CHALLENGING THE UNIVERSALITY OF
THE SPEED OF LIGHT AS A CONSTANT
Raphael Neelamkavil, Ph.D., Dr. phil.
We know that neither time nor space is an existent entity like physical existents. It is a measuremental reality (not an existent) behind all existent physical processes and experiences of existent physical processes simultaneously. The space and time behind all existent physical processes are in fact Extension and Change. their measurements are always by conventional scales and hence epistemic realities.
Can photonal velocity measured spatiotemporally as a constant like the constants of proportionality in physics? Can light be of constant velocity if no spatiotemporal constant of proportionality exists that makes it constant in all physical circumstances? Even the Planck constant is not genuine a proportionality in the strictest sense due to the insufficiency in universality of the units of mass, energy etc. in relation to quanta.
The reader will now surely ask what the meaning and implications of such a questioning would be! The constancy of the velocity of light is bound to experiments within this universe, that too within the phase of the universe where we live. Its universalization is merely a matter of experiments in our part and phase of the universe, and not of all parts and phases of the whole cosmos.
If the amount of matter-energy in the big bang (or even at the bang of a certain amount of matter-energy within a region of the universe) is, let us say, A, then the highest transportation speed would be fixed by the first propagations that arise from the big bang at issue.
That region of the cosmos or of our big bang universe as such has produced a maximal velocity at the start of its phase of expansion, and this limit cannot be overcome by any other propagation within that region of the cosmos or that universe. This is a very pragmatic fact, and not a theoretical limit of all propagations in the universe!
There can be another region of our big bang universe or another phase (say, another phase of expansion, or its contraction phase), where the amount of matter-energy directly available for work is less. The amount of energy here is, say, B – for causal reasons determined by the amount of matter-energy available for work, due to its exteriorizing some energy during the previous phases of evolution.
This can naturally result in the causal determination of the maximal photonal (or any other) velocity being limited to another amount. This is simply because of the difference of density due to the difference in the amount of matter-energy available within that universe or part-universe of the multiverse cosmos.
If not, we may admit at least that there will be speed values A, B, C, etc. in a finite number of times, and then there will be another level, determined by, say, speed values alpha, beta, gamma, etc., where the propagation velocity would be lower or higher.
This, in my opinion, is a solid argument to keep our minds open to accept the facts that (1) the speed of light need not be a constant for all regions of the universe or for all universes, (2) in this case some universes may have superluminal velocities, (3) these propagations will surely enter some universes other than the one/s in which they were produced, and (4) it is extremely difficult to detect them in our universe. But this need not mean non-existence of superluminal velocities.
Can we now say that there will be a general constant of proportionality between possible forms of source-independent (source-independent with respect to objects in their own universes) propagations? If this is imaginable, it can really be called a constant. But if there is a constant of proportionality between the various highest speed limits in each universe, this would have to mean that there are units of difference between the limits speeds of every two universes. But the existence of this sort of a proportionality constant is a matter merely of speculation.
How then can the this-worldly luminal velocity be a constant beyond our universe or our cluster of universes, where its velocity of propagation was determined fully causally by the available amount of density of matter-energy at the bang or start of whatever expansion there is in the local universe?
I have discussed this in two of my books (2014, 2018), the latter being a more generalized work than the earlier. I have also questioned the universality of the Lorentz Factor in the Special Theory of Relativity. The initial background of reasoning behind these arguments is the number of insights achieve from reading various books on the velocity of light during my school days, and developed in the course of decades.
I would be pleased to get open-minded reactions on this question.
Bibliography
(1) Gravitational Coalescence Paradox and Cosmogenetic Causality in Quantum Astrophysical Cosmology, 647 pp., Berlin, 2018.
(2) Physics without Metaphysics? Categories of Second Generation Scientific Ontology, 386 pp., Frankfurt, 2015.
(3) Causal Ubiquity in Quantum Physics: A Superluminal and Local-Causal Physical Ontology, 361 pp., Frankfurt, 2014.
(4) Essential Cosmology and Philosophy for All: Gravitational Coalescence Cosmology, 92 pp., KDP Amazon, 2022, 2nd Edition.
(5) Essenzielle Kosmologie und Philosophie für alle: Gravitational-Koaleszenz-Kosmologie, 104 pp., KDP Amazon, 2022, 1st Edition.
