On the invariance of the speed of light

The invariance of the speed of light in all inertial frames is shown to be an inevitable consequence of the relativity principle of special relativity contrary to the view held by Hsu and Hsu in taiji relativity where the speed of light is no longer a universal constant.The present approach is not only new but also much simpler than the existing approaches.

The role of the light postulate in special relativity is reexamined. The existing theory of relativity without light shows that one can deduce Lorentz-like transformations with an undetermined invariant speed based on homogeneity of space and time, isotropy of space and the principle of relativity. However, since the transformations can be Lorentzian or Galilean, depending on the finiteness of the invariant speed, a further postulate is needed to determine the speed in order to establish a real connection between the theory and special relativity. In this paper, I argue that the discreteness of space-time, whose existence is strongly suggested by the combination of quantum theory and general relativity, may result in the existence of a maximum and invariant speed when combing with the principle of relativity, and thus can determine the finiteness of the speed in the theory. According to this analysis, the speed constant c in special relativity is not the actual speed of light, but the ratio between the minimum length and the shortest time of discrete space-time. This suggests a more complete theory of relativity without light, the theory of relativity in discrete space-time, which is based on the principle of relativity and the constancy of the minimum size of discrete space-time.

Here, we analyze the way the measurement of the speed of light is made and show that the relative time is not implied by the constancy of the speed of light in vacuum for all observers. It is rather the "universal" time that is consistent with the way the speed of light can be measured.

arXiv (Cornell University), 2021

Quantum information theorists have created axiomatic reconstructions of quantum mechanics (QM) that are very successful at identifying precisely what distinguishes quantum probability theory from classical and more general probability theories in terms of information-theoretic principles. Herein, we show how one such principle, Information Invariance & Continuity, at the foundation of those axiomatic reconstructions maps to "no preferred reference frame" (NPRF, aka "the relativity principle") as it pertains to the invariant measurement of Planck's constant h for Stern-Gerlach (SG) spin measurements. This is in exact analogy to the relativity principle as it pertains to the invariant measurement of the speed of light c at the foundation of special relativity (SR). Essentially, quantum information theorists have extended Einstein's use of NPRF from the boost invariance of measurements of c to include the SO(3) invariance of measurements of h between different reference frames of mutually complementary spin measurements via the principle of Information Invariance & Continuity. Consequently, the "mystery" of the Bell states that is responsible for the Tsirelson bound and the exclusion of the no-signalling, "superquantum" Popescu-Rohrlich joint probabilities is understood to result from conservation per Information Invariance & Continuity between different reference frames of mutually complementary qubit measurements, and this maps to conservation per NPRF in spacetime. If one falsely conflates the relativity principle with the classical theory of SR, then it may seem impossible that the relativity principle resides at the foundation of non-relativisitic QM. In fact, there is nothing inherently classical or quantum about NPRF. Thus, the axiomatic reconstructions of QM have succeeded in producing a principle account of QM that reveals as much about Nature as the postulates of SR.

We consider inertial physical systems in which signals about physical measurements conducted in one reference frame are transmitted to a receiver moving with relative constant velocity v, by an information carrier with a constant velocity v_c with respect to the transmitter's rest frame. To render the model relevant to reality, we assume v_c> v. We make no other assumptions. For systems of this type, we derive the relativistic time, distance, mass, and energy transformations, relating measurements transmitted by the information sender, to the corresponding information registered at the receiver. The sender and receiver need not be human or animate observers. The resulting relativistic terms are beautiful and simple. They are functions only of the normalized velocity β = v/v_c , implying they are scale independent with respect to the velocity of the information carrier, and to the mass and spatial dimensions of the observed bodies. The model's scale independence renders it applicable for all physical systems, irrespective of their size, and the velocity of the information carrier used in the system. For β << 1, all the derived transformations reduce to Galileo-Newton physics. The derived transformations disobey the Lorentz invariance principle. The time transformation predicts relativistic time dilation for distancing bodies and time contraction for approaching bodies. The distance transformation predicts relativistic length contraction for approaching bodies and length extension for distancing bodies. The mass transformation is inversely proportional to the distance transformation, implying an increase in relativistic mass density for approaching bodies and a decrease of mass density for distancing bodies, due to respective length contraction or extension along the body's travel path. For distancing bodies, the relativistic kinetic energy as a function of β displays a monotonic pattern, with a unique maximum at β = Φ, where Φ is the golden ratio (≈ 0.618). At sufficiently high normalized velocities, the relativistic extension can maintain spatial locality between distanced particles, suggesting quantum entanglement is not "spooky," because it is a proximal action. For the special case of v_c = c, where c is the velocity of light, application of the proposed model yields new important insights and results and reproduces several important predictions of Special Relativity, General Relativity, observationally based ΛCDM models, and quantum theory. The model makes excellent predictions for the Michelson-Morley's "null" result, the relativistic lifetime of decaying muons, the Sagnac effect, and the neutrino velocities reported by OPERA and other collaborations. Application of the model to cosmology, without alteration or addition of free parameters, is successful in accounting for several cosmological findings, including the pattern of recession velocity predicted by inflationary theories, the amounts of matter and dark energy in various segments of redshift, reported in recent ΛCDM cosmologies, the GZK energy suppression phenomenon, and the radius of gravitational black holes. More interestingly, we show that the model, despite being deterministic and local, reproduces the predictions of quantum theory for key quantum phenomena, including matter-wave duality, quantum criticality, quantum entanglement, and the formation of Bose-Einstein condensate. The multiplicity and range of the proposed epistemic model predictions suggests that for inertial systems, mere comparison between physical observations taken at the rest of reference and the information received about the same measurement from another moving reference frame is a potent tool for extracting the laws of nature as they are revealed to us. Put metaphorically, we contend that the hidden secrets of the book of Nature often disclose themselves by leaving fingerprints on the book's cover. From observing the fingerprints, humans and other beings can reconstruct information valuable for their survival.

