Speed and Aberration of Light and Redshift Research Article

IOSR Journal Of Applied Physics, 2025

A detailed study of light speed is presented based on Newtonian physics in which photon is treated as a particle having inertia properties in both photon generation and propagation processes. With a clear understanding of the definition of light speed and the reference of observation, on one hand, Wu's Spacetime Shrinkage Theory based on a hypothetical Yanton and Yington Theory can be applied successfully in interpretation of physical phenomena of photon associated with Absolute Light Speed observed at light source (also at stationary reference point), such as Cosmological Redshift, Gravitational Redshift, Light Deflection, Anisotropic light speed, as well as Hubble's Law and Expansion of the Universe. On the other hand, Equation of Light Speed and Equations of Doppler Shifts based on a logical analysis can also be implemented perfectly in explanation of physical phenomena of photon associated with Normal Light Speed observed at reference point, such as Axial Doppler Shift, Acceleration Doppler Shift and Transverse Doppler Shift, as well as Acceleration Doppler Effect and Event Horizon. As a result, Normal Light Speed observed at the reference point is not constant, which can change with the relative motion between light source and reference point. Even though Absolute Light Speed observed at light source is constant, it is true only if at the same gravitational field and aging of the universe.

2021

This paper studied why the speed of light is always constant regardless of the speed of the light source or the observer. I also studied that the theory of relativity can be described only with the basic properties of time and space without introducing the constancy of the speed of light as a basic principle. This logical process presupposes that the correct length change in the special theory of relativity is length expansion, not length contraction, and I have confirmed that length expansion is consistent with known relativistic experimental results.

Could Albert Einstein be wrong about absolute motion, absolute time and gravity but right about space contraction and the speed of light? Perhaps the great theoretical physicist is not completely wrong. In this paper, a new law of transformation of reference frames for an absolutely moving observer is proposed. We may call this Apparent Source Theory(AST). With this transformation, the space in front of an absolutely moving observer apparently contracts whereas the space behind an absolutely moving observer expands. Profoundly, AST changes current understanding of the phenomenon of stellar aberration. Stellar aberration occurs because of compression (or expansion) of space in front of (behind) an absolutely moving observer. The apparent change in position of the star is not in the direction of observer's absolute velocity, as is universally thought, but in the opposite direction! Mercury's anomalous perihelion advance can be explained by expansion of space as seen by the Sun and as seen by Mercury. AST also provides physical explanation for a new theory already proposed by this author: Exponential Doppler Effect of light: f ' = f e V/c ,λ ' = λ e-V/c. This agrees with the constancy of the phase velocity of light: f 'λ' = f λ= c and can explain the Ives-Stilwell experiment. Not only frequency but also wavelength changes for an absolutely moving observer and the change in wave length for a moving observer can only be explained by apparent expansion or contraction of space as seen by an absolutely moving observer. AST has differences from and similarities to Special Relativity Theory (SRT) and/or Lorentz Contraction (LC) as follows:1. AST postulates that the phase velocity of light in vacuum is constant c irrespective of source, observer or mirror velocity, but the group velocity of light varies with observer or mirror velocity but is independent of source velocity 2. AST postulates absolute time 3. According to AST, absolute motion exists, but the ether doesn't exist as we know it 4. According to AST, space apparently contracts in front of an absolutely moving observer and expands behind him/her, only as seen by the absolutely moving observer, whereas space (or length) only contracts, both in the forward and backward directions, as seen by the 'stationary' observer, in SRT and LC. In AST, space contraction is applied only when objects are considered as sources (sources of light, EM waves, electrostatic fields, gravity). In Apparent Source Theory, it is assumed that only the position of the light source will apparently change relative to the detector/observer but the mirrors, the beam splitter and all other parts of the apparatus will be assumed to be at their actual/physical positions in the analysis of the experiment. 5. In AST, it is space itself that contracts or expands relative to a moving observer regarding the position of sources 6. AST gives a new law of transformation of space, which is different from Lorentz transformations. 7. In AST, the observer is the light detecting device or the human directly detecting the light and light speed experiments should always be analyzed from the perspective of the inertial observer. More precisely, the observer is the atom detecting the light. According to Apparent Source Theory, the effect of absolute motion of the Michelson-Morley experiment is to create an apparent change in position of the light source as seen by (relative to) the observer/detector.The resulting fringe shift is the same as if the source was actually /physically moved to the same position. Intuitively, we can guess that actually changing the source position will not result in significant fringe shift or gives only small fringe shift. Apparent Source Theory not only accounted for the 'null' fringe shift of the Michelson-Morley experiment, but also for the small fringe shifts observed such as in the original Michelson experiment of 1881 and the Miller experiments. It explainsmany other light speed experiments, including the Sagnac effect, the Marinov experiment, the Silvertooth experiment, the Bryan G Wallace experiment, the Roland De Witte and other experiments. 2

2014

Conventionally, the phenomenon of light (stellar) aberration is understood as a phenomenon of source observer relative motion. In this paper, it is proposed that a phenomenon of aberration exists even if the source and the observer are at rest relative to each other, but co-moving absolutely in space.

