Speed of Light

To resolve some unphysical interpretations related to velocity measurements by static observers, we discuss the use of generalized observer sets, give a prescription for defining the speed of test particles relative to these observers, and show that, for any locally inertial frame, the speed of a freely falling material particle is always less than the speed of light at the Schwarzschild black hole surface. 2 1

As we approach the 125 th anniversary of the Michelson-Morley experiment in 2012, we review experiments that test the isotropy of the speed of light. Previous measurements are categorized into one-way (single-trip) and two-way (round-trip averaged or over closed paths) approaches and the level of experimental verification that these experiments provide is discussed. The isotropy of the speed of light is one of the postulates of the Special Theory of Relativity (STR) and, consequently, this phenomenon has been subject to considerable experimental scrutiny. Here, we tabulate significant experiments performed since 1881 and attempt to indicate a direction for future investigation.

We present the cosmic organism theory in which all visible and invisible matter has different cosmic genetic expressions. The cosmic gene includes codes for the object structure and the space structure. The cosmic digital code for the object structure consists of full object (1, 2, and 3 for particle, string, and membrane, respectively) and empty object (0) as anti de

Length Contraction is interpreted by human visual memory instead of Einstein's special relativity. The mechanism of an interactive observation by optical sensor or human eyes is studied. The concept "Same Time" in observation process is explained. As a result, in compliance with human visual memory, length contraction along the object can be recognized with different traveling speeds and angles. In addition, length expansion can also be observed along the direction away from the object.

From a new insight about the internal structure and dynamics of quantum particles such as photons and electrons, a conclusion has been reached that the exact point on the detector screen of a double-slit experiment where a photon will land is completely predetermined by fine tuning the initial conditions of the photon and the electron during emission. This means that where exactly a photon lands on the detecting screen is completely predetermined by its initial conditions, just as where exactly a ball lands on the ground is predetermined by its initial conditions. This means that an interference pattern or any arbitrary pattern could be formed on the detector screen by (almost) infinitely fine-tuning the initial conditions of the photon during emission, regardless of whether one or both slits are open, regardless of the distance between the slits, regardless of the distance of the detecting screen. In principle, a mechanical version of particle interference patterns can be created by repeatedly kicking a ball towards a hole ("slit") in a wall, with a "detector" wall at some arbitrary distance from the hole(s). This would require almost "infinite" fine tuning of the initial conditions of the ball, that is initial velocity, initial direction and other parameters. The interference pattern occurred just because of infinite fine tuning of the initial conditions of the ball and not because the ball "interfered" with itself. We just made a successful simulation, and created the pattern as if the ball interfered with itself. A supernatural football player can create an "interference" pattern on the net by accurately deflecting the ball from either pole. The interference pattern in the photon and electron double-slit experiment is fundamentally the same. The conclusion is that aiming a photon to a particular atom on the screen requires (almost) infinite fine-tuning during emission. This raises the burning question: WHO fine-tunes the photons during emission so that they form an interference pattern or a Gaussian pattern? The emitting atom? The light source conspiring with the detecting screen? Atoms have infinitely small intelligence as to do the infinitely complex task of fine-tuning a photon. The conclusion is that a super natural being is fine-tuning and, literally, aiming each and every photon emitted not only from the light source of a double slit experiment, but also all photons emitted from all light sources in the universe. The overwhelming evidence of divine intervention is that photons and electrons cannot by themselves behave both as waves and as particles simultaneously. LITERALLY, God has been behind all confusing light speed experiments and observations made over centuries. It has been discovered that the correct model of the speed of light is a novel, seamless fusion of ether theory and emission theory (Apparent Source Theory). Photons cannot by themselves exhibit this dual nature. Literally, all dualities observed so far in light, electromagnetism and gravity are possible ONLY by DIRECT divine intervention.

A new scaling law for the planetary magnetic field strengths is obtained assuming the magnetostrophic balance. The velocity of the convection current v~in a planetary core is estimated by the geometric mean of the possible maximum and minimum values to be v, c(1~/4ir,w)h/2, where~is angular velocity of the core rotation, c the electric conductivity, c speed of light, and p the magnetic permeability. Overall agreement of the prediction by the present new scaling law with the data on magnetic field strengths of various planets is superior to those by previously proposed scaling laws. The present scaling law is also found to predict well the Neptune's magnetic field recently determined by the Voyager 2 observation.

A usual causal requirement on a viable theory of matter is that the speed of sound be at most the speed of light. In view of various recent papers querying this limit, the question is revisited here. We point to various issues confronting theories that violate the usual constraint.

ABSTRACT Laser cooling of ions at relativistic energies was first observed at the TSR storage ring in Heidelberg. A 7Li+ ion beam moving at 6.4% the speed of light was overlapped with resonant co‐ and counter‐propagating laser beams. The longitudinal temperatures were found to pass below 190 mK. Limits and applications of laser cooled relativistic ion beams are discussed. Laser cooling and electron cooling of the ion beam were combined.

In the literature, three procedures have been used to calculate the electromagnetic fields from return strokes. In the first technique, the source is described only in terms of current density and the fields are expressed entirely in terms of the return-stroke current. In the second technique, the source is expressed in terms of the current and the charge densities and the fields are given in terms of both the current and the charge density. In the third technique, the fields are expressed in terms of the apparent charge density. The fields are connected to the source terms through the vector and scalar potentials. In this paper, the standard equations for the electromagnetic fields generated by an accelerating charge are utilized to evaluate the electromagnetic fields from lightning return strokes. It is shown that the total fields evaluated at any distance using these expressions are identical to those obtained using other techniques. However, the composition of the terms that vary as 1/R, 1/R 2 , and 1/R 3 of the total electric field is different from those of other formulations. In the case of the transmission-line model, where the return stroke is described as a current pulse propagating with uniform velocity, radiation emanates only from the bottom of the channel where current is generated. When the speed of propagation is equal to the speed of light, the total field throughout the entire space becomes radiation. The procedure is also applied here to obtain the electric fields of the traveling-current-source model. The electric fields obtained for this case, too, agree with the previous study. It is also shown how the equations can be applied rather conveniently to evaluate: 1) the electromagnetic fields generated by current pulses propagating along overhead power lines; and 2) the electromagnetic fields generated by vertical conductors and towers during lightning strikes.

