IDEAS ON THE SPEED OF LIGHT AND DOPPLER EFFECT.

IDEAS ON THE SPEED OF LIGHT AND DOPPLER EFFECT.

© 2013 Federico Talens-Alesson

Experimental error

Not long ago there was a news item about neutrinos faster than light by about 5 km/s. Then it was reported that the discrepancy was due to experimental error.

However, what the error means is that it is not possible to tell apart between 300,000 and 300,005 km/s. This in turns means that it is not possible to tell apart between 300,000 and 299,995 km/s. In other words, between 299,995 and 300,005 km/s it would not be possible to decide whether two speeds of light are different or not.

The problem is that it also means that it is not possible to tell if there is a range of speeds like, for example, from 299,998 km/s to 300,003 km/s instead of a SINGLE speed of light. Also, there is another factor being ignored.

Detection limits

In order to detect light, it must impact on a sensor and cause an effect. What if there is a lower speed limit for a significant interaction to occur, and an upper speed limit for enough contact time for an interaction to occur (Figure 1)?

The concept of “impact” in a classical way does not make sense, because atoms are actually embodiments of energy well apart from each other within matter, which is mostly void. “Impact” would mean “sufficiently close” near-encounter for an interaction between a passing photon and an electron of a nearby atom to exist. Magnetism is related to electrical charges in motion, and therefore an electromagnetic phenomenon like light may well depend on the “energy” of the electromagnetic package and the relative speed it moves by the target (the sensor). Figure 2 shows an schematic.

Relative movement

If Earth is moving across space at a certain speed (about kilometres per second), it is moving towards some sources of light and away from others. Those sources have fired away photons in Earth's trajectory, like bullets from the machine gun of aircraft, or torpedoes from warships. Some of these photons keep hitting the sensors on the surface or orbiting Earth (Figure 3).

Notice that the established theory makes spectral displacement dependent on both the motions of the origin and destination of the light. The idea is to pretend that there is a wave “connecting” both, and that it must compress or expand to respect the change in distance and the constancy in the number of fluctuations in the wave. This means that the wavelength must change.

This is actually nonsense because the photons which eventually are impacting on a sensor are fired away independently, and this means from different atoms in the originating star. Therefore each would have their own “link” between source and destination. Of course, this is not true: if you hold a flash light, switch it on and off, and have somebody staring at it afterwards, he will not see or be part of any electromagnetic continuum across time and space. Photons are not linked to their source's fate, whether displacement or destruction. Therefore, their properties cannot be, either.

Also, if the photons would be “linked” to their source atom, the conclusion would be that the wave path would be linked to the movement of the atom and any relevant restrictions, like the impossibility of the wave to cross forbidden regions like the core of the star itself (on account of Tyndall effect). The trajectory of the wave would have some strange spiral form. (Figure 4).

The only likely effect of an approaching object would be brightening, whereas a receding object would dim. This would not alter the characteristics of specific photons, but the amount of them by unit of area and time, assuming that the difference between the speed of light and the speed of the stellar body did not make this approaching/receding irrelevant. (Figure 5)

The only reason this is pretended (that there is a link between light Doppler effect and the relative motion of two bodies in space) is that the alternative is that we do not know on what direction cosmic bodies go. That would not be a bread winner for astrophysicists.

Incoming photons travelling at some of the possible speeds of light impact against sensor which is moving itself. This means each photon will have an relative impact speed, and this speed will define whether the sensor detects it or not, pretty much like speed radars may be unable to detect cars travelling too fast.

Because of the various bearings of the incoming photons and Earth's own movement, photons “chasing” Earth will travel at a lower impact speed than photons colliding head on, which would hit sensors faster (Figure 6). As a consequence, “head-on” photons will impact at higher speeds and it is possible to assume that faster (higher energy) photons within these would be too fast or energetic (“shift to the red”). “Chasing” photons will impact at lower speeds and slower (lower energy) photons will be too slow or weak (“shift to the blue”).

This would be consistent with a different view of red-white-blue stars. Smaller stars would would “fire away” faster photons than larger stars. As a consequence, the fast/high energy photons of a red dwarf will be equivalent to “head on” photons: to fast to be detected. The slow/low energy photons of a blue giant will be equivalent to “chasing” photons: too slow to make an impression (Figure 7).

It goes without saying that the situation would be exactly the opposite to current understanding. But there is a strong argument for my theory: I do not need space to have an structure and fold due to gravity. Gravity can affect the trajectory of photons because they have some mass, the constancy of the speed of light is explained because it is the constancy of detectable light, and space can be just void. In fact, it allows to consider space folding as a reduction to absurd, which is what it looks from a common sense point of view.

This opens an alternative explanation to black holes: these would be black stars because due to the high gravity the light would be “out of range”. I personally believe it more likely that black stars exist because a partial explosion vented the region of their atmosphere which would support the solar corona, causing them to be unable to produce light at all, but their light being completely out of speed range is still an alternative, or part of the overall explanation.