Fonseca

Hallo, I have a new theory: - We all know that matter and energy can change to eachother. (e=mc2) - If matter has a weak attraction effect (known as gravity), maybe energy has a weak repel effect (dark energy?). There is some experiments that we can do to test this theory. We can weigh a block two times. At the first time we weigh it hot, and at the second time we weigh it cold. The hot block must be lighter than the cold one (becouse the hot energy repels with the gravity of Earth). We need to have a very precisely weighing-machine to do that. Another experiment is to look at the more when it is half lighted. My picture shows my idea. The illuminated side has moor energy (is hot) as the dark side (is cold). The light of a star saw near the hot side must be less bended than another one near the dark side. If that is correct, the expansion effect in the universe can be results of repel effect of the energy of the cosmic microwave background radiation. What you think? Saulo Fonseca sauloqf@yahoo.com.br

Maybe I need to explain all my theory with another words: 1 - The first point is: the observations and the mathematics need to work together. The mathematics from the Relativity works best as the Newton, to describe the universe. But the Relativity has problems by some observations in objects very far away. The scientists need to create this Dark Energy to make a sense in his observations. The problem with the Pioneer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_anomaly) shows that the problem is near as we think and here in the Solar System we find already problems. We need to find another model to explain the universe (we all Know that); 2 – The light will be slower, if it is near a massive object (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_delay_of_light). That happens if the light makes a curve in space; 3 – With the information from (1) and (2), I thought: We need to separate the speed of light, and the light itself. Maybe the speed of the light, that we know here, is not the same in another parts of the universe. But in the point of view of the light, the Relativity still works, because the light will be slower, and in this situation it need a few time to travel in space. Maybe the speed of the light that we know here is the slower version. Maybe the light makes a curve as its travel trough our Galaxy, or our Solar System. But if the light leaves this place (Galaxy or Solar System) it speed increase, maybe to infinity. Infinity speed means that the light doesn’t feel time as its travel (the time will stop at this point – that is the same thing). 4 – If that is true, the light, which I see in the sky, is not the past of a star, but the star right now, or only a few years old (the light would be slower and game time in its way into the galaxy to the Earth); 5 - If that is true, the universe does not accelerate the expansion, instead what Hubble said. There is no Dark Energy; There is it. I think now you all understand what I said. Maybe I was not clear in my first post. Now comes the conclusion: 6 – Nobody comes with this idea before (as far as I can see); 7 – I think a Forum is a place to discuss new ideas, and not only to explain the current physics. 8 - I have no evidence of my theory. I cannot give proof of that (of course). That is only a speculation. But that make more sense as Dark Energy. 9 – I don’t have a mathematical equation to test what I said. I am only a Photographer. I am only in the philosophical part of the theory. Maybe I can do that in the future, but I need a lot of time to do that. I don’t have this time now. If anyone here thinks that my theory make sense, and is gut with mathematics, can make a proposal of an equation. I don’t want (and I cannot) do this journey alone. Saulo Fonseca sauloqf@yahoo.com.br http://www.saulofonseca.de

You all are trying to explain what relativity is. I don't need that. I am trying to think beyond that. All we now, that the go is to find a equation that unifyes all physics. The relativity can not be applied to all things. My theory is, that the relativity works well if you are inside a group of massive elements. But what about outside in deep space? Outside the solar system? Outside the galaxy? Nobody can say that relativity works there. My theory is, that the light doesn't feel time outside in deep space, but as this light comes inside the galaxy, and inside the solar system, it will be slower and slower. Here is the point were the Shapiro delay comes. This delay shows that the light will be slower near a big object. Maybe we cannot know the true, but there is a true. Maybe I am right, probably I am wrong. But we need to see all theories. We need to measure the speed of the light in many places, outside the earth, outside the solar system, to know if my theory is right. The Pioneer is outside the solar system (or almost). We see already problems by measurements in his position. The Pioneer seems to be near as what the relativity say. If I am right, the answer is that the light is faster there. The people here think, that the Pioneer is near, but I think there is a error in the measurement from its position. If the light there is faster, the Pioneer seems to be near as its real position. The relativity need a fix point as reference to measure all things. This fix point is the speed of the light. But maybe there is no fix point in the universe. We maybe need to learn how can we measure things without a fix point. How can we measure the speed of a plane relative to many another planes that are flying too. I don't say that relativity is complete wrong. I say only that the relativity maybe needs a few adjustments. Saulo Fonseca sauloqf@yahoo.com.br http://www.saulofonseca.de

I understand the concepts of Relativity. What I said is beyond that. All speed of light measurements are made here on Earth or in the Solar System. There is some questions about the behavior of the light outside this gravity field. As we know, the speed of light will be slowed if the light has a big mass near it. That effect is known as “Shapiro delay” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_delay_of_light). Maybe my theory can explain the anomaly observed at the Pionner (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_anomaly). Saulo Fonseca sauloqf@yahoo.com.br http://www.saulofonseca.de

Hallo People. I am new here. I am only a Photographer from Brazil, that live today in Germany. I love the light and all discussions about its physics. I wake up at 25.03.2009 with a thought: - In Einstein Physics, as fast as you travel, as slow the time will be. - If that is true, at the speed of the light, the time has stopped. - If that is true, as the light travel at C (300.000Km/s), the time had stopped, at the point of view of the light. The light doesn’t get old. - If that is true, the light, which I see in the sky, is not the past of a star, but the star right now. - If that is true, the universe does not accelerate the expansion, instead what Hubble said. He said, that the galaxies far way are faster as the another’s one not so far. He thought, that the galaxies far away are in the past, and his conclusion said that the galaxies game speed with the time. If I am right, the galaxies far away aren’t in the past. That means. If I am right, Hubble was wrong. - If that is true, there is no Dark Energy. - If that is true, the time gap between Mars and the Earth is not because that distance between the two planets, but because the gravity field from this planets slows the speed of the light. I send this question to a few physicists, but I become no answer. What you think about that? Saulo Fonseca sauloqf@yahoo.com.br http://www.saulofonseca.de