It is shown how, within the framework of general relativity and without the introduction of wormholes, it is possible to modify a spacetime in a way that allows a spaceship to travel with an arbitrarily large speed. By a purely local expansion of spacetime behind the spaceship and an opposite contraction in front of it, motion faster than the speed of light as seen by observers outside the disturbed region is possible. The resulting distortion is reminiscent of the "warp drive" of science fiction. However, just as it happens with wormholes, exotic matter will be needed in order to generate a distortion of spacetime like the one discussed here.

Though I am an “Amateur Academic” (layperson) I was recently able to deduce the Actual Speed of Light (299,796,057 m/s) in order to update the current Factual Speed of Light that is regrettably in correct. I was only able to achieve such a lofty goal as a result of correctly determining the original dimensions of the Great Pyramid and in so doing discovering the true nature of the cubit, uncovering the reality that the Meter predates the cubit and must be some (at least) 5000 years old, and to definitively define the meter and provide an inverse for the speed of light; all with nothing more than a high school diploma.

We show how one can measure the speed of gravity only using gravitational phenomena. Our approach offers several ways to measure the speed of gravity (light) and checks existing assumptions about light (gravity) in new types of experiments. The speed of light is included in several well-known gravita-tional formulas. However, if we can measure this speed from gravitational phenomena alone, then is it the speed of light or the speed of gravity we are measuring? We think it is more than a mere coincidence that they are the same. In addition, even if it is not possible to draw strong conclusions now, our formulations support the view that there is a link between electromagnet-ism and gravity. This paper also shows that all major gravity phenomena can be predicted from only performing two to three light observations. There is no need for knowledge of Newton's gravitational constant G or the mass size to complete a series of major gravity predictions.

Recent observations of regularly pulsating x-ray sources in binary star systems are analyzed in the framework of the "emission" theory of light. Assuming that light emitted by a source moving at velocity v with respect to an observer has a speed c ′ =c+kv in the observer's rest ...

Radar guns provide an excellent means of explaining and demonstrating some of Einstein's theories in a very simple and undeniable way. Specifically, radar guns demonstrate how the speed of the emitter cannot add to the speed of the light being emitted, but the speed of light can be combined with the speed of the receiver. In practice, this directly conflicts with basic tenets of mathematicians who somehow believe that all motion is relative, and the speed of light will therefore always be the same for the emitter as for the receiver. A step by step analysis of how radar guns work shatters those tenets.

Einstein did not understand Special Theory of Relativity. How to accelerate electrons to the speed of light “Einstein, your professors did not understand STR because the photon has the rest mass m0 = 0, and all the particles have m0 > 0, this means the maximum speed for these particles v 0, this means all the time the speed of the electron v 0, this means the maximum speed for these particles v 0, this means all the time the speed of the electron v 0, this means the maximum speed for these particles v 0, this means all the time the speed of the electron v < c 261. I am the first who discovered what the scientists, the Nobel Laureates, your professors… do not understand? When the electron is accelerated gains kinetic energy and when the electron – positron collide the kinetic energy is transferred to the photons and Dark Matter electrons 262. I am the first who discovered that to accelerate the electron to the speed of light must be acted upon Dark Matter electron 263. I am the...

Submitted for the 4CF06 Meeting of The American Physical Society Special relativity: two postulates or one? DAVID ECKHARD, ALEXANDER PANIN, Utah Valley State College-In current physics textbooks special relativity is derived from Einstein's two postulates: 1.The laws of physics are the same in all inertial frames. 2. The speed of light is the same as measured in all inertial frames. Because the speed of light is also the proportionality constant in the strength of electromagnetic interactions, and is among three fundamental constants (c, h, G) governing laws of physics, then the second postulate is the consequence of the first one (indeed, otherwise Coulomb law and all e/m phenomena would be reference frame dependent). Therefore, should not SR be reduced to one postulate only? Details of this discussion are presented.

The time evolution of unstable SO(3) monopole and dyon classical field configurations is studied numerically. It is found
that as time goes on, a vacuum region of a finite radius r = t develops, and the monopole core becomes a spherical shell of
almost fixed thickness moving out at the speed of light. The monopole and dyon far fields persist outside the shell, with no
indication of the emission of the nonabelian radiation expected as a manifestation of the instability under small perturbations
in the far field region. Even an initially-growing perturbation eventually stabilizes and is split into a part that moves out to
spatial infinity and another that moves in, is reflected in the vicinity of the monopole center, and then moves out. The
general behavior is very similar to that of certain Minkowski-space, spherically-symmetric classical solutions discovered a
few years ago. The stability of those solutions is also studied.

Measuring the line speed of vehicles detached from a land and moving far from navigation systems is a difficult task. It would be great to have a speed measuring device working as much as possible regardless of location and which is reliable enough. Earth's vehicles, such as cars, ships, airplanes, are equipped with autonomous speedometers. With their help, the speed of movement relative to the environment (land, water, air) is measured. Is it possible to create such a speedometer, for which only the luminiferous medium and energy would be sufficient? It looks like yes. To implement this idea, one can use electromagnetic waves (light), and the fact that light can be entrained by a moving transparent medium.