Concepts from the special theory of relativity are widely held, including time dilation theory, perceived to have experimental confirmation, and believed to have no disproof from well controlled prospective experiments. Demonstrated here is that although relativity for light is special, in being an entity always traveling at fixed speed in the propagation direction from its source coordinate, the notion that time "dilates" for objects in motion was an unfortunate extrapolation: (1) An element is derived, missing from the original analysis, which demonstrates that for bodies in motion, the time required to be illuminated differs compared with that in the absence of motion, but absolute time itself does not "dilate." The times required for a moving rod and for a stationary rod are identically calculated by both an observer in motion and one stationary. (2) Experiments with laser light sources, observed while the earth revolves and orbits and produces variable lateral source velocity, demonstrated that light pulses shift laterally along with the source and target while propagating at speed c to intercept the target. Pulses have a lateral velocity imparted by the orbiting earth, a necessary finding to understand special relativity. Examples are provided that clarify thought experiments commonly presented in Physics texts, and (3) intrinsic properties of light photons, such as self propagation, intrinsic speed, and relative velocity, are discussed. Les concepts issus de la théorie de la relativité restreinte, et notamment la théorie de la dilatation du temps, sont largement acceptés et sont considérés comme ayant été confirmés expérimentalement sans possibilité d'être invalidés par des expériences contrôlées. Nous démontrons ici que malgré le caractère spécial de la relativité pour la lumière, s'agissant d'une entité qui voyage toujours à une vitesse constante dans la direction de propagation à partir de sa coordonnée source, la notion que le temps se 'dilate' pour des objets en mouvement était une extrapolation malheureuse: 1) On déduit un élément, manquant dans l'analyse initiale, qui démontre que pour les corps en mouvement, la durée d'illumination nécessaire change par rapport à l'absence de mouvement mais que le temps absolu lui-même ne se 'dilate' pas. Les durées nécessaires pour une tige en mouvement et une tige stationnaire sont calculées avec un observateur en mouvement et un observateur stationnaire. 2) Des expériences avec des sources de lumière laser, observées pendant que la Terre tourne sur elle-même et autour du soleil en créant ainsi une source de vitesse latérale variable, ont démontré que les impulsions lumineuses étaient latéralement décalées comme la source et la cible tout en voyageant à la vitesse c pour intercepter la cible. Les impulsions ont une vitesse latérale communiquée par la révolution de la Terre, un résultat nécessaire pour comprendre la relativité restreinte. Des exemples sont fournis afin de clarifier des expériences de pensée couramment présentées dans des ouvrages de physique. 3) Enfin, les propriétés intrinsèques des photons, telles que l'auto-propagation, la vitesse intrinsèque et la vitesse relative, sont discutées.

Journal of High Energy Physics, Gravitation and Cosmology, 2019

Aims: The paper explores the hypothesis that the speed of light c is decreasing over time at rate () d d c t H c = − ⋅ , H being the Hubble constant. This hypothesis differs from the so-called tired light, in which the velocity c is supposed to vary during the journey of photons in the empty space for some frictional mechanism. In the hypothesis of the author the speed c, during this journey, is assumed constant. In this way the problems of the tired hypothesis are overcome. Methods: The paper links the variation dc/dt with the Hubble constant and infers a value of dc/dt from the difference between the value of the variation of the Earth-Moon distance measured by the Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment and the tidal effect. Results: Under the hypothesis c time varying, we explain: 1) The cosmological redshift. 2) The anomalous acceleration a p ≈ −8 × 10 −10 m•sec −2 , measured for some spacecrafts. 3) The high redshift of supernovae Ia, which seems to evidence an acceleration of the expansion of the universe. 4) The peripheral motion of stars in galaxies around their rotational centre. 5) The dilation of the light curves observed for supernovae Ia.