Outside the most basic 3D matter-particles, the entire space is filled with an all-encompassing universal medium, structured by quanta of matter. Corpuscles of radiation (photons) are the most basic 3D matter-particles. They are created from free 'quanta of matter', available within gaps in structures of universal medium. Universal medium gathers free quanta of matter, compresses and shapes them into disc-shaped 3D matter-cores of photons, which spin at a spin speed proportional to their 3D matter-content and move at the highest possible (hence constant) linear speed with respect to the external universal medium. Movements of 3D matter-cores of photons are accomplished by structural distortions formed in the surrounding universal medium, which have many similarities with EM waves in each plane. Together, the 3D matter-core and structural distortions in the surrounding universal medium form a photon. 3D matter-core provides its particle nature and structural distortions in the surrounding universal medium provide its wave nature in each plane. Therefore, the linear speed of light (radiation) depends directly on the properties of the surrounding universal medium. Within an optically denser medium, where the distortion density of the universal medium is higher, the speed of light appears slower with respect to an outside observer. Within an optically rarer medium, the linear speed of light appears faster with respect to an outside observer.
See: http://vixra.org/pdf/1007.0042v2.pdf
See: http://vixra.org/pdf/1312.0130v1.pdf and http://vixra.org/pdf/1103.0026v2.pdf
നൈനാൻ വർഗീസ്, Thanks.
In fact, I am dealing with the maximum possible velocity that any propagation from within a universe can attain. There will be differences of speed with respect to the intensity of medium through which the EM or other propagations travel. I think this too will have some limit within a given universe. I believe this limit within each universe or part-universe will have been determined by the density of matter-energy at the start of expansion of that universe.
If there is only this our finite-content universe, then the question is clear enough. But if there are other (infinite number of such) universes within an infinite-content multiverse, then the scenario will be difficult. This is what I am dealing with here.
Thanks for the reading suggestions. Are you working at a college in Kerala?
Density of a finite ( locally) coordinable Universe does NOT extend into 4D and 5D.
Quanta may be compressed even outside observation of a measuring "status" ...................
But if there is no 4th dimension in theory, how do we speak of processes? Of course, all other higher dimensions are not of the status of the 4 dimensions, and hence must be explained in terms of them.
Quote :
" But if there is no 4th dimension in theory "
Really ?
Truly ?
Have U ever studied physics' theories from 1905 onwards ? !!
I did not say that there is no 4th dimension! I take for granted that time is just this dimension, as we find in most physical theories, except in those that do not take time as so essential as the three spatial dimensions!
I have been revising this short discussion paper of mine in RG. It is an attempt to correct some basic attitudes in physics. Just now I have written an introduction to it. Please read it here. In a few days I shall upload the whole lead-text of this discussion for your reading and comments. Here please find only the introduction:
FOUNDATIONS OF AXIOMATIC PHILOSOPHY AND SCIENCE
1. INTRODUCTION
I get surprised each time when some physicists tell me that either the electromagnetic (EM) or the gravitational (G) or both the forms of energy do not exist, but are to be treated or expressed as waves or particles propagated from material objects that of course exist. Some of them put in all their energies to show that both EM and G are mere mathematical fields, and not physically existent fields of energy propagations from bodies.
This is similar in effect to Newton and his followers thinking honestly and religiously that gravitation and other energies are just miraculously non-bodily actions at a distance without any propagation particles / wavicles.
Even in the 21stcentury, we must be sharply aware that from the past more than 120 years the General Theory of Relativity and its various versions have succeeded in casting and maintaining the power of a terrifying veil of mathematical miracles on the minds of many scientists – miracles such as the mere spacetime curvature being the meaning of gravitation and all other sorts of fields.
A similar veil has been installed on the minds of many physicists by quantum physics too. We do not discuss it here. Hence, I have constructed in four published books a systemic manner of understanding these problems. I do not claim perfection in any of my attempts. Hence, I keep perfecting my efforts in the course of years. The following is a very short attempt to summarize in this effort one important point in physics and in the philosophy of physics.
Questioning the Foundations of Physical Constants, Properties, and Qualities
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Questioning_the_Foundations_of_Physical_Constants_Properties_and_Qualities
My opinions are according to an alternative concept explained in the book ‘MATTER (Re-examined)’. See: https://www.matterdoc.info.