I havealready proposed a new theory known as Apparent Source Theory(AST) that has been highly successful in explaining the hitherto enigmatic and apparently contradictory light speed experiments. For example, to this date, there is no known, accepted theory of the speed of light that truly reconciles the 'null' result of the Michelson-Morley experiment and the fringe shift in the Sagnac effect. Apparent Source Theory is formulated as follows: the effect of absolute motion for co-moving light source and observer is to create an apparent change in position of the light source relative to (as seen by) the observer. Therefore, in the Michelson-Morley experiment (MMX), there will be an apparent change in position of the light source as seen from the point of light detection. There will be only a small fringe shift due to apparent change of source position for the same reason that there will be only a small fringe shift if the position of the light source wasactually/physically changed. The ether doesn't exist, as disproved by the Michelson-Morley experiment, but absolute motion does exist, as proved by the Silvertooth and other experiments. Apparent Source Theory has successfully explained the conventional and modern Michelson-Morley experiments, the Sagnac effect, the enigmatic Silvertooth experiment, the Venus radar ranging experiment anomaly (as analyzed by Bryan G Wallace), the Marinov experiment, the Roland De Witte experiment and moving source and moving mirror experiments.In this paper,Iwill present a new analysis and interpretation of the Michelson-Morley experiment, the Sagnac effect and the phenomenon of stellar aberration. There have been two interpretations of the Michelson-Morley experiment (MMX)within the physics community: the 'null' interpretation and the non-null interpretation. From the point of view of stationary ether theory, the MMX result is essentially null because the observed fringe shift is much smaller than the expected value. On the contrary, the MMX result is non-null from the perspective of relativity theories, mainly the classical emission theory and the Special Relativity Theory (SRT) because there were always small but significant fringe shifts observed, as in the Miller experiments. Therefore, the MMX disproves not only the ether theory, but also the emission theory and SRT. A correct theory of the speed of light, therefore, should account not only for the 'null' interpretation, but also for the non-null interpretation. To this date there is no such known, accepted theory of light. Apparent Source Theory (AST)has resolved this century old puzzle by explaining the small fringe shifts observed in MM experiments. In this paper it will be shown that AST predicts a maximum fringe shift of about 0.013 fringes for the 1881 Michelson experiment. Michelson measured a maximum fringe shift of about 0.018 fringes !The discrepancy may be reduced if more details of the dimensions of the original Michelson apparatus are obtained. For example, slight variation of the dimensions have resulted in a fringe shift of 0.02125 fringes. AST has successfully resolved the enigmatic contradiction between the Michelson-Morley experiment and the Sagnac effect. No known existing theory of light, including SRT, has achieved this.AST also explains why conventional Michelson-Morley experiments gave small fringe shifts, but modern Michelson-Morley experiments using optical cavity resonators give almost a complete null result. Despite all these successes, AST is found to be in conflict with stellar aberration, a simple analysis I overlooked for years. This was a serious problem that made me resort to speculative ideas*. This contradiction has been resolved at last in my other recent paper that gives a new interpretation to the phenomenon of stellar aberration. 2

Time is a simple word, though it remains truly the most mysterious and vicious phenomena where every living and non-living ones are its victim. This antediluvian force of nature shows no mercy as it moves along every path, every corner sniffing over its wounded and marks victory over one after another. Time mystifies us with the maze of moments and wraps up in the illusion that it would last forever. Indeed, some gets time and some even gets the time of their lives but as one stares at the clock know for sure that time is creeping in onto her/his territory. And with the fractured youth and battered adolescent, one finds her/himself feeble against the ultimate ambush of time as it calmly introduces the being to the prime truth of all. Tirelessly, we chase the days as we make it to the journey of life as we know it. The fixture of sunrise and sunset detonates the moments, and all familiarity seems like occasions held seconds ago. There is no escape. The mystic hands of the clock never greet one at the same spot twice.

But, what if we could actually travel back in time and into the future? There has always been a great deal of interest in time-travel. It has been the center of many science fictions. And frankly, who wouldn't want to travel through time and aspire to a part of this surreal experience?  Through time travel and consequently with the aid of time machine, one can explore the different periods of time, both in the context of past as well as of the future and in that way, one can somewhat overlook the existent that is traditionally allocated to him/her.

The idea of time travel has fascinated human beings for quite some time and from scientists to writers to artists, everybody alike fancied the idea of time travel, pondered about going back to the past as well as take a journey into the future and ultimately unlock and master the mysteries of time itself. And, this book timely tells the story of the spectacular journey of the phenomena now known as Time Travel.

In this paper, we explore the use of multi-band radio frequency interconnect (or RF-I) with signal propagation at the speed of light to provide shortcuts in a many core network-on-chip (NoC) mesh topology. We investigate the costs associated with this technology, and examine the latency and bandwidth benefits that it can provide. Assuming a 400mm 2 die, we demonstrate that in exchange for 0.13% of area overhead on the active layer, RF-I can provide an average 13% (max 18%) boost in application performance, corresponding to an average 22% (max 24%) reduction in packet latency. We observe that RF access points may become traffic bottlenecks when many packets try to use the RF at once, and conclude by proposing strategies that adapt RF-I utilization at runtime to actively combat this congestion.

An early contention of A. Einstein regarding the influence of the magnetic field on the propagation of light is examined. It is found that the contention is compatible with the Cespedes-Cure hypothesis and the idea that the index of refraction of empty space containing magnetic energy density (Quasi-empty space) is modified by the total energy density of space mainly gravitational due to the far away stars and galaxies. Compelling evidence for the Cespedes-Cure hypothesis are coinciding values of the gravitational energy density of space * ρ due to the far-away stars and galaxies, calculated on application of the hypothesis to the Astronomical Lensing phenomenon and to the Pioneer Anomaly problem. Consequences include a revision of Doppler effect-derived radial velocities that lead to overestimation of recession velocities at locations with a decreased gravitational energy density. The radially decreasing mass density observed visually in galaxies may explain the "Flat rotation curve of galaxies" and an assumption of a finite universe with radially decreasing mass density leads to a plausible explanation of the deviation from linearity of Hubble's law: the accelerated expansion of galaxies at extreme distances. Three possible earth bound laboratory experiments to provide additional evidence of the A. Einstein contention and the Cespedes-Cure hypothesis are presented.

