| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Double-A
Guest
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 6:50 pm Post subject: VSL |
 |
|
I have begun reading Joao Magueijo's book "Faster than the Speed of
Light". His thesis is that light in the early universe travelled
faster than c. But so far in the book he is just describing
Einstein's theories and what it was like to be a graduate student at
Cambridge.
Double-A |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
oldcoot
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 12:47 am Post subject: Re: VSL |
|
|
On Jun 20, 11:50 am, Double-A <double...@hush.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
I have begun reading Joao Magueijo's book "Faster than the Speed of
Light". His thesis is that light in the early universe travelled
faster than c. But so far in the book he is just describing
Einstein's theories and what it was like to be a graduate student at
Cambridge.
Yeah, Magueijo has been discussed here many times. He originally co- |
authored with Dr. Andy Albrecht, one of the fathers of inflation
theory (along with Guth et al). Magueijo-Albrecht proposed an
alternative to inflation. All it required was one simple adjustment to
the axiom that the speed of light is universally constant. They called
it variable speed of light, or VSL. If lightspeed is allowed to drop
precipitously across the 'inflation' spike, the need for "inflation"
disappears as if by magic (along with some niggling little problems
with inflation). It very deftly resolves the Horizon Problem and the
flatness paradox. But of course varying lightspeed amounts to a grand
heresy.
It also requires violating the Lorentz invariance, one
of the biggest no-nos in physics. Upon that note, Albrecht got cold
feet and back-pedaled back to the safety of "approved" doctrine.
Magueijo freely admits it violates Lorentz, but remains steadfast and
soldiers on anyway (talk about big brass cajones!). But he is a Void-
Spacer and has no concept of the *mechanism* behind the lightspeed
drop he intuitively knows to be real. If he did, he would recognize
that it is NOT necessary to violate Lorentz (or any other constant for
that matter). He could "have his cake and eat it too". That mechanism
is explained here --
http://community-2.webtv.net/oldcoot/ContinuousBigBang/page2.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Double-A
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:54 pm Post subject: Re: VSL |
|
|
On Jun 20, 5:47 pm, oldcoot <oldcoot7...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jun 20, 11:50 am, Double-A <double...@hush.com> wrote:
I have begun reading Joao Magueijo's book "Faster than the Speed of
Light". His thesis is that light in the early universe travelled
faster than c. But so far in the book he is just describing
Einstein's theories and what it was like to be a graduate student at
Cambridge.
Yeah, Magueijo has been discussed here many times. He originally co-
authored with Dr. Andy Albrecht, one of the fathers of inflation
theory (along with Guth et al). Magueijo-Albrecht proposed an
alternative to inflation. All it required was one simple adjustment to
the axiom that the speed of light is universally constant. They called
it variable speed of light, or VSL. If lightspeed is allowed to drop
precipitously across the 'inflation' spike, the need for "inflation"
disappears as if by magic (along with some niggling little problems
with inflation). It very deftly resolves the Horizon Problem and the
flatness paradox. But of course varying lightspeed amounts to a grand
heresy.
|
Magueijo says that those who put the information in the textbooks are
less concerned about heresy that those who got their information from
those textbooks. This Einstein floated his own VSL theory in 1911.
But I don't see that as Einstein being inconsistant with himself.
Light does "seem" to slow in speed as it passes massive bodies as
measured from a constant distant frame. It is just a matter of how
you look at it.
| Quote: |
It also requires violating the Lorentz invariance, one
of the biggest no-nos in physics. Upon that note, Albrecht got cold
feet and back-pedaled back to the safety of "approved" doctrine.
Magueijo freely admits it violates Lorentz, but remains steadfast and
soldiers on anyway (talk about big brass cajones!). But he is a Void-
Spacer and has no concept of the *mechanism* behind the lightspeed
drop he intuitively knows to be real. If he did, he would recognize
that it is NOT necessary to violate Lorentz (or any other constant for
that matter). He could "have his cake and eat it too". That mechanism
is explained here --http://community-2.webtv.net/oldcoot/ContinuousBigBang/page2.html
|
Maybe you should send him a copy of your theory. He remarked that he
already has a collection of "crackpot" theories that have been sent to
him.
