TriggerGrinn

I am going to have to do it much clearer. I mean no offense but you did not understand what I expressed. Ok this could make a slight bit of sense if electromagnetic waves were even slightly mechanical. they are not mechanical, the are electromagnetic and are self propagating which means they do not need a medium such as and 'Aether' I was not expressing that electromagnetic waves were mechanical. I was stating that in the past aether was based off the same method of sound. relative to the observer, when you have light leave in front of you, it can not be measured in your frame. (it can only be calculated) I expected you to follow the math sorry for not expressing more in detail. The negetive is correct, because we are trying to see how fast the light is moving away from the observer (source of light). The observer is moving with the light and thus the velocity will be expected, predicted, to decrease relative to that observer. You can not measure the speed of which light leaves a source (from that observation frame) Anything you do to measure it changes frames, or reflects it back to you, thus it is not moving away. Because of this, you can not say it moves C, because it is impossible to tell and if you can supply proof I am willing to read it, but you wont have much luck (remaining in your own frame). Thus the reason for the positive and the minus. This theory predicts the velocity of the light for the observer of the source. Of course the light will continue to move at C relative to other observation frames. But keep in mind that you can only see light that comes at you. So you can not imagine to a photon traveling through space perpendicular to you, and assume that is the correct posistion. It is uncertain to predict this. The photon must change course and reach your frame for you to detect it. When it turns away from its source like this the source continues in motion, we hope, so depending on the distance the photon had to travel, the light source (or old path it was in) moves an equal distance ahead, completely oblivious to your measurment capabilites. I need to get back to this later. gotta go.

You are correct. It made one final pass perpendicular to the aether at a velocity of C relative to the source. Thus we equate 1C which does not change the measurement. Going head on into space One path went; 0degrees forward at 0.9 C through the mirror and onto path B at 0degrees at 0.9C then reflected at 180 degrees at 1.1C (in order to maintain C in relativeness to space, with or without aether considerations, meaning alternatively space-time) then on it turned 90degrees relative to the source and towards the detector at 1C. Total velocity or let us say average= 0.9(step a) + 0.9(step b) + 1.1(step c) + 1(step d) = 4 = 4/4 = 1 C However path B took a different course. It traveled head on in proposed direction of travel at 0.9C, (step a) then turned 90degrees relative to motion at 1 C (step a) then reflected off that mirror and took another path at 1 C (step C) finall passed through the last section of glass unscathed and continued at 1C(step d) 0.9+1+1+1=3.9/4=0.975 (NOT C) uh oh? we see that relative to the observer the light did not remain at C. That is fine, because this is the way sound wave like mechanics work and that was how the aether concepct was put together, which turned out to create errors in consistancy. (NOTE: that if I could show the math we would include observer velocity .1 relative to the lights velocity of C to get a vector quanity that works out to finalizing the average as C. eg. in simple form a)0.9 b)1+0.1=1.1 c)1+0.1=1.1 d)1+0.1=1.1 average= 0.9+1.1+1.1+1.1=4.2/4=1.05 however I did not input the actual vector velocity relative to the observer, since that requires math skills I am not prepaired to begin at the moment) However, when we look at the velocity relative to the aether through all paths we get. path A step: a)0.9 + 0.1 = 1 b)1.1 - 0.1 = 1 c)1 d)1 we see in path A of light it remained C at all times relative to the aether, and C relative to the observer (when it returned) path B: a)0.9 + 0.1 = 1 b)1 c)1 d)1 We see that relative to the aether the light traveled at 1 C in path B (constant) and relative to the observer (or light source) observer a)0.9 + 0.1 = 1 b)1 c)1 d)1 to futher explain how we get a)0.9 + 0.1 = 1 , it is what the observer must comprehend in single (non reflected) pathways of light. Doing so we have not broke the constant speed of light. Now finally. we set up this experiment apparatus in this configureation: An example of the corrected appartus. Note: light sources aimed in perpendicular angles laser (light source 1a) to ------------> detector (1b) @ angle x laser (light source) (2a) to ------------> detector (2b) @ angle y The light is measured in no reflected paths from source to detector (which are at rest relative to eachother. Thus if there IS aether, and there IS motion of aether through that (static space) aether, then a change in the speed of the light will be found in one of the direction the light was sent, which one depends on which direction of travel is being made by the apparatus. note:distance for each indivudal path of light must remain perfectly consistant, since the measurement is detecting Distance/time to determine light velocity relative to the source and detector. Lastly, what is desired to be found is (theory disproven) or velocity of light in singular paths. speed of earth through the aether absolute rest space. aether's existence. a difference in arrival times for light over equal distances with different directions of travel.

E=MC^2 Assume it requires an amount of energy from an atom to create a wave in the medium of a static space. The ammount an object can contain is directly perpotional to its total mass. Then we use the fact that when light IS made form an atom it must travel C in the static medium of space to obey the constant of light. Or let us say the atom will act in speeds up to C + C however it can only act in a velocity of C relative to the aether. We presume the aether has such properties that allow waves to be created a finite value, C, which is directly related to the permittivity permeability of that space. Which is exaclty how one can calcualte the value of C. So an atom traveling through the static space at say 0.9C, it must send light out at 0.9C to obtain a value of 0C reltative to the aether, then it must also send out + C on top of that to reach a value of C relative to the aether of which we know is the constant speed of light. Thus it is not the equation which dictates the energy in mass. It is the way in which mass and matter behaves in the permittivity permeability of the static space that results in an equation of C + C velocities. Now to understand that when you are dealing with moving energy we use the equation Ke=1/2 (M *V^2) This explains that the energy in a moving object is relative to the square of its velocity, due to inertia of the two objects that interact to transfer a value of kentitic energy. So an atoms energy when interacting with the specific values of permittivity permeability of space it is capable to act in speeds of C in one direction relative to the aether and pseeds of C in the opposite direction relative to the aether. Thus the energy in an atom is C^2 mulplied by its mass. That is the theoretical amount of energy to be expelled. Without any other equation, Energy contained in an atom must be equal to the square of the speed at which it can emmit that energy which is C, and its magnitude of capacity is directly related the total mass of that object.