Although Maxwell’s most important equations had already appeared throughout his seminal paper entitled “On Physical Lines of Force” , which was written in 1861, it was not until 1864 that Maxwell created a distinct listing of eight equations in his follow up paper known as “A Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field” . This was in a section headed as ‘General Equations of the Electromagnetic Field’. While Maxwell refers to twenty equations at the end of this section, there are in fact only eight equations as such. Maxwell arrives at the figure of twenty because he splits six of these equations into their three Cartesian components. Maxwell’s eight original equations,

Jtotal = Jconduction + ∂D/∂t                                                                        (A)
∇×A = μH                                                                                                          (B)                                                                             
∇×H = Jtotal                                                                                                      (C)                                                                       
E = μv×H − ∂A/∂t − ∇ψ                                                                                    (D)                                                               
D = eE                                                                                                                (E)                                                                                   
E = RJconduction                                                                                            (F)                                                                             
∇∙D = ρ                                                                                                              (G)                                                                                   
∇∙J + ∂ρ/∂t = 0                                                                                                  (H)               

will be discussed in depth in individual sections throughout this paper.

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".

Resumen Este experimento constituye una de las prácticas que, con fines didácticos, los alumnos de Física realizan en la asignatura de Técnicas Experimentales en Física IV. Está diseñado con el objetivo de medir la velocidad de la luz en el aire mediante la medida de interferencias entre ondas electromagnéticas, así como observar el efecto de las guías de ondas, además de hacer un estudio más detallado del funcionamiento de tanto los emisores como los receptores de radiación electromagnética de microondas. Todo ello se realizará mediante el uso de un diodo Gunn, el cual genera microondas, acoplado con una guía a la antena de bocina emisora de esta radiación. La señal electromagnética es dividida mediante el uso de una placa dieléctrica, en dos señales iguales las cuales recorren caminosópticos distintos, para poder ser detectadas finalmente en un punto común. Estas dos señales provocan interferencias, las cuales dan lugar a máximos y mínimos en los valores del potencial detectado que analizaremos con el fin de calcular la velocidad de la luz en el aire una vez que conocemos la frecuencia emisora, y habremos conseguido así el objetivo de este experimento. Se ha obtenido una medida de la velocidad de la luz de c = 294603100 ± 590000 m/s, que difiere en un 0, 017 % con el valor actualmente aceptado para la velocidad de la luz en el aire, que es de c = 299705543 m/s .

That the speed of light is always c=300,000km/s relative to any observer in nonaccelerating motion is one of the foundational concepts of physics. Experimentally this was supposed to have been first revealed by the 1887 Michelson-Morley experiment, and was made one of Einstein's key postulates of Special Relativity in 1905. However in 2002 the actual 1887 fringe shift data was analysed for the first time with a theory for the Michelson interferometer that used both the Fitzgerald-Lorentz contraction effect, as well as the effect of the air in the interferometer on the speed of light. That analysis showed that the data gave an absolute motion speed in excess of 300km/s. So far six other experiments have been shown to give the same result. This implies that the foundations of physics require significant revision. As well data shows that both Newtonian gravity and General Relativity are also seriously flawed, and a new theory of gravity is shown to explain various so-called gravit...

“Theory of Grand Settlement” is a new Theory of Everything (TOE) that brings out a fundamental change in the physical and cosmological understanding of the Universe.

Gravity, Space-Time and Origin of the Universe are all redefined. The “Hot Big Bang” concept is denied while giving room for the exponential growth of the Universe from a single (infinitesimal) speck of energy that rose out of a vacuum fluctuation, which finally ended up in a sustained and “Steady State” evolution of the cosmological bodies. The origin is stretched back to an infinitely past-point in time and the end to an infinitely future-point in time with respect to a given (finite) rate of time-flow of the Universe.

It resolves the issues around the prevailing theories of Big Bang, Cosmic Inflation/ Accelerated Expansion, Dark Energy, Dark Matter, Matter-Antimatter Asymmetry, Mass Defect and other observed properties of the Universe, like, Isotropy, Flatness and Homogeneity.

It better explains the Quantum weirdness like Uncertainty Principle, Wave-Particle Duality, Entanglement, etc. The new theory once again claims that there is a fundamental space called, “Absolute Empty Space”, that accommodates both “Zero” and “Infinity” and upon which the Universe is fully built. Perhaps, human intellect, which can dwell only in finite and discrete domains can never reach out to this new (hypothetical) entity.

It replaces Einstein’s Space-time with Energy-space-time. It explains the geometrical curvature of space-time around energy bodies as a characteristic of the energy-space-time continuum around them. It reviews the speed of EM Waves and justifies its constancy more practically.

In the present scheme of things, most of the physical (that includes both quantum-physics and astrophysics) phenomena were initially conjectured, hypothesized, mathematised and then experimentally verified. So, the new “Theory of Grand Settlement” gives a new set of conjectures and hypotheses, keeping almost the same mathematics and the experimental observations, Surprisingly, it resolves a lot of hitherto unsolved physical and astrophysical issues, paving the way for a new “Theory of Everything”.

We consider plane-symmetric spacetimes satisfying Einstein's field equations with positive cosmological constant, when the matter is a fluid whose pressure is equal to its mass-energy density (i.e., a so-called stiff fluid). We study the initial-value problem for the associated Einstein equations and establish a global existence result. The late-time asymptotics of solutions is also rigorously derived, and we conclude that the spacetime approaches the de Sitter spacetime while the matter disperses asymptotically. A technical difficulty dealt with here lies in the fact that solutions may contain vacuum states as well as velocities approaching the speed of light, both possibilities leading to singular behavior in the evolution equations.