All propagations are initiated and maintained by the universal medium’s mechanical actions. The most basic 3D matter-particles (photons) and independent EM Waves move at the highest possible linear speed that the universal medium can provide without its own breakdown. This linear speed is of constant value with respect to the universal medium. That is: the number of latticework structures in the universal medium traversed by the propagation is constant in unit time. If the distortion density of the universal medium in a region is different, displacement of propagation in space would appear different to an observer, who is situated outside the region of propagation. However, as the number of latticework structures of the universal medium traversed by the propagation remains the same, the linear speed of the propagation is maintained constant. Although the linear speed of propagation appears different to the observer, its linear speed with respect to the universal medium remains constant. This phenomenon gives rise to the assumption that the linear speed of radiation reduces in denser mediums and time expands in rarer mediums.
I believe in a (non-expanding) steady-state universe of infinite extent and different parts of which are destroyed/renewed cyclically. Stable galaxies maintain steady distances between them.
Nainan
IN MY OPINION, most of the ideas that you have presented are very much mechanistic and not taking into consideration the processual aspect of physical objects. I do not venture into critiquing every part of it, because it is tedious, and I am not writing a book in your ideas or on your books. One example: you accept c as the highest possible velocity in the cosmos. But what if there are other parts of the universe where the local expansion-bang density has made a superluminal velocity C as the highest limit? Then we can put C instead of c in the Lorenz factor and obtain another GTR parallel to the present. Hence, the alleged criterial nature of c is not a theoretical presupposition.
One thing I found rather agreeable is the final paragraph here: the steady-state universe (SSU) of infinite extent. I have worked out a Gravitational Coalescence Paradox and its solution, which, in my opinion, goes beyond the SSU. You can find it here in a gist, but without details:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Gravitational_Coalescence_Paradox_GCP_Introduction_to_Gravitational_Coalescence_Cosmology_GCC
Symmetry: A Subset of Universal Causality. The Difference between Cause and Reason
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Symmetry_A_Subset_of_Universal_Causality_The_Difference_between_Cause_and_Reason
This discussion-text is just 2.5 pages, but intense. Meant for those who are interested in a clear presentation of what symmetry and symmetry breaking are, and of how physicists and mathematicians tend to misunderstand and/or misuse these concepts.
The Universally Causal context of the concept of symmetry is explained in terms of a solidly founded system of differentiation between cause and reason.
The Fallacies of Space, Time, and Spacetime in Physics
https://www.researchgate.net/post/The_Fallacies_of_Space_Time_and_Spacetime_in_Physics
Physical and Exact Sciences and Axiomatic Philosophy: Introducing Grounding (long text)
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Physical_and_Exact_Sciences_and_Axiomatic_Philosophy_Introducing_Grounding_long_text
Causality and Statistics: Their Levels of Effect and of Explanation
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Causality_and_Statistics_Their_Levels_of_Effect_and_of_Explanation
Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox and Non-Locality: Is Einstein a Monist?
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen_Paradox_and_Non-Locality_Is_Einstein_a_Monist
Spacetime Curvatures, Gravitational Waves, Gravitons, and Anti-Gravitons: Do They All Exist?
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Spacetime_Curvatures_Gravitational_Waves_Gravitons_and_Anti-Gravitons_Do_They_All_Exist
The Fate of “Source-Independence” in Electromagnetism, Gravitation, and Monopoles
https://www.researchgate.net/post/The_Fate_of_Source-Independence_in_Electromagnetism_Gravitation_and_Monopoles
Can what are termed "mathematically consistent" natural laws necessarily be physically consistent? If they can, then mathematics becomes physics (and for that matter any other mathematical science). But if math is different from all these sciences, the adequacy and applicability of math to physics and other sciences cannot be 100%. If that is the case, it is very important that physics (and other sciences) be helped to choose the most suitable math. This help can come from the same science/s only in a partially realized manner. Nor can math take up this task fully well. Hence, a generic science beyond all these including math and logic must take charge of the remaining portions of inadequacy and inapplicability of math to physics and the sciences. Which could that science be? I hold that this most general science need not contain all that philosophy has so far understood itself to be. But something of the philosophy of these sciences combined with the philosophy of math, logic, etc. would be an ideal option.