Double-A |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Double-A
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 8:19 pm Post subject: Re: VSL |
|
|
On Jun 21, 9:15 am, herbertglaz...@webtv.net (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:
| Quote: |
oc & Double-A Best to think "space: to change speed of objects(making
the distance shorter or grater) than to have even a tiny matter particle
like the electron to reach 'c' Light goes at 186,242 mps It can't
go faster and reality is it never slows down. Bert
|
Still if light is a particle and has any mass at all, it doesn't
really reach c either. But that is speculation.
Double-A |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Double-A
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 8:21 pm Post subject: Re: VSL |
|
|
On Jun 21, 10:42 am, "Hagar" <hs...@surewest.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
"Double-A" <double...@hush.com> wrote in message
news:b4606d8a-5b23-4a75-8833-8d10e1253eb6@u36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
I have begun reading Joao Magueijo's book "Faster than the Speed of
Light". His thesis is that light in the early universe travelled
faster than c. But so far in the book he is just describing
Einstein's theories and what it was like to be a graduate student at
Cambridge.
Double-A
Here's my two cents worth ...
The fact that there is a cosmic speed limit for light seems to indicate that
there is something out there in the Universe that limits it to 186,246
m/sec.
Since there was nothing out there right after the Big Bang to impede the
speed of light, especially during the hyperinflation period, light in all
likelihood may have had an "instantaneous" speed limit for a short time.
The speed of sound is measured at feet per second at sea level, which means
that it travels at a given speed in a given density. Just like light has a
red shift when it recedes and a blue shift when it approaches, sound waves
are also stretched or compressed relative to the observer.
That tells me that the speed of light is dictated by the average density of
the Universe, which is probably measured in something like one to five atoms
per square meter. It also seems that after the initial inflation, the early
on the Universe was denser and light traveled slower. Then the cosmic
expansion started to accelerate and the average density decreased and light
became faster. If the ever increasing acceleration of the expansion of the
Universe continues, then sometime in the very distant future, the speed of
light might once again be instantaneous.
|
A very scholarly treatment of the subject. I didn't know you had it
in you, Hagar.
Double-A |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Double-A
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 8:24 pm Post subject: Re: VSL |
|
|
On Jun 21, 10:56 am, herbertglaz...@webtv.net (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:
| Quote: |
Hagar Guth did not change 'c' He had space inflation at the first
trillionth of a second of the BB out faster than light He knew not to
fool with Einstein's SR We even talk that the expanding "space"
between the galaxies can be inflating faster than 'c' Bert
|
If the universe can inflate faster than light, then what about the
price of gas?
Double-A |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
oldcoot
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 9:51 pm Post subject: Re: VSL |
|
|
On Jun 21, 12:54 pm, Double-A <double...@hush.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Maybe you should send him a copy of your theory. He remarked that he
already has a collection of "crackpot" theories that have been sent to
him.
I did correspond with him by e-mail back in '02. He indicated he is |
firmly commited to the 'one-shot' BB and the standard open-ended
expansion idea. Hence he has no concept of space being anything other
than 'nothing'. Any further correspondance would have been pointless. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Hagar
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 10:42 pm Post subject: Re: VSL |
|
|
"Double-A" <double-a2@hush.com> wrote in message
news:b4606d8a-5b23-4a75-8833-8d10e1253eb6@u36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: |
I have begun reading Joao Magueijo's book "Faster than the Speed of
Light". His thesis is that light in the early universe travelled
faster than c. But so far in the book he is just describing
Einstein's theories and what it was like to be a graduate student at
Cambridge.
Double-A
|
Here's my two cents worth ...
The fact that there is a cosmic speed limit for light seems to indicate that
there is something out there in the Universe that limits it to 186,246
m/sec.
Since there was nothing out there right after the Big Bang to impede the
speed of light, especially during the hyperinflation period, light in all
likelihood may have had an "instantaneous" speed limit for a short time.