Although Fresnel's ether drag coefficient was ad hoc, its curious confirmation by the Fizeau experiment forced physicists to accept and adopt it as the main guide in the development of theories of the speed of light. Lorentz's 'local-time' , which evolved into the Lorentz transformations, was developed to explain the Fizeau experiment and stellar aberration. Given the logical, theoretical and experimental counter-evidences against the theory of relativity today, it turns out that the Fresnel's drag coefficient may not exist at all. The Fizeau experiment and the phenomenon of stellar aberration have no common physical basis. The result of the Fizeau experiment can be explained in a simple, classical way. It is as if nature conspired to lead physicists astray for more than one century. Alternative theories and interpretations for the ether drift experiments and invariance of Maxwell's equations will be proposed. Physicists rightly assumed the invariance of Maxwell's equations, but their deeply flawed conception of light as ordinary local phenomenon led them unnecessarily to seek an 'explanation' for this invariance, which was the Lorentz transformation. Einstein went down the wrong path when he sought an 'explanation' for the light postulate, when none was needed. The invariance of Maxwell's equations for light is a direct consequence of non-existence of the ether and there is no explanation for it for the same reason that there is no explanation for light being a wave when there is no medium for its propagation. Constancy of phase velocity of light and rotation of the wave fronts for a moving observer, which are direct consequences of non-existence of light carrying medium, can explain the phenomenon of stellar aberration. The group velocity of light behaves in a conventional way: independent of source absolute velocity, but varying with observer absolute velocity. Light is a dual phenomenon: local and non-local. Light is a dual and quantum mechanical phenomenon. The paradoxes in classical electromagnetism, such as the moving magnet and conductor problem, arose due to incompleteness of classical electromagnetism and its wrong interpretation. The solutions to these paradoxes lay in unconventional and subtle, yet logical and natural, fundamental nature of light and electromagnetism.

Speed and Time. These two notions are changing our world and our reality, and we all are the instigators. We all have a part to play in that transformation. There is no escaping it. We have to be prepared. However, the problem is, it is a change, and, by nature, we are resistant to change. But change, especially in relation to speed and time is not to be overlooked. Rushing to save time. Is that true? One would think that a fast-paced lifestyle would lead to more time available. This is far from being the case. Time has become a luxury in our modern world. Lack of time affects almost everybody and every family. Research has found that people with high incomes feel particularly short on time. We live in an ever-accelerating world: faster computers, markets, food, fashion, product cycles, minds, bodies, kids, lives.  When did everything start moving so fast? Why does speed seem so inevitable?  Is faster always better? Speed is fascinating, but why are humans fascinated with speed? Today, we are integrating machines more and more into our ways of life. We feel more and more comfortable to let machines think and act for us. However, speed and time optimization are necessary for the mechanism of our evolution. Speed and time optimization are linked to modernity. The dynamics of speed and time in our society is something we inherited from past generations. Technology and industrialization play an important role in the way we socially approach time. How do you know what you’re doing is a good use of your time? Does this task really need to be done? What causes you to waste time? What do you want to do more with more time? What do you want to spend less time doing? How do you manage your time and prioritize tasks? Is proper time management increase your productivity? What if time was an illusion? The answers to these questions, of course, will vary from one person to the next. The evolution and the progressive increase of Speed and Time and its impacts on our modern world gives rise to two categories of observers: the proponents of the idea that we should keep moving faster and faster and the opponents or those who think we should, instead, slow down. In that regard, this book shows the various benefits of speed and time and also their disadvantages. Then, it brings an answer to the question, Is there a happy medium between the two views?

Einstein did not understand Special Theory of Relativity. How to accelerate electrons to the speed of light

“Einstein, your professors did not understand STR because the photon has the rest mass m0 = 0, and all the particles have m0 > 0, this means the maximum speed for these particles v < c and their m and E will not be infinite”
Adrian Ferent

“In Einstein equations and theories are singularities, infinite mass and energy, gravitational singularity, because Einstein did not understand Special relativity and Gravitation”
Adrian Ferent

“The electron is composed of a photon and a Dark Matter electron”
Adrian Ferent

“In particle accelerators they accelerate the electric charge, the photon inside the electron with m0 > 0, this means all the time the speed of the electron v < c”
Adrian Ferent

“What the scientists, the Nobel Laureates, your professors… do not understand?
When the electron is accelerated gains kinetic energy and when the electron – positron collide the kinetic energy is transferred to the photons and Dark Matter electrons”
Adrian Ferent

“To accelerate the electron to the speed of light must be acted upon Dark Matter electron”
Adrian Ferent

”In Ferent Quantum Gravity Dark Photons and Gravitons are faster than light”
Adrian Ferent

“To accelerate the electron to the speed of light must be acted upon Dark Matter electron with Dark Photons or Gravitons”
Adrian Ferent

“The electron at the speed of light it will be broken down into high energy photon and Dark Matter electron”
Adrian Ferent

“Near the Black Holes gravitons accelerate electrons to the speed of light and they break them in high energy photons and Dark Matter electrons”
Adrian Ferent

The relativistic mass in STR, m is:
the rest mass m0

You learned from Einstein, your professors that when v = c, m and E goes to infinity and that’s not physically possible.
In particle accelerators scientists try to accelerate electrons to the speed of light.
Because the scientists do not understand what the electron is, they do not understand what they doing there.

“The electron is a photon around Dark Matter”
Adrian Ferent

“The Dark Matter electron is the Dark Matter inside the electron”
Adrian Ferent

“Between the Ferent time t = 1.294 × 10^(-86) s and the Planck time t = 5.391 × 10^(-44) s were created the Dark Matter electrons”
Adrian Ferent

“When the photons were created, the photons with the energy 0.5 MeV and the Dark Matter electrons created the electrons”
Adrian Ferent

“Einstein, your professors did not understand STR because the photon has the rest mass m0 = 0, and all the particles have m0 > 0, this means the maximum speed for these particles v < c and their m and E will not be infinite”
Adrian Ferent

“In Einstein equations and theories are singularities, infinite mass and energy, gravitational singularity, because Einstein did not understand Special relativity and Gravitation”
Adrian Ferent

“Einstein bent the space, Ferent unbent the space”
  Adrian Ferent

“The electron is composed of a photon and a Dark Matter electron”
Adrian Ferent

“I calculated the charge created by the photon with f = 10^20 Hz inside the electron Q = 1.6 × 10^(-19) C, the electron charge”
Adrian Ferent

“In particle accelerators they accelerate the electric charge, the photon inside the electron with m0 > 0, this means all the time the speed of the electron v < c”
Adrian Ferent

In 2019 the Nobel Prizes were awarded to scientists who do not understand Dark Matter, to scientists who discovered batteries, to scientists who discovered how cells sense oxygen, nothing at Planck level or beyond!