Henok Tadesse

This author has already proposed a new theory, Apparent Source Theory (AST), that can explain the Michelson-Morley experiment, the Sagnac effect, the Silvertooth experiment, the Roland De Witte experiment, the Venus planet radar range data anomaly (analyzed and reported by Bryan G Wallace) and other experiments. According to AST, there will be an apparent change in position of a light source as seen by the observer, for absolutely co-moving source and observer. The 'null' result of the Michelson-Morley experiment (MMX) is explained as follows. The effect of absolute motion is just to create an apparent change in position of the light source relative to the detector. There will be no (significant) fringe shift in the MMX for the same reason that there will be no (significant) fringe shift if the source position was actually, physically shifted slightly. The fringe shift in Sagnac effect is explained as follows. The source will be apparently shifted away relative to the detector when looking in the backward direction and shifted towards the detector when looking in the forward direction, hence creating a path difference. Einstein's thought experiment ('chasing a beam of light') is re-interpreted and used as one of the foundational arguments in this paper. The new interpretation is that it is the phase velocity of light that is always constant irrespective of source, observer and mirror velocity. The group velocity behaves in a more conventional way: it is independent of source (absolute) velocity but depends on observer and mirror velocity. For an observer moving near the speed of light away from a light source, the phases will still move past the observer at the speed of light while the group will be at rest relative to the observer. The new theoretical framework consists of two theories: 1. Apparent Source theory 2. Exponential Doppler Effect of light theory. The results of many light speed experiments can be derived from these two theories. Apparent Source Theory determines the phase and group delay of light, whereas Exponential Doppler Effect theory determines the frequency/wavelength of light.

Journal of Applied Physics , 2021

Einstein's Special Relativity is based on a postulation that the light speed in vacuum is constant no matter the light sources and observers. Because light speed is very much faster than the speed of light source, it is nearly impossible to measure the light speed on a light source moving at a comparable speed. Since there is no solid proof yet that light speed is constant, it is fair to ask what if light speed is not constant. Based on Photon Inertia Transformation and Yangton and Yington Theory, Equation of Light Speed is proposed, such that Doppler Redshift can be explained by Acceleration Doppler Effect, and Event Horizon can be interpreted by the competition between Absolute Light Speed and star acceleration speed. Both of them can also be considered as the nature proofs of that light speed is not constant. In addition, if light speed is indeed constant, then interference shall be found in Michelson Morley Experiment even Aether doesn't exist. On the contrary, if light speed is not constant, then Einstein's Special Relativity shall not be true simply because of the wrong assumption, and Velocity Time Dilation cannot be true either. Furthermore, for the same reason, relativism could be totally false and Length Contraction could be induced from human's visual memory instead of Special Relativity. After all, it is the purpose of this review to give a sound answer to the question "What if light speed is not constant".

Physics Essays, 2018

The speed of light is normally assumed to be a fundamental constant of nature. In this essay, I propose that the speed of light is not a fundamental constant, but, rather, it is a consequence of the execution of fundamental laws of nature: primarily, the second law of thermodynamics and a law of gravitation. The implication is that the speed of light has to be constant and independent of the speed of the emitting source only when the light is subject to gravitation. This also means that the special theory of relativity is implicitly based on the existence of gravitational potential. The related implication is that the universe can be infinite in time as massless energy (photons) can accumulate and stars can form out of thermal radiation in the regions of the universe where no gravitational potential exists.

2015

Most of the experiments and phenomena on the speed of light can be explained either by the ether theory or the emission theory. The emission theory can explain the Michelson-Morley experiment. The ether theory can explain the Sagnac and Michelson-Gale experiments, moving source experiments, the Silvertooth experiment and Bradely Stellar Aberration. Therefore, it is highly likely that a single theory can be formulated which is a fusion of the emission theory and the ether theory. Neither does the ether exist, nor is the ballistic theory correct. The emission theory and the ether theory are not wrong but incomplete separately. This paper proposes a theory which seamlessly fuses the two into one. The speed of light is constant relative to the apparent source. A consequence of this is that it is impossible to detect absolute motion by phase comparison using a single light source. The fallacy with the Michelson Morley experiment was that a single light source was used. Modern Michelson Morley experiments use two light sources but then compare frequencies (not phases) which will not change for co-moving source and observer [3]. All of the known light speed experiments agree with this theory. We call the new theory the Apparent Source Theory. A direct evidence of the two-source claim made above is Ronald de Witte's experimental detection of absolute motion by comparing the phases of two independent Cesium clock stabilized signal sources.