Watch this video (streamed today, 23 July 2023) from after the 9thminute: A suggestion that the constant velocity of light, Planck’s constant, and Gravitational constant may be found to have covariance when the whole cosmos is considered.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPCoqJqSbGY
Essential Reason in Physicists’ Use of Logic: And in Other Sciences Too!
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Essential_Reason_in_Physicists_Use_of_Logic_And_in_Other_Sciences_Too
Preprint ESSENTIAL REASON IN PHYSICISTS' USE OF LOGIC: IN OTHER SCIENCES TOO
I have seen a lot of physics and mathematics students mistaking the logical ways in which they experiment and theorize as the conceptual foundations of physics and mathematics. They even think of these ways as the possession of scientists. Imaginably, in this pride, they are encouraged by their scientific temper. More evidently, there were and there are physicists holding that their use of logic, epistemology, ontology, etc. is final and that all other details being done by other sciences, especially by philosophers, are a mere waste of time. (If you want me to cite, I suggest to get into some of the YouTube interviews with Stephen Hawking.) The same sort of claim is to be seen being made by many mathematicians: that logic is a by-product of mathematics.
How Does Physics Know? The Epistemology Presupposed by Physics and Other Sciences
https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_Does_Physics_Know_The_Epistemology_Presupposed_by_Physics_and_Other_Sciences
Preprint MATHEMATICAL SOURCE OF FLAWS IN COSMOLOGICAL THEORIES: MATHE...
Preprint THE EPISTEMOLOGY PRESUPPOSED BY PHYSICS AND OTHER SCIENCES R...
PHYSICAL-PROCESSUAL REPRESENTATION OF IRRATIONAL NUMBERS
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Physical-Processual_Representation_of_Irrational_Numbers
An expanding space does not necessarily have to change the physical constants. Nor does a different "matter-energy" quantity. Let's look at the Big Bang with the inflation phase. What if this phase had had an influence on the constant speed of light, with an unchanged medium. This constant would have been completely different after the end of the inflation phase. As far as I know, there are no such findings (yet). - If the speed of light were fundamentally not constant in a medium, the speed of light at the boundary of the cosmos from its time of origin would have to behave differently than it does today when light is created. However, this "old" light can be measured today and shows no change in speed compared to today's light.
There is also the question of whether a changed amount of matter-energy, as you write, can actually influence the expansion speed of light. According to the principles of physics, it is exclusively the medium traversed that determines the speed of propagation. If the medium in the cosmos changes (assumed), the speed of light would also change, but as a function of the medium. The constancy of the speed of light would thus be preserved.
How does space expand, if matter-energy therein does not expand?
I am not speaking merely of a cosmos with the big bang universe. There can be other universes too, and there can be an infinite number of big bang universes within the cosmos.
Only if we speak only of a big bang universe need to be spoken of the inflation. An inflation need not change the value of c.
If there are infinite number of such universes, how can be sure that the light that we measured today is the oldest?
You: "it is exclusively the medium traversed that determines the speed of propagation". Whatever that is, how does the constancy of the speed of light be preserved? What is meant by constancy here? A constancy relative to the medium? But light should pass also through a non-medium, i.e., even where there is no medium to conduct it.
Speed is the rate of change of the distance moved in a unit interval. Before discussing the speed or constancy of the speed of light, it is prudent to establish that the light moves and the mechanism of its motion. An appropriate reference is also needed to relate to the motion of light. See: http://vixra.org/pdf/1103.0026v2.pdf
Nainan
You: "Before discussing the speed or constancy of the speed of light, it is prudent to establish that the light moves and the mechanism of its motion."
Accepted. But these proofs exist already. Now I do not have to redo them. Hence, I discuss only the speed and constancy of the speed of light!
THE ONTOLOGY BEHIND PHYSICS
3.1. Traditional Physical Categories
https://www.researchgate.net/post/The_Ontology_behind_Physics
"Evidence" for another universe! But some may continue to hold that beyond these other universes no other universe exists! Should we be so conservative as to deny an infinite-content multiverse / cosmos?
Watch the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcrHdOwPTi0
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Grounded_Physical-Ontological_Categories_behind_Physics
Grounded (New) Physical-Ontological Categories behind Physics
Preprint THE ONTOLOGY BEHIND PHYSICS: CRITIQUE OF TRADITIONAL PHYSICA...
