Speed of Light May Not Be Constant, Phycisists Say

page: 2
13
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 28 2013 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Panic2k11

Humm ?!? The effect in the speed is always down (it will not accelerate), no variance up. The randomness of the effect will only make that the average will be constant from any one direction, but the dimension of the effect will not be tiny at huge distances...


If the value of permittivity and permeability is dependent on the density of virtual particles, and if that density varies as a standard shot-noise equation (looks like it from their description), then sometimes there will be fewer virtual particles per volume, and sometimes more. Less = faster, more = slower. Not a lot more or less. Nearly unmeasurable.




posted on Apr, 28 2013 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 




it bends around the moon


No, not the moon, but ultra heavy objects some massive stars, black holes and galaxies can have gravitational lensing effects on light...



posted on Apr, 28 2013 @ 07:20 PM
link   
I just wanted to take a minute to salute the members that have posted in this thread. Tonight I've read some of the most creative and substantial posts that I have ever read on ATS. This is truly what makes ATS a wonderful medium to educate and learn from. I have truly been impressed by the off-the-collar knowledge that some of you possess. I continue to grow and develop from learning what I have from each and every one of you.


Thank you
-Cosmic



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cosmic911

Speed of Light May Not Be Constant, Phycisists Say



Is the speed of light constant but varies by the medium it travels through? I thought this was known.

Especially when considering how light acts in water, air and a vacuum. Then their is the whole gravity thinggy. Geez, its nothing new.



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Danbones
it bends around the moon which is in a vacuum
and to bend it has to slow down relative to the observer
as it says at the link


It does not noticeably bend around the moon, the moon is no where near massive enough.
It does not need to slow down when it undergoes gravitational lensing, it's speed is constant.



posted on Apr, 29 2013 @ 05:43 PM
link   
Dont want to start a new thread but what I thought tonight is relevant to this thread.

We are told nothing is faster than the speed of light,

What about the birth of the universe? Didnt that travel faster than the speed of light from expanding from the size of an atom?



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 08:40 AM
link   
Reminds me of the banned TED talk I watched a while ago.

edit on 30-4-2013 by Eonnn because: (no reason given)



We need to pay more attention to this guy. Note he is the one who came up with morphogenic fields.
edit on 30-4-2013 by Eonnn because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 09:30 AM
link   
The Nature Of Vacuum Space? They pretty well know that isn't true anymore yet they're still talking away the lies.

www.rexresearch.com/ether/silvertooth.pdf‎
Silvertooth - Rex Research

www.worldnpa.org...
Biography

www.freegrab.net...

And the word entanglement comes to mind.

The picture of the ether is a web or akin to a brain cell:

www.universetoday.com...
Astronomers Witness a Web of Dark Matter



Apparently when scientists are being paid to maintain a false paradigm, they won't budge overall.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 01:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Unity_99
 


The quoted stuff is a load of junk. Physicists have known that the vacuum has important physical properties since the early days of quantum field theory, late 1940's-1950's.

It has the advantage of being verified quantitatively by experimental results.

This new computation uses that theory along with properties of the Standard Model which is assertions about the properties of the physical particles in the theory.



new topics
top topics
 
13
<< 1   >>

log in

join