2007

We will look for an implementation of new symmetries in the space-time structure and their cosmological implications. This search will allow us to find a unified vision for electrodynamics and gravitation. We will attempt to develop a heuristic model of the electromagnetic nature of the electron, so that the influence of the gravitational field on the electrodynamics at very large distances leads to a reformulation of our comprehension of the space-time structure at quantum level through the elimination of the classical idea of rest. This will lead us to a modification of the relativistic theory by introducing the idea about a universal minimum limit of speed in the space-time. Such a limit, unattainable by the particles, represents a preferred frame associated with a universal background field (a vacuum energy), enabling a fundamental understanding of the quantum uncertainties. The structure of space-time becomes extended due to such a vacuum energy density, which leads to a negative pressure at the cosmological scales as an anti-gravity, playing the role of the cosmological constant. The tiny values of the vacuum energy density and the cosmological constant will be successfully obtained, being in agreement with current observational results.

The invariance of the relativistic interval as a third postulate in Special Relativity, 2021

In contemporary epistemological research it is gradually emerging the fact that the relativistic interpretation of Lorentz transformation (LT) started from Einstein's early criticism of the notion of "simultaneity" and Minkowski's invariance of the space-time interval should be considered as playing a different role than that of the LT under a Newtonian physics background, i.e., in classical wave propagation theories (Voigt). In this paper we summarize the nature of the deep shift between LT before 1905 (LTC , wave propagation models) and LT after Einstein's article on Annalen der Physik [11] (LTR , relativistic particle physics), pointing out the hypothesis that this difference should be ascribed to the presence of a third postulate in Special Relativity, not attributable to the other two and well distinct from them: the invariance of the space-time interval, also necessary for the foundation of the entire relativistic dynamics.-According to Einstein, Special Relativity is different from Newtonian mechanics only by the postulate of invariance of the light velocity c in vacuum (II postulate), the first one (I postulate), the principle of Galilean relativity, remaining unchanged. We see in this paper that the two postulates (I and II) are not sufficient in order to establish Special Relativity. A well-known remarkable difference between Lorentz (LT) and Galilean (GT) transformations lies in the way the relativity principle, common to both, is implemented-without (Galilean) or with (LT) upper bound for all boost velocities. We read at p. 322 in [1]: "However, this (...) is only one aspect of the historical path; another aspect, of which the existing literature gives no clear account, concerns the different roles played by LT in describing either classical wave propagation phenomena or relativistic particle physics". From the mathematical side, both LT C and LT R are described by the same well-known formalism. An exhaustive discussion about the mathematical properties of LT together with a historical account can be found in Klein, [2]. LT C was first deduced by Voigt's work [3] in 1887 through his description of wave propagation, and it is still a common mathematical tool for the comprehension of the classical Doppler shift effect [4]. H. A. Lorentz himself [5] recognised the anteriority of Voigt's contributions in 1909 [6]. However, Klein's aforementioned work does not distinguish explicitly the physical difference between the classical interpretation of Voigt's transformation and the relativistic one. This difference is clearly pointed out in [1] for the first time. The invariance of the relativistic interval as a third postulate in S. Relativity Digrazia K., Pagano E. V.

Earlier, we had presented heuristic arguments to show that a natural unification of the ideas of the quantum theory and those underlying the general principle of relativity is achievable by way of the measure theory and the theory of dynamical systems. Here, in Part I, we provide the complete physical foundations for this, to be called, the Universal Theory of Relativity. Newton's theory and the special theory of relativity arise, situationally, in this Universal Relativity. Explanations of quantum indeterminacy are also shown to arise in it. Part II provides its mathematical foundations. One experimental test is also discussed before concluding remarks.

In this paper, a logically unambiguous thought experiment with the potential of physical realization is presented to show that under the given condition, the postulate of the constancy of speed of light in vacuum would lead to logically impossible results. A much involved analysis is provided in this writing showing that the most plausible cause for this logical defect was due to the introduction of a new absoluteness when scientists discarded the notion of absolute space and time at the turn of the 20th century. The new absoluteness introduced at that time was the requirement that the Maxwell equations should look absolutely the same in all inertial systems, which would naturally entail a constant speed of light in all inertial frames of reference. Accordingly, this writing would call for the phase out of the special theory of relativity together with its two postulates through a practice of semiotic scaffolding, and also proposes the immediately needed works from the community of theoretical physics for a smooth transition in the post special relativity era.

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.