Another view on the Speed of Light limit

Einstein’s theory of high speed motion (that is, his mathematical expression and his interpretation thereof) is accepted as having been “confirmed by a large number of experiments,” and it is currently part of the dogma of conventional physics. The truth is, however, that those experiments, no matter how great their number may have been, or how conclusive their results, have confirmed only the mathematical aspects of the theory. The point that now needs to be recognized is that the speed limitation does not come from these confirmed mathematics; it comes from the untested interpretation...

If Einstein’s assumption that the mass varies with the speed is valid, then the mass of a moving object reaches infinity at the speed of light. A greater speed is thus impossible. But this is only one of the possible interpretations of the mathematics, and neither Einstein nor anyone else has produced any tangible evidence to support this interpretation. New “tests of Einstein’s theory” are continually being reported, but they are all tests of the mathematics of the theory, not tests of the theory....

The findings of the scalar motion investigation agree with the mathematical expression of this theory of Einstein’s, as they must do, since physical facts do not disagree with other physical facts, but they indicate that he made the wrong guess when he chose mass as the variable quantity in the acceleration equation. It is a decrease in the effective force that accounts for the decrease in acceleration at high speeds, not an increase in the mass....

This casual acceptance of the interpretation by the physicists has placed a roadblock in the way of gaining an understanding of phenomena in which speeds greater than that of light are involved. Since, as we have found, the decrease in acceleration is due to a reduction in the effective force of the electric charge, there is nothing in the mathematical relations that would prevent acceleration to higher speeds where means of applying greater forces are available. This conclusion, reached by correcting the interpretation of Einstein’s equation, without affecting the equation itself, is the same conclusion that we reached when we subjected the experimental results to a critical consideration. The mathematics of Einstein’s theory describe the process of acceleration by means of a one–dimensional (electric) force. They do not apply to the maximum possible acceleration by other means.

It is generally believed that the conclusion as to the impossibility of exceeding the speed of light has been proved by experiment. The truth is, however, that the experiments have all involved acceleration of particles by electromagnetic forces, and what the results of these experiments actually show is not that speeds in excess of that of light are impossible, but that they cannot be produced by means of forces of this kind.

Sorry about the giant quote, but I felt it was necessary since the original article at VortexPlusWater is no less than 74 pages long when printed out, and I wanted to discuss only this part.

Basically what the author is saying is that the Speed of Light has only been verified in experiments by using electromagnetic forces, and what the experiments really say is that the Speed of Light cannot be broken by using electromagnetic forces. He says those forces are the ones who is limiting the Speed of Light to what we think is the limit, not the Speed of Light itself.

Its a very interesting article to read, because it challenges a lot of the current mainstream science out there. I recommend you print the whole thing out and read it actually.

If you want to read more about what he says about the Speed of Light, you can find where to start reading in the page by searching for "Einstein’s theory of high speed motion" and going from there. My quote does not include everything he writes by a long shot.


[edit on 12-11-2007 by Copernicus]

www.science-spirit.org...

www.telegraph.co.uk.../earth/2007/08/16/scispeed116.xml

Those are two different articles of scientists claiming to have broken the speed of light. I hadn't heard of the germans breaking it, but I did hear about the American scientists breaking it by sending the photons through a cesium gas.

Based off of your article, I wonder what the fundamental reason for breaking the law is. Is it real, or just a different way that they are measuring it.

I am the first to admit that I have a very poor understanding of physics.

Originally posted by Karlhungis
I hadn't heard of the germans breaking it, but I did hear about the American scientists breaking it by sending the photons through a cesium gas.

I remember that article. They sent a laser beam through a cloud of caesium gas and the beam came out before it left! That's just weird

Originally posted by Beachcoma

Originally posted by Karlhungis
I hadn't heard of the germans breaking it, but I did hear about the American scientists breaking it by sending the photons through a cesium gas.

I remember that article. They sent a laser beam through a cloud of caesium gas and the beam came out before it left! That's just weird

Yea, it is pretty weird because we don't fully understand it and it's new to us.


Once you break barriers thought unachievable, you're gonna get some very strange results.

Originally posted by Karlhungis
I hadn't heard of the germans breaking it, but I did hear about the American scientists breaking it by sending the photons through a cesium gas.

Interesting. If light could travel faster than c through a cesium gas, it therefore follows that light could have been travelling faster in space when it passes through a medium similar to cesium gas.

Time will be distorted as c becomes variable travelling faster in different cesium like medium. The age of the universe will thus become a lot younger. If measured with our local c, taking the Star Abell 1835 IR1916 at 13.23 billion light years away, it correctly suggest that our universe is 13.23 billion years old relative to our c.

However, things will get confusing if light is found out to travel faster than our local c. This will suggest that if that light were travelling at 1000x faster than local c, the light year will become 1000x further than our local c, and the age of the universe will become 1000x younger.

In view of the beginning of the universe, I believe there is a super dense core with a massive gravity billion times stronger than a black hole. Somehow, the energy it contained escaped and exploded and emited photons. In order to escape such stong gravity, the photons could have been travelling at billions of billions of times faster than our local c.

I believe that light travels at a variable as it travels at different vacuum of space. There is no constant c at all to consider anymore.


[edit on 14-11-2007 by amitheone]

Well there is Lorentz-Poincare version of relativity which was actually published a year before Einsteins paper on special relativity. In that version a preferred frame is allowed and only time and space dilate and mass remains invariant.

Lorentz Relativity

However that theory also sets light speed as the upper bound on physical mass.

It's true and I still don't understand why it is explained as an increase in mass as you approach c, but rather should be explained as a net decrease in efficiency.
Still, this does not change the fact that mass still cannot be accelerated past c with physical means of propulsion.

I think the term "c" should be redefined as "relative c" if light were discovered to travel in many regions of the universe faster than our local c. Their c might be, say, 1000x faster than our local c, therefore it follows that their mass can be accelerated faster than our local c, but cannot be accelerated past their c. Also, If there exist regions in space where their c is much slower than our c, then, we can therefore travel faster than the speed of light relative to their c.





[edit on 15-11-2007 by amitheone]

reply to post by amitheone


No, we cannot.

C = speed of light in a perfect vacuum. This is the top limit for physical propulsion.