Francis: It sounds like the theory is pushing that C (speed of light) is not a constant. I have been saying such a thing for about a decade now. Here's an example:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2270920/posts Even better http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/electrogravitics/index?tab=articles On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Roarty, Francis X < [email protected]> wrote: > The thread below found on a 2007 forum thread > <http://lofi.forum.physorg.com/Speed--Of-Light-Depends-On-Vacuum-Permittivity-_16713.html>makes > reference to a paper http://www.ldolphin.org/setterfield/vacuum.html > THE VACUUM, LIGHT SPEED, AND THE REDSHIFT. The takeaway is clear that C is > inversely proportional to vacuum energy density such that it slows when > compacted by high velocity or equivalently strong gravitational fields. The > more interesting and exploitable feature is that time gets faster when > vacuum density gets lower such as occurs with Casimir geometry. Although > normally uniform at macro scale it is a seething sea at the planck scale > and Casimir geometry can be perceived as a sorting mechanism that > segregates some of these seething planck scale variations into nano scale > reservoirs large enough to act upon physical matter occupying or passing > though the reservoirs such as Mills hydrino or Rossi’s hydrogen. > > > > czeslaw > > 30th July 2007 - 02:31 PM > > I do not know if the speed of light was considered according to this > context on the Forum. > I found an interestin link : > > RECONSIDERING LIGHT-SPEED > > It is at this point in the discussion that a consideration of light-speed > becomes important. It has already been mentioned that an increase in vacuum > energy density will result in an increase in the electrical permittivity > and the magnetic permeability of space, since they are energy related. > Since light-speed is inversely linked to both these properties, if the > energy density of the vacuum increases, light-speed will decrease uniformly > throughout the cosmos. Indeed, in 1990 Scharnhorst [48] and Barton [20] > demonstrated that a lessening of the energy density of a vacuum would > produce a higher velocity for light. This is explicable in terms of the QED > approach. The virtual particles that make up the "seething vacuum" can > absorb a photon of light and then re-emit it when they annihilate. This > process, while fast, takes a finite time. The lower the energy density of > the vacuum, the fewer virtual particles will be in the path of light > photons in transit. As a consequence, the fewer absorptions and > re-emissions which take place over a given distance, the faster light > travels over that distance [49, 50]. > > However, the converse is also true. The higher the energy density of the > vacuum, the more virtual particles will interact with the light photons in > a given distance, and so the slower light will travel. Similarly, when > light enters a transparent medium such as glass, similar absorptions and > re-emissions occur, but this time it is the atoms in the glass that absorb > and re-emit the light photons. This is why light slows as it travels > through a denser medium. Indeed, the more closely packed the atoms, the > slower light will travel as a greater number of interactions occur in a > given distance. In a recent illustration of this light-speed was reduced to > 17 metres/second as it passed through extremely closely packed sodium atoms > near absolute zero [51]. All this is now known from experimental physics. > This agrees with Barnett's comments in Nature [11] that "The vacuum is > certainly a most mysterious and elusive object...The suggestion that the > value of the speed of light is determined by its structure is worthy of > serious investigation by theoretical physicists." > > http://www.ldolphin.org/setterfield/vacuum.html > > >