“What the scientists, the Nobel Laureates, your professors… do not understand?
When the electron is accelerated gains kinetic energy and when the electron – positron collide the kinetic energy is transferred to the photons and Dark Matter electrons”
Adrian Ferent

They started Stealing from Ferent Quantum Gravity:
How Dark Matter was created before the Planck wall,
How Stars and Planets were formed around Dark Matter…
https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.061302
https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.141301

How to accelerate electrons to the speed of light?
Because in Ferent Quantum Gravity the electron is composed of a photon and a Dark Matter electron, acting on a photon how I explained it is not possible in particle accelerators.

“To accelerate the electron to the speed of light must be acted upon Dark Matter electron”
Adrian Ferent

”In Ferent Quantum Gravity Dark Photons and Gravitons are faster than light”
Adrian Ferent

“To accelerate the electron to the speed of light must be acted upon Dark Matter electron with Dark Photons or Gravitons”
Adrian Ferent

“Ferent equation for N elementary particles:”
Adrian Ferent

What will happen with the electron at the speed of light?
Not the infinite mass and energy how you learned from your professors!

“The electron at the speed of light it will be broken down into high energy photon and Dark Matter electron”
Adrian Ferent

In Ferent Quantum Gravity:

“Black Holes are Dark Matter”
Adrian Ferent

“Near the Black Holes gravitons accelerate electrons to the speed of light and they break them in high energy photons and Dark Matter electrons”
Adrian Ferent

I published this article because today is my Birthday!
Remembering my Parents on my Birthday!

257. I am the first who discovered that Einstein, your professors did not understand STR because the photon has the rest mass m0 = 0, and all the particles have m0 > 0, this means the maximum speed for these particles v < c and their m and E will not be infinite

258. I am the first who explained that in Einstein equations and theories are singularities, infinite mass and energy, gravitational singularity, because Einstein did not understand Special relativity and Gravitation

259. I am the first who discovered that the electron is composed of a photon and a Dark Matter electron

260. I am the first who discovered that in particle accelerators they accelerate the electric charge, the photon inside the electron with m0 > 0, this means all the time the speed of the electron v < c

261. I am the first who discovered what the scientists, the Nobel Laureates, your professors… do not understand?
When the electron is accelerated gains kinetic energy and when the electron – positron collide the kinetic energy is transferred to the photons and Dark Matter electrons

262. I am the first who discovered that to accelerate the electron to the speed of light must be acted upon Dark Matter electron

263. I am the first who discovered that in Ferent Quantum Gravity Dark Photons and Gravitons are faster than light

264. I am the first who discovered that to accelerate the electron to the speed of light must be acted upon Dark Matter electron with Dark Photons or Gravitons

265. I am the first who discovered that the electron at the speed of light it will be broken down into high energy photon and Dark Matter electron

266. I am the first who discovered that near the Black Holes gravitons accelerate electrons to the speed of light and they break them in high energy photons and Dark Matter electrons

I attempted to prove with the current hypothesis that the speed of a photon can
exceed 300,000 km/s. The infinity element affects the speed of light.
The density of the substances in the medium in which light travels affects the speed of light. If
there is no matter in the medium, the speed of light can be 500,000 km/sec.
Subatomic particles whose existence cannot be detected can reduce the speed of light

Just as Albert Einstein's special theory of relativity was gaining acceptance around 1908, the young Swiss physicist Walter Ritz advanced a competing though preliminary emission theory that sought to explain the phenomena of electrodynamics on the assumption that the speed of light depends on the motion of its source. I survey Ritz's unfinished work in this area and review the reasons why Einstein and other physicists rejected Ritz's and other emission theories. Since Ritz's emission theory attracted renewed attention in the 1960s, I discuss how the earlier observational evidence was misconstrued as telling against it more conclusively than actually was the case. Finally, I contrast the role played by evidence against Ritz's theory with other factors that led to the early rejection of his approach.

The author reviewed the experimental ether-drift experiments and publications of Michelson–Morley, Dayton Miller, Michelson–Pease–Pearson, and more recent others, from the late 1800s through the present.  Many of these historical studies presented positive results in detecting a cosmic ether, and ether-drift through space. Among these experiments, the most widely cited Michelson–Morley experiment of 1887, which did show a slight positive result (and never the claimed “null”), was found to be the least significant or robust in terms of experimental procedures and actual data collected, as compared with the far more important 1920s’ study by Miller on Mount Wilson near Los Angeles, California. Most ether-drift experiments yielding claimed negative results were plagued by various unwarranted assumptions about the capacity of an ether-drift to penetrate dense materials such as stone buildings or metal shielding, or that ether flow would “contract” matter, including measuring instruments, leaving the ether-drift undetectible. Some obtained positive results, but the authors chose to interpret them as “negative” due to unwarranted assumptions demanding extremely fast ether-drift velocities near to the Earth’s surface.  Miller was the first to experimentally account for these issues, his most important study made atop Mount Wilson in a thermal shelter, with the largest light-beam interferometer ever constructed, and where the light-beam path was enclosed only by light glass or cardboard. His procedures accounted for a matter-retarded cosmic ether-drift with a reduced velocity closer to the Earth’s surface. Miller thereby obtained significant positive results over four epochs of study. Albert Einstein also was aware of these issues, and admitted openly that if Miller was correct, then his own relativity theory would “collapse like a house of cards.” In subsequent years, however, the followers of Einstein defeated this evidence for the cosmic ether by public ridicule and political tactics, not too different from the modern “skeptic” movement. The Shankland, McCuskey, Leone, and Kuerti article claiming to have reviewed Miller’s Mount Wilson data, well after all the old ether-drift experimenters were dead and could no longer defend their findings, were also specifically reviewed and found to not support their own stated conclusions, thereby leaving the question of a cosmic ether and ether-drift as an open and unresolved question, or one which positive evidence indicates has been proven out. More recent ether-drift experiments from the last quarter of the 20th and early 21st Centuries, notably by Galaev, Múnera, and others, using radiofrequencies, light-beam interferometery, and other novel methods, have provided further proof for the existence of a cosmic ether in space.  Journal of Scientific Exploration  28(4): 647-682, 2014.