Aether was formed from sound wave mechanics. In this form as we know velocity(light) to an observer is Velocity(light) = Velocity(source) + C, or V(l) = V(s) + C Thus If the velocity source is 0.1C in reference to (static aether) and the light is traveling in the same direction as the source than we have this (relative to the observer of source) Vl = (-0.1C) + C Vl = 0.9C Thus we continue using this equation for the light traveling in the opposite direction of the direction of travel of the source. Vl = (0.1 C) + C Vl = 1.1C So in the MM experiment we have (away from source) path A 0.9C , (towards source) path b 1.1c, (perpendicular to source) path C, velocity 1C. if the light was to be calculated to travel away, reflect, than return to source we have. average of 1.1 + 0.9 = 2 thus 2/2 = 1 = 1C = C As you can see the MM experiment would have detected NO change of the lights velocity whether there was aether or not. Also notice that on return trip measurements of lights velocity over a distance, aether, or wave in a static medium, can obey the law of physics. A postulate in the theory is that no light wave that moves away from a source is ever going to be directly detectable in that particular observation frame (reference frame) again. IT must reflect to be observed. ALthough it can be dected by a seperate frame (observer), known as the waves destination point. ps- whether your opinion is with or against this theory, can you put that aside and help me with how a paper is written?

There has however been very few experiments if any where light was accuratly measured in an A to B pathway, that is a source to destination with perfect syncronization of seperate frames clocks. Most to all experiments that I have come across measure lights speed coming towards an observer, either from a source or from an A to B to (return) A. Source reflector back to detector. These forms can not and could not ever detect a change in light even if there was one, because the average resorts to C. Tests that have been done in A to B like apparatus' have found change in energy, wavelength, and/or velocity of light. Since the MM experiment was flawed to be able to detect an absolute space whether it was there or not more attention should be payed to being certain on these assumptions. see here in the theory of absolute relativity (work in progress) http://www.scienceforums.net/showthread.php?t=23633

Nothing has been pulled out of the arse. No problem. There is alot of work I havnt shown just yet, it has been following very straightfoward basics. But I do see your point. There must be mathamatical truth that is shown. It can be nearly impossible to understand some peoples 'theories', thus the importance of showing that it calculates. For example, this theory here. However, I have brought and proved -althought not that confidently- that the MM experiment was flawed and unable to detect aether whether it was there or not. That is important to comprehend! Also I have shown that previous experiments have shown that as you change the angle of a light source its frequency can change -eg. the expectation of aether wind-. but also I need to know an outline of how a paper is written, a guideline. If someone could help that'd be great. In the meantime, the math is comin, no worries there.

The theory hypothesises the reasoning for the following and predicts them in based on the foundation of postulates. - explaination of E=MC^2 (how to reach this conclusion without previous equations) - Time dilation - Length contraction - mass dilation - gravity - electromagnetic forces - uncertainty principle - quantum entanglement - graviational lensing - gravitational time dilation - Constant of the speed of light - Universal restriction of the C A possible lead to unified theory.

