physics (described by the Galilean transforms).
@@deepbean You are changing the numbers, and you don't have an alternative to a theory that changes your numbers BEFORE you look at it in a serious way. PLUS, it is the only theory you have EVER known. Paradigms are known to be difficult, but somehow you are immune?
@@jnhrtmn No theory/paradigm is immune to revision or refutation, and I'm certainly not claiming that privilege for relativity theory. However, it is not the case that relativistic effects are a case of just "changing the numbers", any more than Newtonian mechanics is based on "changing the numbers". They both produce numbers that happen to agree with experimental observations in particular domains, which is why they are both accepted and widely applied in those domains. However, I agree with you that relativity theory may be superseded, and in fact, Einstein himself spent many years trying to replace it with a grand unified theory that could account for quantum effects. With these videos, I'm not treating relativity as the be-all-and-end-all of physics; merely as a highly successful theory.
@@deepbeanIt gets the right answer, so there is never going to be a reason to refute it. It is all math that tells you a different story than what you ACTUALLY SAW. Light speed does not look constant. Math provides a rote memory path into something, and people mistake that rote for understanding.
@@jnhrtmn In relativity theory, the math is not a source of truth in and of itself. It was used to discover the logical implications of Einstein's two postulates, both of which were grounded in prior physics, such as electromagnetic theory. So instead of questioning the math, you'd have to question the postulates, since, given the postulates, the math just elaborates what the logical conclusions.
Was enjoying this up until you introduced the math. Too bad.
The math is there in case you want a deeper understanding, but it won't detract from the other stuff to skip it 😀
@@deepbean It ruins it for me. Never mind. Plenty other content that keeps to the basics.
Take a step back from the equations and use your common sense - time is an abstract concept, it doesn't dilate