This work presents, for the first time in history, a coherent and correct concept for stellar aberration based on the wave nature of light and classical physics. Considering the spherical propagation of the light wavefront and the motion of the observer relative to the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) leads to a physically meaningful formula that, unlike the classical formulas, relates to the squares of the velocities for light and the CMB. Moreover, stellar aberration is explained by the entire light path from the star to the observer, with significant consequences for the concept of a dragged ether and the reinterpretation of a large number of experiments. It is demonstrated that all relevant experiments can be consistently explained within the framework of an ether fully dragged by gravity. The anisotropy of light is presented from a new perspective, and time dilation and length contraction become obsolete.

A new model and theoretical framework of absolute motion and the speed of light is proposed in this paper. 1. For absolutely co-moving light source S and observer O, with uniform rectilinear motion, the effect of absolute motion is to create an apparent change in the position of the source relative to the observer. The apparent source, just as the
real source, is at rest relative to the observer and the speed of light is constant relative to the apparent source. Therefore, the procedure of analysis of a light speed experiment in this case is to replace the real source by an apparent source and analyze the experiment by assuming that the speed of light is constant relative to the apparent source. Once the real source is replaced with an apparent source to account for absolute velocity, we assume emission theory in which the group velocity of light is constant relative to the (apparent) source and depends on mirror velocity. The position of the apparent source is determined by assuming the ether to calculate the time delay
of light emitted by the source and detected directly by the observer and interpreting the change in time delay as being due to an apparent change in the source position relative to the observer, rather than as being a result of varying speed of light which would be the case if the ether existed. In this paper it is revealed that the ether doesn't exist but absolute motion does exist. 2. For all other cases/experiments in which the light source S, an observer A and mirrors have independent, arbitrary absolute and relative velocities, for uniform rectilinear motion and for
accelerated motion, including rotation, the experiment is analyzed according to the following principle: an observer A who is at a given point relative to the light source, at a given instant of time, observes what a co-moving observer at that point is observing at that instant of time. A co-moving observer O is defined in this paper as an observer who is at a given point in the reference frame of the source at the instant of light emission and continues to move with the same velocity (magnitude and direction) as the velocity of the source at the instant of light emission. For example, to determine the time instant when light emitted by a source is observed by an arbitrary observer (A) with known initial position and motion (velocity and acceleration) at the instant of light emission, we find a point relative to the source where a co-moving observer O at that point observes light at the time instant that observer A is passing through that point. 3. The phase velocity of light is constant, independent of source, observer and mirror velocity. The group velocity of light is independent of source absolute velocity, but depends on observer absolute velocity and on mirror velocity. 4. A new law of Exponential Doppler effect of light is proposed as: λ' = λ eV/c and f ' = f e - V/c , where V is the source observer relative velocity. 5. Light has dual natures: local and non-local, constant (phase) velocity and
variable ( group) velocity, behaving according to both ether (wave) theory and emission (particle) theory. Static electric and magnetic fields also have dual nature: finite and infinite speed of transmission 6. Inertia is
electromagnetic radiation reaction. The speed of light is the universal limit on absolute velocities of all physical objects in the universe. The mass (inertia) increase of electrons with velocity is due to non-linear law of electromagnetic radiation power and radiation reaction. As the absolute velocity of a body approaches the speed of light, any further acceleration will result in or require increasingly infinite amounts of radiation power and radiation reaction. 7. Gravity is a difference between electrostatic attraction and repulsion forces. 8. Absolute velocity of an
object is the resultant of its mass weighed velocities relative to all massive objects in the universe. The universal principle that applies to all light speed experiments is : an observer at a given point relative to the source, at a given instant of time , observes the same light phenomenon being observed by a co-moving observer at that point, at that instant of time. A co-moving observer is an observer that continues to move at the same velocity the source had at the instant of light emission. However, a more convenient procedure for experiments involving rectilinear motions is : 1. Replace the real source by an apparent source 2. Determine the velocity of the apparent source relative to the observer 3. Analyze the experiment by assuming that the speed of light is constant relative to the apparent source; i.e. once the real source is replaced by an apparent source , we apply (modified) emission theory in which the group
velocity is constant relative to the apparent source and depends on mirror velocity, but the phase velocity is always constant. Physically ( intuitively ) the group velocity ( magnitude and direction) of light varies relative to the real source, due to absolute motion of the source. AST is a modified emission theory, a fusion between emission theory and ether theory. In the Sagnac experiment, the source appears farther away than its physical distance when looking in the backward direction and closer than its actual/ physical distance in the forward direction, relative to the
detector. Physically this means that the velocity of light is c + Vabs in the backward direction and c - Vabs in the forward direction, relative to the source , hence a fringe shift at the detector. In the case of the Michelson-Morley experiment, an apparent change in the position of the light source relative the detector does not create a fringe shift, for the same reason that an actual ( physical ) change of the source position doesn't create any significant fringe shift. The group velocity of light relative to the source moving with absolute velocity Vabs is c - Vabs in the forward
direction and c + Vabs in the backward direction. Therefore, the velocity of light relative to a stationary observer will be: (c - Vabs ) + Vabs = c and (c + Vabs ) - Vabs = c . The (group) velocity of light changes relative to the source in such a way that it will not be affected by source velocity.