The Theory of Absolute Relativity Introduction This is a theory of relativity with a form of luminiferous aether of absolute rest. In this paper it is shown the possible flaw in the original testing for luminiferous aether in the famous Michelson-Morely experiment. Furthermore, it goes on to show all experimental data and laws of physics can still be obeyed by a form of absolute rest and luminiferous aether. Lastly the required apparatus to correctly test to show a form or lack of luminiferous aether. Experimental Data In the original Michelson-Morely experiment it was expected to have light wave results similar to that of sound waves or water waves. However, this is not the case in the operation of luminiferous aether. It must be considered that any wave of light must comply to the constant velocity of C in all frames of observation, most importantly the absolute rest frame of aether. It is possible to get two types of C depending on which technique you measure the speed of light, both still obey the constant of light to all observers (note: this is possible when we accept light that moves away from an observer can NOT be considered directly observable thus its values elude the observer, but will remain a value of C when measured after its return trip to that same observer). These two types are 1) The time it takes for light to reach a distant detector according to the observer(at light source). 2) The time it takes for light to travel a path and reflect back to the observer. Let us look at the details behind the latter descriptions. If you are not familiar with the Michelson-Morely experiment, Visit this link ( http://galileoandeinstein.physics.virginia.edu/more_stuff/flashlets/mmexpt6.htm ) to become familiar with the apparatus and experiment. This experiment was designed to measure a difference in arrival time for the two different paths of light. The theory of absolute relativity hypothesises there will never be a difference in arrival times between the two different paths of light in an aether enviroment while the system is in motion through the aether, using the configuration in the past Michelson Morely experiment. There are 5 images including four stages and a conclusion tablet of the Michelson-Morley Experiment. The system is moving through the aether at a velocity of 0.1C. Image 1. http://www3.telus.net/hill/MichExperiment.jpg step 1:The light leaves the laser (light source) at 0.9C head on into the aether which is traveling 0.1C. This is in accordance with experimental data of wave mechanics. The aether is expected to create a wind effect that would differ the velocity of light moving 'upstream' as it were. Image 2. http://www3.telus.net/hill/MichExperiment2.jpg step 2:The light splits into the two perpendicular paths. The green arrow (we call A) remains going 0.9C, as the paths has been unchanged. The red arrow (we call B) turns perpendicular to the aether and is now capable to travel at C or 1C, because it is not moving parrallel with the motion of the proposed aether. Image 3. http://www3.telus.net/hill/MichExperiment3.jpg step 3:The light reflects and returns to the center mirror. Historically it was not calculated that the light could measure beyond C relative to the apparatus. However, it is absolutely acceptable for the light to reach C relative to the aether on its return trip, thus creating a measurement 1.1C relative to the experiment system. Although, the apparatus observer must take into consideration its own velocity relative to the aether. As so we have; Observer velocity 0.1C, Light velocity C. Thus the distance that is covered between observer and the light is 1.1C, although this does not affect the true velocity of the light, and all laws of physics are obeyed. Image4. http://www3.telus.net/hill/MichExperiment4.jpg The light waves turn on the final stretch to make there way to the detector, perpendicular to the aether at a velocity of 1C, at this point they have regained equal posistion (as will be seen in the table of image 5). note: one arrow was crossed out to show that they have returned to one wave form again. Image5. http://www3.telus.net/hill/MichExperiment5.jpg This table shows the different velocities of the light relative the experiment system in each step. At the end of the trip the total velocity remains equal. I called this net velocity, however, it is the average velocity that is also equal. In the past they didnt expect aether to be able to function in a way to have light remain as a constant for observers. In the way I have shown, I hypothesis it can. Here we see that in the past, the expectation of having light act like sound waves or water waves, was incorrect and the experiment would fail because of that. If light acted similar to sound waves it would not coincide with experimental evidence that C remains constant. However, as just previously described, when the source of light is can have a varying velocity of emition, it will agree with lights observed constant. How is light able to exceed C relative to an inertial frame as it leaves 'downstream' into the aether? Enter E=MC^2. While obeying the law that nothing can exceed the speed of light, a moving object is predicted to be able to send light faster in the direction opposite of motion than it is in the direction of motion relative to the observer of that source. In doing so it obeys the law of light always traveling C, relative to the aether, which as mentioned, works into being constant for all observers in conventional return trip measurements. It is due to this that an atom has the energy of the square of the velocity of light in a magnitude of the multiplication of its total mass. In order to obey the constant of C in aether mechanics the atom must be capable to act in speeds beyond C relative to itself to match C relative to the aether. However, it is possible for an atom to act this way as said ealier: How to correctly detect a form of aether. In my understanding, if the Michelson-Morely Experiment was rearranged to only send light in a strait line from, source to a detector a detectable result would be possible, to prove and or correctly disprove a moving aether wind. An example of the corrected appartus. Note: light sources aimed in perpendicular angles laser (light source 1a) to ------------> detector (1b) @ angle x laser (light source) (2a) to ------------> detector (2b) @ angle y The prediction of this theory is that the result would find: - a difference in arrival time for the two light sources - a difference in frequencies between the two lights (if their sources were identical - a velocity of the aether This is a general simple form of the experiment. If the light was capable to make a return trip the experiment would fail to show any change between the two light paths and light would be measured to be a constant of C. The light must make one path from A to B to detect any change. Conclusion It is possible for medium (aether) like universe to obey the laws of physics and create the same experimental observation that have been performed to test the theory of SR with space-time. Support on this theory. http://www.wbabin.net/physics/kingston.htm The Mössbauer effect http://www.rsc.org/Education/EiC/issues/2002July/july2002Adetunji.asp apparatus image. - http://www.rsc.org/images/adetunji_jul02_fig4_tcm18-36458.jpg The angle of light source propogation in respect to space can directly affect the frequency emitted from a gas that is excited by the same light (energy) source.

I am writing a paper on a scientific theory. For those of you who have not kept up with the other thread related to it, it is a theory of aboluste relativity. The theory defines relativity with absolute space. This sound much stranger than it really is, however it follows the laws of physics and observable data as you will see in the paper. I have not written a paper before and I do not know exactly how to go about it. I would prefer to, in repsect of einstein and the vast use of his work, to follow his style of the paper. The paper I am going to submit to the science community at large. Hopefully a journal would take it? The theory is absolutely testable. One test may change science forever. Finally opening the doors to unified theory. I will add the begginning rough draft in the next post.

