c-global (c) and Cryodynamics (C):
cC do mutually confirm each other. They got first glimpsed by Fritz Zwicky in 1929. This fact gives me a deep respect for Zwicky.
The problems began when the scientific community, represented by CERN, decided to bet planet Earth against Zwicky1929, started in 2008.
I recently had a 3-hour discussion with a class of high-school students. It was a wonderful experience. They understood everything and found even new implications. But I could not fully convince their teacher.
It would be great to if possible contact Greta Thunberg, the 16-year-old great environmental activist. But there is no chance so I was told.
April 20, 2019
(Posted Nov.9, 2019)
OE Rossler: "cC do mutually confirm each other."
Would you kindly disclose the basic idea?
Thank you, Johan.
c-global is the retrieval of the universal speed of light in the vacuum, in the equivalence principle which is formally based on this very assumption.
Cryodynamics is the new sister discipline to Thermodynamics, each deterministic.
OE Rossler: "equivalence principle"
Why shouldn't the equivalence principle hold under local condition c < c0 such as suggested in 1911 by A. Einstein for explaining observed bending of light by the sun as due to reduced local gravitational potential?
http://myweb.rz.uni-augsburg.de/~eckern/adp/history/einstein-papers/1911_35_898-908.pdf
http://www.relativitycalculator.com/pdfs/On_the_influence_of_Gravitation_on_the_Propagation_of_Light_English.pdf
Thank you, Johan, for the concise question.
Your question is absolutely justified.
My answer: Yes, why shouldn't it.
It only so happens that the equivalence principle is unfinished in the form assumed by you in accordance with its original formulation. Hence the formally correct conclusions drawn are not the features that are implied by the corrected (finished) equivalence principle. So they are, unfortunately, unphysical.
The good news is that the features of the corrected -- finished -- equivalence principle are not yet fully (or at all) known. So there is a wonderful opportunity to do correct novel physics in a paradise of formal simplicity.
"Yes, why shouldn't it."
Dear Otto,
Thanks for your comments. The funny thing about possible retardation effect of local gravitational potential on local luminal speed is the order of magnitude: In case of our sun Einstein in his 1911 paper calculates an effect of 2*10-6. When comparing with cumulative local potential of the "visible" universe the corresponding effect shoud be expected six orders of magnitude larger, hence might be responsible at all for limitation of c at what we call luminal speed "in vacuum". Why shouldn't it?
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_speed_of_light_basically_limited_by_local_cumulative_gravitational_potential_originating_from_remote_masses_of_the_universe
- Badges
- Science topic