The speed of sound is measured at feet per second at sea level, which means
that it travels at a given speed in a given density. Just like light has a
red shift when it recedes and a blue shift when it approaches, sound waves
are also stretched or compressed relative to the observer.
That tells me that the speed of light is dictated by the average density of
the Universe, which is probably measured in something like one to five atoms
per square meter. It also seems that after the initial inflation, the early
on the Universe was denser and light traveled slower. Then the cosmic
expansion started to accelerate and the average density decreased and light
became faster. If the ever increasing acceleration of the expansion of the
Universe continues, then sometime in the very distant future, the speed of
light might once again be instantaneous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
G=EMC^2 Glazier
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 10:56 pm Post subject: Re: VSL |
|
|
Hagar Guth did not change 'c' He had space inflation at the first
trillionth of a second of the BB out faster than light He knew not to
fool with Einstein's SR We even talk that the expanding "space"
between the galaxies can be inflating faster than 'c' Bert |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
oldcoot
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 1:24 am Post subject: Re: VSL |
|
|
On Jun 21, 12:54 pm, Double-A <double...@hush.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Einstein floated his own VSL theory in 1911.
But I don't see that as Einstein being inconsistant with himself.
Light does "seem" to slow in speed as it passes massive bodies as
measured from a constant distant frame. It is just a matter of how
you look at it.
Yep, his development of GR expanded upon SR by recognizing the slowing |
of lightspeed in a gravity well relative to an outside observer..
which made SR with its universal lightspeed-constancy a wholly owned
subsidiary of GR. Here's a good discussion of it-
http://www.relativitybook.com/resources/c_speedoflight.html
But GR simply describes the effect and cannot explain *why* it occurs.
Slowing of light in a "gravitationally dense" region (per this
article's vernacular) is due to _diminished_ density (or PDT value) of
the spatial medium. Conversely, lightspeed increases in
"gravitationally sparse" regions such as deep space where PDT value is
higher. And at deep cosmological distances, lightspeed begins
increasing exponentially the farther back you go, due to the
steepening *cosmological PDT gradient*. Yet the speed of light is
always constant `locally` in all PDT frames.. which is the natural
extension of both SR and GR. And as Painius recently emphasized,
spatial volume also *contracts* concomitantly with increasing PDT
value, as you "play the tape backwards" of the expansion of the
universe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Art Deco
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 6:46 am Post subject: Re: VSL |
|
|
oldcoot <oldcoot7074@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jun 21, 12:54 pm, Double-A <double...@hush.com> wrote:
Maybe you should send him a copy of your theory. He remarked that he
already has a collection of "crackpot" theories that have been sent to
him.
I did correspond with him by e-mail back in '02. He indicated he is
firmly commited to the 'one-shot' BB and the standard open-ended
expansion idea. Hence he has no concept of space being anything other
than 'nothing'. Any further correspondance would have been pointless.
|
Irony Alert!
--
"Substantiation that you regard yourself as a God to be worhsipped [sic]
should be your concern, Deco."
-- David Tholen |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Art Deco
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 6:47 am Post subject: Re: VSL |
|
|
oldcoot <oldcoot7074@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jun 21, 12:54 pm, Double-A <double...@hush.com> wrote:
Einstein floated his own VSL theory in 1911.
But I don't see that as Einstein being inconsistant with himself.
Light does "seem" to slow in speed as it passes massive bodies as
measured from a constant distant frame. It is just a matter of how
you look at it.
Yep, his development of GR expanded upon SR by recognizing the slowing
of lightspeed in a gravity well relative to an outside observer..
which made SR with its universal lightspeed-constancy a wholly owned
subsidiary of GR. Here's a good discussion of it-
http://www.relativitybook.com/resources/c_speedoflight.html
But GR simply describes the effect and cannot explain *why* it occurs.