I wonder who will be the first to take the challenge. If you can show the math, you can prove my logic. The person that works this out will have shown aether (absolute rest) is a plausible hypothesis. I will see what I can do in the meantime. Note: If you havnt read each post and want to tackle this problem refer to post's: #22 and #23

Lets lay out the laws of each form. Sound wave mechancs. (for comparison #1) from wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether So this is newtonian form of physics. That is, (back to our MM experiment) if an object was traveling in the wind, the speed of the light wave in this sound wave model would be relative to the streaming wind of the aether. Absolute Relativity - Aether wave Mechanics (for comparison #2) In this form the emitter of the light is restricted by the aether, that has a maximum velocity of C to travel through it, and futhermore only a velocity of C. Thus an object moving through the aether will have light emmit at a slower velocity in the direction of travel (to maintain C in the aether) and a faster velocity in the opposite direction of travel (to maintain C). In detail: The light retains C, (we base this off of the fact the energy available from the matter is a value of the square of the speed of light with a magnitude relative to the multiple of the matters mass. Shortly, an object can emmit light between C and C+C (in the range of C+C when the object (light source) is moving very near C). The object (or matter) emmits as fast as it can at all times and the medium (aether constrains it) This is the guidelines to follow when sorting out: one last time: comparison #1 (sound wave mechanics) and comparison #2. (lights obeying aether mechanics)

There are many versions of aether, however that is not what the subject being discussed at hand. All that is required of the aether (or space of absolute rest) -at this point- is to carry a wave of light at only C. Such as how air will only create a sonic boom at velocity "X". However, if the velocity acts below C no wave is formed. It must be that in order for matter to transfer energy it must meet the velocity of light in the medium we are refering to. Much like Cerenkov Radiation. see here: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/einvel.html#c3 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Back to the paper (absolute relativity) I am looking to express the following in mathmatical form. I would appreciate anyones help with putting this paper together full bodied. Math with the logic. I feel I have made very valid points that should take interest in the science communnity. Thanks in advance. I want to express 2 comparissons for the (michelson morely) MM experiment. With this I want to show that the MM experiment was configured in such a way that it was unable to detect aether regarldess if it was there or not. We understand with experimental evidence that light is the same velocity to each observation frame. So in comparison #1 we show that sound wave mechanics are false (that which the theory of aethe was constructed on) for light, and that the apparatus arrangement was flawed. In comparison #2 we can show that aether can infact obey the observed laws of physics and allow C to be constant to each observation frame. Thus also showing that the apparatus was flawed in being able to detect such aether. It should not be to difficult considering I have the ground work layed out. I will add it here below. The system is moving through the aether at a velocity of 0.1C (and obviously at rest for non absolute space) That is all the data really needed please see the next post to see the guidelines of the two comparisons. (and if needed refer to the MM experiment in the Absolute Relativity paper ealier posted)

I am arkain101, I agree I was a pain when I was last here, and I apologize for it. It is understandable people dont have the time to read or be interested in this theory that I have more recently brought forward. Regardless of opinions on the many details (because there is mistakes I have been making) , there is two important things brought up that I believe are fact. 1)The experiment used to test aether was incapable of doing so, thus even if there was a kind of aether wind, the apparatus would not of been able to detect it. 2)There is a way to test this theory that as far as people have said has not been done, which will more confidently decide whether an aether is existant. This theory could very well be bunk. I have just asked kindly for anyone interested to help me out.

If anyone is interested in helping me improve this paper. With the maths or what have you that would be great. Thanks in advance.