At what velocity does an electron emits a photon? Another proof for Ferent Quantum Gravity

“Because the electron is a photon around Dark Matter, the electron receives and emits photons with the speed of light”
Adrian Ferent

At what velocity does an electron emits a photon? The answer is another proof for Ferent Quantum Gravity (FQG).

In modern physics a charged particle emits and absorbs energy, but its mechanism was not discovered.

All the Nobel Laureates, all the scientists, your professors…were not able to answer to this question:
At what velocity does an electron emits a photon?

If you want to have fun, just ask your professors these questions:
At what velocity does an electron emits a photon?
Does have photon an acceleration time?

The internet is like a ‘comedy book’ with answers to these questions:

Feynman's answer to the question:
“An electron emits an ordinary photon in response to being struck by a reverse-time ("advanced") photon that has traveled backward in time from some point in the future.”Some point in the future" could range from femtoseconds (or less) away up to billions of years in the future. The real photon that is emitted in response to the recoil-inducing, backwards-in-time photon travels along the classical time path as a normal or "retarded" photon (no I did not make that up), and eventually strikes the very same target that emitted the advanced photon sometime in the future.”

Another scientist said:
“The opposite happens when an electron emits a photon. The photon is not selected from a "well" of photons living in the atom; it is created instantaneously out of the vacuum. The electron in the high energy level is instantly converted into a lower energy-level electron and a photon. There is no in-between state where the photon is being constructed. It instantly pops into existance.”

277. I am the first who discovered at what velocity an electron emits a photon

278. I am the first who discovered because the electron is a photon around Dark Matter, the electron receives and emits photons with the speed of light

Dark Matter particles can travel at the speed of light. Special Relativity and General Relativity are wrong

“Dark Matter particles can travel at the speed of light”
Adrian Ferent

“The gamma ray and the Dark Matter electron travel together at the speed of light”
Adrian Ferent

“Because the Dark Matter electron travels at the sped of light, Special Relativity is wrong”
Adrian Ferent

“Because Special Relativity is wrong, General Relativity is wrong”
Adrian Ferent

“In electron – positron collision gamma ray and Dark Matter electrons are created and Special Relativity and General Relativity are wrong”
Adrian Ferent

“The electron – positron collision is another proof that Einstein Gravitation theory is wrong and Ferent Quantum Gravity is right”
Adrian Ferent

You learned from Einstein, your professors that when v = c, mass and energy goes to infinity and that’s not physically possible.
In particle accelerators scientists try to accelerate electrons to the speed of light.
Because the scientists do not understand what the electron is, they do not understand what they do there.

In Ferent Quantum Gravity, FQG, during the electron – positron collision are created gamma rays and Dark Matter electrons.

I discovered that:

“The electron is a photon around Dark Matter”
Adrian Ferent

“The Dark Matter electron is the Dark Matter inside the electron”
Adrian Ferent

“Between the Ferent time t = 1.294 × 10^(-86) s and the Planck time t = 5.391 × 10^(-44) s were created the Dark Matter electrons”
Adrian Ferent

“What the scientists, the Nobel Laureates, your professors… do not understand?
When the electron is accelerated gains kinetic energy and when the electron – positron collide the kinetic energy is transferred to the photons and Dark Matter electrons”
Adrian Ferent

“In electron – positron collision gamma ray and Dark Matter electrons are created”
Adrian Ferent

The electron – positron pair is produced by a photon – photon interaction.
This means:

“The gamma ray and the Dark Matter electron travel together at the speed of light”
Adrian Ferent

“Because the Dark Matter electron travels at the sped of light, Special Relativity is wrong”
Adrian Ferent

“Because Special Relativity is wrong, General Relativity is wrong”
Adrian Ferent

“Dark Matter particles can travel at the speed of light”
Adrian Ferent

“In electron – positron collision gamma ray and Dark Matter electrons are created and Special Relativity and General Relativity are wrong”
Adrian Ferent

“The electron – positron collision is another proof that Einstein Gravitation theory is wrong and Ferent Quantum Gravity is right”
Adrian Ferent

279. I am the first who discovered that Dark Matter particles can travel at the speed of light

280. I am the first who discovered that the gamma ray and the Dark Matter electron travel together at the speed of light

281. I am the first who discovered because the Dark Matter electron travels at the sped of light, Special Relativity is wrong

282. I am the first who discovered because Special Relativity is wrong, General Relativity is wrong

283. I am the first who discovered that in electron – positron collision, gamma ray and Dark Matter electrons are created and Special Relativity and General Relativity are wrong

284. I am the first who discovered that the electron – positron collision is another proof that Einstein Gravitation theory is wrong and Ferent Quantum Gravity is right

Although the description just given is meant to apply to a whole series of thinkers in the West, it fits the position of our opening thinker, Plato, with alarming accuracy. Plato inherited a rich tradition of natural philosophy developed during the pre-Socratic period. Numerous philosophers had developed divergent accounts of what could be the arché or ultimate principle,

The effects of gauge interactions in graphene have been analyzed up to now in terms of effective models of Dirac fermions. However, in several cases lattice effects play an important role and need to be taken consistently into account. In this paper we introduce and analyze a lattice gauge theory model for graphene, which describes tight binding electrons hopping on the honeycomb lattice and interacting with a three-dimensional quantum U (1) gauge field. We perform an exact Renormalization Group analysis, which leads to a renormalized expansion that is finite at all orders. The flow of the effective parameters is controlled thanks to Ward Identities and a careful analysis of the discrete lattice symmetry properties of the model. We show that the Fermi velocity increases up to the speed of light and Lorentz invariance spontaneously emerges in the infrared. The interaction produces critical exponents in the response functions; this removes the degeneracy present in the non interacting case and allow us to identify the dominant excitations. Finally we add mass terms to the Hamiltonian and derive by a variational argument the correspondent gap equations, which have an anomalous non-BCS form, due to the non trivial effects of the interaction.