Slowing of light in a "gravitationally dense" region (per this
article's vernacular) is due to _diminished_ density (or PDT value) of
the spatial medium. Conversely, lightspeed increases in
"gravitationally sparse" regions such as deep space where PDT value is
higher. And at deep cosmological distances, lightspeed begins
increasing exponentially the farther back you go, due to the
steepening *cosmological PDT gradient*. Yet the speed of light is
always constant `locally` in all PDT frames.. which is the natural
extension of both SR and GR. And as Painius recently emphasized,
spatial volume also *contracts* concomitantly with increasing PDT
value, as you "play the tape backwards" of the expansion of the
universe.
|
What are the units of PDT value? How do you measure it?
--
"Substantiation that you regard yourself as a God to be worhsipped [sic]
should be your concern, Deco."
-- David Tholen |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 7:07 am Post subject: Re: VSL |
|
|
"Art Deco" <erfc-1024@usa.net> wrote in message
news:220620081946045047%erfc-1024@usa.net...
| Quote: |
oldcoot <oldcoot7074@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On Jun 21, 12:54 pm, Double-A <double...@hush.com> wrote:
Maybe you should send him a copy of your theory. He remarked that he
already has a collection of "crackpot" theories that have been sent to
him.
I did correspond with him by e-mail back in '02. He indicated he is
firmly commited to the 'one-shot' BB and the standard open-ended
expansion idea. Hence he has no concept of space being anything other
than 'nothing'. Any further correspondance would have been pointless.
Irony Alert!
Pedo alert! Art Deco hiding in the bushes! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
chatnoir
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 8:54 am Post subject: Re: VSL |
|
|
On Jun 22, 7:47 pm, Art Deco <erfc-1...@usa.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
oldcoot <oldcoot7...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
On Jun 21, 12:54 pm, Double-A <double...@hush.com> wrote:
Einstein floated his own VSL theory in 1911.
But I don't see that as Einstein being inconsistant with himself.
Light does "seem" to slow in speed as it passes massive bodies as
measured from a constant distant frame. It is just a matter of how
you look at it.
Yep, his development of GR expanded upon SR by recognizing the slowing
of lightspeed in a gravity well relative to an outside observer..
which made SR with its universal lightspeed-constancy a wholly owned
subsidiary of GR. Here's a good discussion of it-
http://www.relativitybook.com/resources/c_speedoflight.html
But GR simply describes the effect and cannot explain *why* it occurs.
Slowing of light in a "gravitationally dense" region (per this
article's vernacular) is due to _diminished_ density (or PDT value) of
the spatial medium. Conversely, lightspeed increases in
"gravitationally sparse" regions such as deep space where PDT value is
higher. And at deep cosmological distances, lightspeed begins
increasing exponentially the farther back you go, due to the
steepening *cosmological PDT gradient*. Yet the speed of light is
always constant `locally` in all PDT frames.. which is the natural
extension of both SR and GR. And as Painius recently emphasized,
spatial volume also *contracts* concomitantly with increasing PDT
value, as you "play the tape backwards" of the expansion of the
universe.
What are the units of PDT value? How do you measure it?
|
Flatten one Deco with a asphalt roller vehicle! Take the longest
resulting part as One Deco unit which would still measure no such
thing - but is a good idea anyway! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Double-A
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 6:57 pm Post subject: Re: VSL |
|
|
On Jun 22, 2:00 pm, oldc...@webtv.net (oldcoot) wrote:
| Quote: |
AA wrote,
Interesting, as (Magueijo) was writing
about how Einstein was pondering
whether space itself was a "something"
which perhaps had anti-gravitational
qualities. He thought tension would give
it anti-gravity. I'm not sure how tension
differs from pressure...
Evidently he's come around to pondering whether it might be a
'something' after all. If he understood the concept of the cosmological
PDT gradient, he would have the *cause* of his VSL, and with no need for
violating the Lorentz invariance.
|
Magueijo seems to be discounting Einsteins ponderings about space with
anti-gravitational properties. He maintains that the cosmological
constant was Einstein's biggest mistake. While the book was only
written a few years ago, I wonder if it was written before the
evidence came out seeming to show that the expansion of the universe
is accelerating? Or perhaps he rejects accelerating expansion along
with the inflationary period. I will just have to finish the book to
find out.
Double-A |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
102 Attacks blocked
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