The Theory of Absolute Relativity Introduction This is a theory of relativity with a form of luminiferous aether of absolute rest. In this paper it is shown the possible flaw in the original testing for luminiferous aether in the famous Michelson-Morely experiment. Furthermore, it goes on to show all experimental data and laws of physics can still be obeyed by a form of absolute rest and luminiferous aether. Lastly the required apparatus to correctly test to show a form or lack of luminiferous aether. Experimental Data In the original Michelson-Morely experiment it was expected to have light wave results similar to that of sound waves or water waves. However, this is not the case in the operation of luminiferous aether. It must be considered that any wave of light must comply to the constant velocity of C in all frames of observation, most importantly the absolute rest frame of aether. It is possible to get two types of C depending on which technique you measure the speed of light, both still obey the constant of light to all observers (note: this is possible when we accept light that moves away from an observer can NOT be considered directly observable thus its values elude the observer, but will remain a value of C when measured after its return trip to that same observer). These two types are 1) The time it takes for light to reach a distant detector according to the observer(at light source). 2) The time it takes for light to travel a path and reflect back to the observer. Let us look at the details behind the latter descriptions. If you are not familiar with the Michelson-Morely experiment, Visit this link ( http://galileoandeinstein.physics.virginia.edu/more_stuff/flashlets/mmexpt6.htm ) to become familiar with the apparatus and experiment. This experiment was designed to measure a difference in arrival time for the two different paths of light. The theory of absolute relativity predicts there will never be a difference in arrival times between the two different paths of light in an aether enviroment while the system is in motion through the aether. There are 5 images including four stages and a conclusion tablet of the Michelson-Morley Experiment. The system is moving through the aether at a velocity of 0.1C. Image 1. http://www3.telus.net/hill/MichExperiment.jpg step 1:The light leaves the laser (light source) at 0.9C head on into the aether which is traveling 0.1C. This is in accordance with experimental data of wave mechanics. The aether is expected to create a wind effect that would differ the velocity of light moving 'upstream' as it were. Image 2. http://www3.telus.net/hill/MichExperiment2.jpg step 2:The light splits into the two perpendicular paths. The green arrow (we call A) remains going 0.9C, as the paths has been unchanged. The red arrow (we call B) turns perpendicular to the aether and is now capable to travel at C or 1C, because it is not moving parrallel with the motion of the proposed aether. Image 3. http://www3.telus.net/hill/MichExperiment3.jpg step 3:The light reflects and returns to the center mirror. Historically it was not calculated that the light could measure beyond C relative to the apparatus. However, it is absolutely acceptable for the light to reach C relative to the aether on its return trip, thus creating a measurement 1.1C relative to the experiment system. Although, the apparatus observer must take into consideration its own velocity relative to the aether. As so we have; Observer velocity 0.1C, Light velocity C. Thus the distance that is covered between observer and the light is 1.1C, although this does not affect the true velocity of the light, and all laws of physics are obeyed. Image4. http://www3.telus.net/hill/MichExperiment4.jpg The light waves turn on the final stretch to make there way to the detector, perpendicular to the aether at a velocity of 1C, at this point they have regained equal posistion (as will be seen in the table of image 5). note: one arrow was crossed out to show that they have returned to one wave form again. Image5. http://www3.telus.net/hill/MichExperiment5.jpg This table shows the different velocities of the light relative the experiment system in each step. At the end of the trip the total velocity remains equal. I called this net velocity, however, it is the average velocity that is also equal. How is light able to exceed C relative to an inertial frame as it leaves 'downstream' into the aether? Enter E=MC^2. While obeying the law that nothing can exceed the speed of light, a moving object is predicted to be able to send light faster in the direction opposite of motion than it is in the direction of motion relative to the observer of that source. In doing so it obeys the law of light always traveling C, relative to the aether, which as mentioned, works into being constant for all observers in conventional return trip measurements. It is due to this that an atom has the energy of the square of the velocity of light in a magnitude of the multiplication of its total mass. In order to obey the constant of C in aether mechanics the atom must be capable to act in speeds beyond C relative to itself to match C relative to the aether. However, it is possible for an atom to act this way as said ealier: How to correctly detect a form of aether. In my understanding, if the Michelson-Morely Experiment was rearranged to only send light in a strait line from, source to a detector a detectable result would be possible, to prove and or correctly disprove a moving aether wind. An example of the corrected appartus. Note: light sources aimed in perpendicular angles laser (light source 1a) to ------------> detector (1b) @ angle x laser (light source) (2a) to ------------> detector (2b) @ angle y The prediction of this theory is that the result would find: - a difference in arrival time for the two light sources - a difference in frequencies between the two lights (if their sources were identical - a velocity of the aether This is a general simple form of the experiment. If the light was capable to make a return trip the experiment would fail to show any change between the two light paths and light would be measured to be a constant of C. The light must make one path from A to B to detect any change. Conclusion It is possible for medium (aether) like universe to obey the laws of physics and create the same experimental observation that have been performed to test the theory of SR with space-time. Support on this theory. http://www.wbabin.net/physics/kingston.htm The Mössbauer effect http://www.rsc.org/Education/EiC/issues/2002July/july2002Adetunji.asp apparatus image. - http://www.rsc.org/images/adetunji_jul02_fig4_tcm18-36458.jpg The angle of light source propogation in respect to space can directly affect the frequency emitted from a gas that is excited by the same light (energy) source.

Please look at this simplified post on how and why the Michelson Morely Experiment can not detect an 'aether wind' effect with the configuration it used. For light to obey C in all frames it must always travel at C relative to the absolute rest of space. (please ignore the typical concept of aether and just use absolute rest in space) Thus in this experiment the path of light has different velocities in each direction it moves. By obeying lights constant it ends up being in tandom with the other light path regardless. see here: http://forums.hypography.com/142527-post15.html This arrangement of a Michelson Morely Experiment that I have designed will test the light in one direction of a path, which will be the only capable way to test any difference in velocity that an aether wind could create. see here: http://forums.hypography.com/142685-post20.html The following is an experiment that was nearly identical to the apparatus arrangement that I explain above to test aether dynamics possibility. This following experiment tested the frequency that was emitted from a gas that will glow and emmit light when excited from a source of light. As the angle changed of which the light traveled in, the frequency of the gas would change. This was namely said to be according to the scientist "Mössbauer recorded the recoilless nuclear resonance absorption of -rays by iridium-191 as a function of the linear (tangential) speed of the source." However later it was forced to be said only change in energy to comply to accepted space-time theory. see here: http://forums.hypography.com/142683-post19.html It is not insufficient, it is just slow going. I am going to work on getting the maths done today. I understand the current SR and mathamatics. I followed all the laws of physics while putting this theory together, with or without math this is possible, however, I did so with the use of an absolute rest. It complies with E=MC^2 to have an aether of absolute rest. Aether has been incorrectly tested for, thus it supports my proposal.

This is the most important section I could explain. Even with the "the luminiferous aether", the operation behind light and its travel mechanisms is NOT like sound waves and water waves. Let me explain. Lets call Aether X. It is absolute rest. Lets call moving object 'inertial frame' (A) Lets call rest observer (b) Lets use the speed of light it is 'C'. Lets use the equations E=MC^2 In the way sound waves work if an object is traveling away from you it will send sound to you more slowly, and distort the sound. A doppler shift. In aether it does not work like this. Lets build a scenario with aether. Any direction the light travels it travels at C, and any observer will measure this. frame 'A' is moving at velocity 0.2C away from observer 'b' who is at rest. Frame a is moving 0.2C relative to the aether. A photon that leaves in the direction of travel of frame a will travel away from observer B at C and will travel through the aether at C. A photon that travles from frame a to observer b, -this is where it comes together-. Typically in the way sound works a photon would leave frame A at velocity C minus the velocity of the moving frame A to give a total of 0.8C towards the observer B. However, in the form of aether, the atom has energy of that of the square of C. What occurs here is that the atoms on frame A that emmitt the photons must continue to obey the laws of physics. Thus the photon is emitted from frame A to observer B at velocity 1.2C as to remain in velocity C relative to the aether. The photon also travels towards the observer B at velocity C, as we see with; -frame A (-0.2C) relative to observer B. -photon (1 C) must obtain 1.2C relative to moving frame A to remain C for observer and aeather. We presume that atom (source of light) has the freedom to act up to that of velocity C relative to the aether and nothing else. Thus the energy of the matter must be that of E=MC^2 otherwise it would never create C velocity when traveling away from an observer at velocity .999C (as an example). The difference is that aether wave functions come from a electrodynamic source and sound waves come from a momentum source. The aether source has properties which must obey the observed laws of physics. When this is all implemented into the rest of all motion, space and time. It does as I say work as flawlessly as that of SR.

