# Comment on my Light Theory

1. Nov 27, 2003

### SmarterThanGod

Myself and an associate have been working on a new theory of light in which c, that is the speed of light, is NOT constant, but relative to the size of the given universe

U~m/c

Where m is the constant maximum speed which all photons travel, c is an average speed of all the possible paths of a photon, P, and U is the size of the universe.
This is because U limits P to a finite number.
We have developed this theory over time, of which I cannot give exact details yet because there are a few kinks in the theory to work out, but any suggestions would be greatly appreciated
I will update this as the theory is developed, and will eventually post our entire theory

2. Nov 27, 2003

### Eepl

I see the applicability of that theory. And I think(which is always my mistake) that you're off to a good start. But that won't be all of the equasion. I believe that c is not a constant, but you will have to factor in other manipulations of spacetime. But an expanding universe is one factor that I had never considered to change c.

3. Nov 28, 2003

### SmarterThanGod

yeah your right. The equation qill be different from the one given, that was just a general guideline for the theory. So what are your thoughts as to what else determines c? Im interested to hear all the ideas you have

4. Nov 28, 2003

### Eepl

I figure it this way, no matter how fast your going light will always be going 300,000 kmps. This is because the faster you travel the more time slows down. So relative to you light will always be going the same speed. This is why we haven't been able to test for aether succesfully.
Also I believe that black hole work under the same physical equasions as we do. Einstein said that an aether theory was not nessicary, but I believe it is. Because that one thing could tie all we know together, and explain blackholes. I'm still working out the wording and details, but I'll post one of my own soon then you can tell me what you think.
If you can figure this out then somewhere will be the universal constant that scientists have been looking for.
Also I believe that spacetime are two different things. Space and Time. Gravity affects space which in turn affects time. The photon is traveling through the maximum density of space (aether) possible, and this is why it doesn't experiance time. This would also explain why things get more massive as they go faster. Once your going c then you're everywhere at once relative to you, so if you were everywhere at once then you would have an infinite mass, or maybe when that barrier is broken you would possiby have no mass, which is the case with the photon.
Sorry, lots of little ideas. Have fun with them.

5. Nov 28, 2003

### SmarterThanGod

I agree with your first statement, light, as are all things, is relative. That is the principle of my theory. So tell me what you think of this: If a photon is believed to travel all posible paths, how does each path "know its destination" before the shortest possible path is reached. This gave birth to one of my more extreme theories; messenger particles of light. Feel free to poke holes in it and rebuke me to any extent. Basically, one path from point A to point B will be the shortest possible path Once this is reached, all other paths, assuming they all travel the same speed: M, will still be "out there". To me, the only way for all paths to reach the same destination would be messenger particles or something like that "telling" each path where to go, once the shortest path is taken. Ive already though of several big errors in this, so please feel free to aid me in this, or to yell at my stupidity. For one thing, in order for a single messenger particle to catch up to the longest possible path, that is the one travelling exactly away from the destination, it would have to travel faster than M, which in my theory is impossible. Also, how would each Messenger particle kow where to go to interact with each path, and if there are infinite paths taken, will there be infinite messenger particles? Again, this is an extreme theory which doesnt make much sense, but if you have any other ideas as to how a photon knows where to go, tell me please

6. Nov 29, 2003

### QuantumNet

If the speed of light variated, everything would variate in the same way. The acceleration in a field would grow if lightspeed increased etc.

7. Dec 2, 2003

### Mike2

Suppose the universe is expanding. OK, is the expansion actually creating new space? If not, then we are stretching what already exists to get more. Or alternatively, the metric is expanding, we're getting more distance with time. If we are stretching what already exists, then one can imagine c changing with time to accomodate the stretched space. The more you stretch it, them fast c is to get to the same spacetime points that have been stretched further apart.

8. Dec 2, 2003

### dlgoff

But wouldn't time be slowed so c remains the same?

9. Dec 2, 2003

### Eepl

The expansion of spacetime could get very complicated. First you will have to explain what spacetime is. I believe that that there is just space, and time... well that is an absence of. This is where I believe the eather theory can come in. Say that space is aether, and gravity manipulating that aether changes time, because there would be more space on a massive object time would slow down. In any one point in space the total of spacetime would have to equal 1. Say that we are traveling through .4 space right now, then we are experiancing .6 time. This is why photons do not experiance time, because they are going through 1 space constantly. This also brings up another problem though. Where rational numbers and infinity colide. For if you wanted to stop a photon you would have to have 1 density of space, but to do that you would have to have infinite gravity.
Also with this would explain why c increases with the expansion of the universe. Technically it's still traveling though the same amount of space, it always will. But more distance is traveled. But we will never be able to measure this for the amount of time is we experiance is realative, so unless we are traveling c, the photon will always be traveling 186,000 mps.

10. Dec 4, 2003

### Eepl

Also think about this. If the universe is expanding, then it stops somewhere. What if space is actually this big nothing with even more universes in them. Just like there are more galaxies, there could be more universes. All swerling around in this big cosmic nothing.

Now you feel small.

11. Dec 5, 2003

### Sariaht

12. Dec 5, 2003

### hey.like

conjecture is conjecture still c is far away now

C is a beautiful dream to conjecture. but it is far away enough like to move some mass to c and naturely light travel by c. c it is naturely the c.

13. Dec 12, 2003

### SmarterThanGod

Photons, in relativity, are not affected by time, they experience no time dimension

14. Dec 12, 2003

### SmarterThanGod

ok i have a question about our current light theory. Because of the double slit experiment, we now view a photon as taking all paths to it's destination, causing the interference pattern observed.

A.) Some paths would ahve to be longer than others, and in order to reach the destination in the same amount of time as the shortest possible path, all longer paths would need to travel faster than C, or else the photon would be observed multiple times. Am i correct in thsi view? and......

B.) In order for all paths to get to the same destination, each path would need to "know" where it is going, or else it could be recorded at another place that is NOT the predicted destination, and at the predicted destination at the same time. Or, a path could overshoot the photosensitive plat at which it is being fired, and we would be able to see things that are behind solid objects. All paths would need a means to "know" where to go. I am pretty sure that I am wrong here, so criticize me at will

15. Dec 13, 2003

### Staff: Mentor

No, because you have no way of knowing where a photon is unless you intercept it (observe it with some detector). And whenever you do, you ALWAYS find that it traveled from the emitter to the detector at exactly C.
Actually, thats pretty much right. One of the bizarre things about the two slit experiment is that if you close one of the slits AFTER the photon passes through but BEFORE it hits the detector, the pattern goes away. Its as if the photon somehow knows you are going to close the slit before you do it. Freaky, huh?

16. Dec 13, 2003

### Mike2

Is this Feynman Path integral formulation just a way of finding the geodesic path of classical mechanics? As I understand it, the path integral formulation does give the classical geodesic path in the average. So I'm wondering if the Feynman formulation is equivalent to the variation of the action integral being zero. If not, then what is the relationship between the path integral formulation and the zero variation of the action integral formulation?

Thanks.