A SIMPLE GAME-CHANGER CAUSALITY FOR PHYSICS: Beyond the Two Millennia
https://www.researchgate.net/post/A_SIMPLE_GAME-CHANGER_CAUSALITY_FOR_PHYSICS_Beyond_the_Two_Millennia
https://www.researchgate.net/post/DEFINITION_OF_THE_ONTOLOGY_BEHIND_PHYSICS_5_Paragraphs
DEFINITION OF THE ONTOLOGY BEHIND PHYSICS (5 Paragraphs)
THE ANOMALY IN MATHEMATICAL / THEORETICAL PHYSICS (Short Text)
https://www.researchgate.net/post/THE_ANOMALY_IN_MATHEMATICAL_THEORETICAL_PHYSICS_Short_Text
Here a serious and somewhat complex matter to discuss:
NON-FOUNDATIONS OF ‘WAVICLES’ IN EINSTEIN-PODOLSKY-ROSEN PARADOX: Bases for Quantum Physics to Evolve (Maybe a physical-ontological Breakthrough)
https://www.researchgate.net/post/NON-FOUNDATIONS_OF_WAVICLES_IN_EINSTEIN-PODOLSKY-ROSEN_PARADOX_Bases_for_Quantum_Physics_to_Evolve_Maybe_a_physical-ontological_Breakthrough
AGAINST COSMIC ISOTROPY, CONFORMAL CYCLIC COSMOS, ETERNAL INFLATION, etc.: A Critique of Identity, Simultaneity, Cosmic Repetition / Recycling, etc.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/AGAINST_COSMIC_ISOTROPY_CONFORMAL_CYCLIC_COSMOS_ETERNAL_INFLATION_etc_A_Critique_of_Identity_Simultaneity_Cosmic_Repetition_Recycling_etc
Preprint A SIMPLE GAME-CHANGER CAUSALITY FOR PHYSICS Beyond the Two Millennia
Preprint ESSENTIAL LOGIC, EPISTEMOLOGY, AND ONTOLOGY BEHIND PHYSICS, ...
WHAT IS THE MYSTERIOUS STUFF OF INFORMATION? A Short but Clear Definition
https://www.researchgate.net/post/WHAT_IS_THE_MYSTERIOUS_STUFF_OF_INFORMATION_A_Short_but_Clear_Definition
Preprint COSMIC ISOTROPY, CONFORMAL CYCLIC COSMOS, ETERNAL INFLATION:...
THE PLANCK ERA / QUANTUM ERA and “DISAPPEARANCE” OF PHYSICAL CAUSALITY: “OMNIPOTENCE” OF MATHEMATICS
https://www.researchgate.net/post/THE_PLANCK_ERA_QUANTUM_ERA_and_DISAPPEARANCE_OF_PHYSICAL_CAUSALITY_OMNIPOTENCE_OF_MATHEMATICS
Preprint PLANCK ERA or QUANTUM ERA,and ”DISAPPEARANCE” OF CAUSALITY. ...
Preprint CAUSAL HORIZONAL RESEARCH: A METHODOLOGY IN PHYSICS Raphael ...
https://www.researchgate.net/post/WHAT_IS_INFORMATION_WHAT_IS_ITS_CAUSAL_OR_NON-CAUSAL_CORE_A_Discussion
Deleted research item The research item mentioned here has been deleted
Preprint LINGUISTIC HERESY OF DENOTATIVE ABSOLUTISM: PHYSICAL-BIOLOGI...
https://www.researchgate.net/post/ONTOLOGICAL_DIFFERENCES_OF_CHARACTERISTICS_OF_ARTIFICIAL_AND_BIOLOGICAL_INTELLIGENCE_ALGORITHMS_AND_PROCEDURES_Against_Exaggerations
https://www.researchgate.net/post/WHY_EXACTLY_THE_WAVE-PARTICLE_DUALITY_Phenomenal_Ontological_Commitment_POC_as_the_Solution
https://www.researchgate.net/post/UNTENABLE_REIFICATION_OF_CONCEPTS_IN_PHYSICS_With_Examples
Preprint WHY EXACTLY WAVE-PARTICLE DUALITY? Phenomenal Ontological Co...
- Badges
- Science topic