Check the section on the Michelson Morely experiment. and this table ( http://www3.telus.net/hill/MichExperiment5.jpg) which explains what will happen everytime you check for aether wind with the setup they used. rearrange the Michelson Morely experiment otherwise you can not get a measurement on aether in this form. I agree, but I am saying I understand it is possible with absolute rest of space. I have enough math skills to show its validiy. However it will take me awhile becaue I have to find the formula for many of the steps because I do not have them in memory. This is not my main area of expertise. Thanks for the good luck thoughts.

Alot can happen in an infinite amount of time, if that is what you base the universe upon However it is difficult to measure something in an unmearsureable enviroment with infinite nature. (also requires another wink)

It can and it will. I mentioned this is a work in progress that has taken alot of time. However I have tried to express each component as I went along only over a couple of days. So forgive me. I am not here to convince or prove, due to my lack of math ability. However I have shown how it can be proved. Anyone interested to investigate and check it is my guest. It dissagrees with a major part of current SR. That is, it deals with an absolute rest in which light travels. I described how and why light can act as it has been experimentally found in an aether like enviroment. (see: This Theory and Michelson Morely Experiment. ) There is also several differences in this. Time dilation, dimension dilation, and relativistic mass. It still aligns to observations made but explains them differently. For example: This theory of relativity states the following. Two types of time. Time 1: The visual information carried in light that displays a rate of change. ex. A clock can be seen to move faster but this is only a measurement of the light. note: this version of time is not fundamental (under this theory of Alt relativity) it is a measurement of the rate of incoming change. Time 2: A universal syncronized time for all matter. Ex. a series of lights at multiple distances from an observer can turn on at the exact same moment. However, an observer that is located in a rest posistion will never see them come on at the same moment. The lights matter is synced but what is seen is only what is in the observers frame and it is relative to that observer, thus the time, or what a clock measures is variable. note:this version of time is fundamental. (current SR says the laws of physics and the speed of light is the same for all frames of observation). (ASR says the same thing, AR=alternative relativity) Theoretically yes. Due to it being possible for all reference frames of matter to be in sync it should directly imply that by some means they can instanty influence eachother. However I do not know exactly how the appartus is set up to cause this to occur so I can not say for sure. But the time for matter is equal at all distance thats the principle. Reasons to take interest. I believe I have clearly shown that the Michelson Morely Experiment can not and will not detect a change in the light with or without aether wind. This is a fundamental point to look at.

It has been a rushed process. I urge you to read the sections that you find interesting. Such as the comparisson table at the end, and the original thread would be your best bet to get the clearest conception. I agree It needs summery but I am in the process of building it. I urge critics. I will do what I can do describe the theory's plausability.

The original thread on the discussion of this theory in developement is located at this link. http://forums.hypography.com/physics-mathematics/9110-special-relativity-alternatives.html NOTE: -This theory has support from actual experimental evidence. -It is 100% testable, and the test aparattus is explained if you scrolll through -The last section shows a comparison chart between this theory and current special relativity, so you can see just how similar they are. -This is not an attack on any theory; it only brings up possible faults and explains the alternative if it were proved and accepted. The entire process of the theory will be located below. - - - - - This is a theory in the works that has been making great progress. (forgive me, it is all cut and pastes from a different forum and there is no official title other than it is a different theory on relativity. I use alternative relativity throughout this post.) There is support in experinmental evidence. There is also ways to test the theory which will be in the following. I will post the series of posts all at once in this post. Take your time and enjoy. contents (of sorts): First I stated observations I made of the physical world. I also stated the principles that were fromed from those observations. Later in this thread I gathered up these princples to desribe what they state overal as a theory and what it predicts. I then set out to desribe real true ways to test this theory. One of which was the Michelson Morely Experiment. Under the circumstances and principles of this theory the Michelson Morely Experiment was incorrectly set up. I desribed how to rearrange the Michelson Morely Experiment experiment to test for an aether effect known as aether wind. In this arrangement it would be possible to measure the predicted shift from an observer moving through an absolute space. The Cerenkov Radiation post was only something to consider. It in my opinion supports the theory what and how light works. ************************************************************* ACTUAL observable events There is a group of concepts I have thouroughly thought out that I would like to discuss here. These concepts are related to motion, light, and matter. In otherwords, it relates to the dialations described the theory of Special Relativity. I find what these concepts do is point to a possible alternative in SR. But I urge you to put those statements aside for the time being and 'reset' as it were and continue on. First I want to list the things that occur and can be measured in near speed of light velocities of matter in the good old Newtonian structure of physics, this is, ignoring Relativity occurances at this point. 1) As an object nears the speed of light its observable posistion becomes altered. When an object is nearing very close to the speed of light the distance it is observed from becomes perportionally equal (the perportionallity is depending on how close the speed of light the observed object is traveling) to the distance the observed object travels in the time it takes for the light to cover that distance to the observer from the observed moving object. The light takes time to reach you. In that time the object continues in motion. So when the light reaches the observer the posistion of that object may not be measured to where it really is. There is time between observation frames relative to the distance between them. Note: this is to imagine an object traveling perpendicular to the observer. 2) As an object travels directly away from an observer the time it takes for the light to reach that observer increases. So as an object accelerates away from an observer at nearly the speed of light, the time it takes for the light to reach the observer continually increases even if and when the light remains at a constant velocity. If the object travels 1 year away at nearly the speed of light, the time it takes for the observer to detect the object in that posistion will also take (aprox) a year. Thus when the light reaches the observer (which took a year) the object will now be close to 2 light years away. Likewise, when an object travels towards an observer the light that comes from that object has less and less distance to travel. Thus the time it takes for the light to reach the observer will continually decrease. When the object nears the speed of light it keeps (a significant) pace with the light it is eminating, to the observer. 3) When an object travels in any direction to an observer at a signifcant distance (where time visuals can be managable) at nearing the speed of light, the observer measures only the light of the object but not the object itself (with a ruler for example). Furthermore, what happens to the object directly is not measureable (because it is moving near the speed of light) but only the light that eminates from it is. 4) Any observer, moving or not, can only detect light that has had an interatcion with them. The light that eminates from an observer is undectable, unmeasurable, and in a way like a phantom photon that may never be reached, and can in a sense allow it to not exist. However the only method to detect that photon is to have it absorbed by another object and reflected back to the observer. However at this point it is not the same photon. 5) The wavelength of light from a moving object will always change to an observer as that object changes velocities. This is, anything that has a frequency increases distance between each 'peak' as the velocity increases. Because all forms of light are frequencies they will observed to change when eminating from a moving object in comparison to rest. (we must also assume the observer is at rest -ps not this means if you think in terms of a person, they can not move their eyes if they want pure rest observations. Moving your eyes is a way to catch different angles of light and will change your observation details making the light coming from a moving object behave differently. ************************************************************* The Principles and Forming of Theory The theory that is formed is a theory of an possible alternative of special relativity. What I discovered was what the following observation (quote) defines; What it defines is that the motion of bodies in the macro scale also contains the same or very similar (hiesenberg) uncertainty principle. (in very high velocity scenarios) To elaborate; As an observer measures the posistion of a moving body (of any size) they are left unable to prove the objects momentum. This is because any moving object can be measured in two forms. It can be measured by causing it to have a collision, which detects its posistion and momentum, or it can be measured by detecting its velocity and posistion via the light that eminates from that object. The earlier is uncertain but predictable, but not proveable, the latter is certain and proveable. thus It can be said that an object can be measured in two ways. One that is certain and one that is not, one that is in particle form and one that is in wave form. The reason for this, The objects position in high velocity (near light speed) systems is able to escape instantanious report to observer. It is also able to accellerate into time of report. This is, as a particle moves away, or perpendicular to an observer at a significant velocity the light that comes from that object will take a period of time to travell the # distance from object to observer, and as it does, the object itself will be predicted to continue on its path. Predicted because the measurement can no longer be instant enough to know what the object is doing in the present. The object to the observer will act like it is moving into the future. In the same way the actions on the sun are in our 'future' and take time to reach us, the action of the moving object likewise acts as if it is in the future, it is no longer instantanious measurement. The direction of movement of the moving object will be the cause for the occurances of the observation. If the object moves towards an observer a clock will apear to accelerate, and the posistion of the object will not be certain, depending on its distance. If the object moves perpendicular, a clock will act in sync with the observer due to the moment where distance is not changing between the frames. Finally as an object accelerates more away from an observer a clock will apear to slow down, and the posistion of the object will become uncertain but theoretically predictable. However in this case a clock is not what measures time. The rate a clock ticks in the observers frame is its own constant. When a clock is compared to a moving frame and the observer the light that is used to observe and measure is the display of the time or the comparison of the clocks. However important to note that this is difference in clock tick is not as intwined with passage of time in the frames. Because any observation made is an observation made in the observing frame. Any distance outside that frame is undetectable. As for the matter (the material the atoms) in each frame, time as it were, ticks by in syncronization. Thus regardless of distance all matter (observation frames) may act in syncronicity. However the light that traverses between any frame may alter the measurement of time comparison, and run in difference. We end up with, as I understand (hopefully) coinciding an alternative SR theory to quantum mechanics theory due to the fact they both share the uncertainty princple, and mesh in macro and micro. Here we have a list of what is described in this theory, (in this post). - the uncertainty principle in both micro and macro (quantum thoery and Relativity) - The wave particle duality of both light and matter - syncronicity between systems - dilations observed in an observers frame - Time, the observation of time, and the conception of time. ************************************************************* This Theory and Michelson Morely Experiment. Attempt to show how to have an aether like universe and not be affected by "aether wind'. There is an redescription in this theory that allows there to be zero difference in the time it takes a light wave to cover a two paths when dealing with the effect of aether wind, in an aether like universe. Visit this link ( http://galileoandeinstein.physics.virginia.edu/more_stuff/flashlets/mmexpt6.htm )and experiment with the tool to become familiar with the Michelson-Morley Experiment. It measures the proposed expectations of an aether enviroment. This theory suggests there will never be a difference between the two different paths of light in an aether enviroment while the system is in motion. I have 4 images (four stages) of the Michelson-Morley Experiment. In each image I describe the expected velocity of the light wave. The system is moving through the aether at a velocity of 0.1C. The speed of light is not violated. Image 1. http://www3.telus.net/hill/MichExperiment.jpg The light leaves the lazer at 0.9C head on into the aether which is traveling 0.1C (Note the light is moving 0.9C relative to the lazer[observer] thus Image 2. http://www3.telus.net/hill/MichExperiment2.jpg The light splits into the two perpendicular paths. The green arrow (we call A) remains going 0.9C. The red arrow (we call B) turns perpendicular to the aether and travels at 1.0 C, or C. Image 3. http://www3.telus.net/hill/MichExperiment3.jpg The light reflects and returns to the center mirror. Historically, or in todays theory the experiment was calculated that no wave could reach a value beyond C. However in this theory it is acceptable for the light to reach C relative to the aether on its return trip. Thus light wave a travels at 1.1C relative to the experiment system. Image4. http://www3.telus.net/hill/MichExperiment4.jpg The light waves (which are matched) make there way to the detector, perpendicular to the aether at a velocity of 1C in tandom. (which is why the green arrow is cancled out because it will be in equality with the other wave. Image5. http://www3.telus.net/hill/MichExperiment5.jpg A table that shows the different velocity of the light relative the experiment system in each step and shows that at the end of the trip the total velocity is equal. I called this net however, I meant to say the average velocity for each path ends up the same once it makes its way to the detector. Relative to the aether the speed of the photon (light wave) never changed. However to the experiment it did, which was expected historically during these experiments. Thus because the light speed does not remain constant to the observer in an aether enviroment it can reach velocities beyond C on its path towards the observer. This would be expected to violate the rule of the speed of light, but it does when the speed of the observer is put into account. For example, if an observer is moving through space at velocity .5C and a source of light is coming directly towards the observer, the light will be measured to be moving faster than C relative to the observer, but only because the observer is also moving relative to the aether. As for the structure and properties of this aether, there are many current theoretical versions. This very structure of the system aligns precisely with the rest of the statements in this theory. My accertion is that our expectation of a delay occuring for the two different light paths was not correct. The velocity of light was not kept at constant to begin with so it is valid to allow it to exceed C only relative to the observer. ************************************************************* Support on this theory. http://www.wbabin.net/physics/kingston.htm The Mössbauer effect http://www.rsc.org/Education/EiC/issues/2002July/july2002Adetunji.asp Enter Rudolf Mössbauer In 1953 Rudolf Mössbauer.... This line (Fig 5) constitutes the first Mössbauer spectrum. His work, incorporating this classic plot, was submitted to the journal Die Naturwissenschaften in August 1958 and was published within a matter of weeks.7 The short paper, scarcely 1000 words long, generated immense interest: within one week Mössbauer received 260 requests for reprints. Its use as an analytical method was soon recognised and this interest sustains: in 2000 Mössbauer spectroscopy featured in 1185 papers. apparatus image. - http://www.rsc.org/images/adetunji_jul02_fig4_tcm18-36458.jpg From what I gather; The angle of light source propogation can directly affect the frequency emitted from the resonance of an excited gas. I assume The ether wind effet would produce such results. These results are predicted in this alternative relativity theory and may support it. ************************************************************* Note: Extracted from ealier post to expose its importance. Theory is as of now referred to as alternative relativity theory. Testing this theory and the possibility of ether existence. In my understanding, if the Michelson-Morely Experiment was rearranged to only send light in a strait line from, source to detector, a new result may come about. For example: lazer (light source 1a) to ------------> detector (1b) @ angle x You would also send light in a perpendicular angle to a seperate detector in the same manner. lazer (light source) (2a) to ------------> detector (2b) @ angle y The prediction of this theory is that the result would find: - a difference in arrival time for the two light sources - a difference in frequencies between the two lights (if their sources were identical - a velocity of the aether This experiment would test this theory with firm authority. I'd be glad to see it fail or pass. If it failed, then I would be satisfied. If it passed I would be glad to see new headway in science. ************************************************************* Because this theory does not yet have an official title I will remain to refer to it as alternative relativity theory. alternative relativity theory: Aether Dynamics and Cerenkov Radiation http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/einvel.html#c3 The theory may Propose light 'energy' is produced in a similar manner. The electron persay, attemping to exceed the speed of light. Energy (E) in an atom is equal to the velocity of light squared, multiplied by its mass. (Here we assume the equation is a product of matter able to operate in C+C quantities, which depends on the matter's velocity relative to the ether.) Once matter a part of an atom has achieved the desired velocity it stresses the fabric of the aether causing a light wave to burst into existence similar to the method of Cerenkov Radiation production. The energy exchange is 100% efficient and the matter resides to its original state.. As it does it acts in the same manner a particle does when entering a medium where light travels slower, sending out a light wave. All particles with mass are capable to produce light energy. If a nuclei is stressed enough it too may hammer into a specific medium light travels in, at a high enough velocity to send out a pulse of energy, light. I only mean to propose consideration of this effect with the aether plausability. ************************************************************* Special Relativity & Alternative Relativity A chart that summerizes what I have said to show the difference and simularity between the two theories. http://forums.hypography.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=804&d=1163542114