Entries Tagged 'Science' ↓

Experiment Opera has resulted in a radical story concerning the speed of light.

Reuters reports that Antonio Ereditato and his team at the Cern Particle Research Centre sent 15000 beams of neutrinos speeding from one place to another whereby they arrived at their destination 60 nanoseconds ahead of schedule.

From this it has been determined that the neutrinos were traveling faster than light speed. This suggests that Einstein’s relativity could be overturned as it has been assumed impossible for mass to travel faster than the speed of light.

It may be that the speed of light was not exceeded at all but that light speed is not at all constant.

Keep in mind that the speed of light is the time it takes light to travel a distance of one metre…which is 1/299,792,458ths of a second and that this value was standardized many years ago on the basis of light speed fluctuating from place to place. The whole idea of a standard value was to eliminate confusion but at the same time failed to question the constancy of light speed.

I would suggest that the alleged neutrinos did not exceed the speed of light but simply traveled at the speed of light as it is at the present time.

No rules have been broken and no speed limits exceeded.

Unfortunately light does not itself have a speed as described…what is measured is a time factor and nothing more.

The idea light speed should remain constant for billions of years in a dynamic universe seems a bit less than rational, just as the idea of it being possible to clock the speed of light in the same manner as a race horse seems a bit less than rational.

At some point a distinction must be made between the speed of a horse in terms of a linear evaluation and the apparent speed of light in terms of a non-linear evaluation.

A truly dynamic universe does not produce or require the aid of a universal constant as the only universal constant is change…sometimes fast and sometimes slow but change nonetheless.

I recently sent an email to Arnie in response to his comments on the disposal of nuclear waste materials and the neutralization of plutonium. I also made a point of thanking him for his effort and his balanced attitude in speaking out on the Fukishima situation and other critical issues facing the nuclear industry, so a big hats off to Arnie Gundersen.

There is no known solution to either issue but I wonder if anyone has had any experience in attempting to freeze Plutonium to a temperature close to absolute zero and I further wonder if such a thing would be possible.

If we consider the true nature of energy in relation to an underlying force of energy sustaining and perpetuating the structure of all physical materials and realize that Plutonium has an extremely low ratio of energy per unit of mass we might be able to make some progress.

The whole issue of nuclear waste materials is in fact a very real and immediate problem which needs to be dealt with as soon as possible. Both Canada and the USA have undertaken attempts to establish underground depositories in which to store nuclear waste materials only to abandon the idea, yet the Swiss seem to be pushing ahead despite the very real safety issue involved in relation to the internal and external dynamics of the earth being inversely proportional.

This means that the sealing of underground depositories once filled with nuclear waste materials, backfilled and sealed with concrete may pose a risk in that the internal dynamics of the earth will then have a direct effect on the stability of the nuclear materials.

Drums of nuclear waste materials have a surface temperature of 110 to 120 F before the depository is sealed and as so little is known about the inverse effects of the earth’s internal dynamics it may be possible that the temperature of the stored nuclear waste materials will increase in temperature over time. The extent of such a temperature increase is unknown at this time but it can be determined that an increase will occur.

The key to neutralizing any nuclear waste material links directly to the low ratios of energy per unit of mass determining an extremely high resistance to a further increase in energy in that it is an increase in energy which is needed to neutralize nuclear waste materials.

What is ultimately needed is an alternative to nuclear power allowing the accumulation of nuclear waste materials to cease and to this end I believe Project Unity might be capable of fulfilling that goal.

It could have something to do with money…?

Money = power…the more money and or power you have the more influence you can apply to further your own agenda.

At the same time money can be employed to reward those, whether they be individuals or organizations willing to afford cooperation.

Therefore the academic world is not forgotten or overlooked, as they too can benefit through cooperation and concessions.

What agenda?

There are very few who cannot be bought…therefore the scope of one’s agenda can involve multiple facets and a variety of subject matter.

So what exactly are we talking about here?

Corruption…financial corruption, scientific corruption, political corruption, military corruption, law enforcement agency corruption, medical corruption, academic corruption, industrial corruption, regulatory corruption, religious corruption, social corruption and so on and so on etc.

We here at Gravity Control believe the world deserves better, something more than corruption, something better than hypocrisy…something more than lies and more lies.

Clean renewable energy is available…the international playing field can be made level affording all people equal opportunities to be productive and self sufficient, whereby achieving a dignified and equitable standard of living.

What stands in the way is corruption…the selfish narrow minded ideals of men and women willing to sacrifice the good of the many to afford themselves personal gain.

I’ve had enough of the corruption, enough of the denial, enough of the deception and enough of the lies.

There is no middle ground…there is a line in the sand.

Where do you stand?

Light speed is considered a constant and who dares to argue the point?

I dare say I’m willing to give it a go…light speed is determined to be 299,792,458 meters per second based on the observers perception of light traveling a distance of one meter in exactly 1/299,792,458ths of a second.

The first problem with this is the terms employed as they are completely inadequate.  Sure they might be applicable to many aspects of trade and commerce but not very useful in this case.

On top of this it is assumed that light travels in a linear fashion, much like a train or a speeding bullet, but having no mass.  And of course this is quite impossible if for no other reason than the universe failing to cooperate, as the universe is not linearly structured.  Therefore space cannot be measured using a ruler and a clock.

As the universe exists in a dynamic state it would follow that light being a common occurrence throughout the universe would also exist in a dynamic state, which disqualifies the concept of a constant, in respect to the perception of light having a speed.

It is important to keep in mind that Einstein employed the concept of light speed remaining constant due to his view at the time, 1905, that the universe existed in a static state.  In later years he came to realize this was not the case, but it would seem many others missed the point.

Today light speed is employed to determine the size and age of universe, with scientists reporting having taken photographs of distant galaxies.  In this respect they ask us to accept their perception of space in that they have photographed events having occurred billions of years ago, with the photographed subject being situated billions of light years distance from Earth.

Therefore it is believed that the outer boundary of the visible universe is some 14 billion light years away with the universe expanding at a fantastic rate.

Keep in mind that to make any kind of sense of this one must accept the constancy of light speed over a period of roughly 14 billion years, which is a stretch of the imagination to say the least.

Some years ago it was determined that the universe existed in simultaneous state, with Einstein adding his two cents worth as well…he stated clearly that; “time is different for every system in motion.”  And what an amazing statement that was and still is,  but unfortunately not very well understood.

This means that both past and future conditions exist relative to our earth with both past and future conditions existing simultaneously.  This suggests time is different for every planetary body in space.

In a simultaneous universe you do not find or even need light traveling for millions or even billions of years to reach us.  What you see is what you get whether it be a past condition or a future condition existing simultaneously.

Time is a relative factor of space, which is dynamic, therefore light speed over such distances cannot be constant if in fact light does have a speed.

It’s the perception of the beast that fools us into believing we have it right, but in fact we have it wrong.  Light is simply a condition of field, just as gravity is a condition of field and neither one has a speed or a speed limit we can refer to as a constant.

Light is incapable of linear motion, as for it to do so it would have to be in motion independent of the field in which it is observed to be situated and this is not the case.

Light speed is said to be constant coming or going, which again relies on one’s imagination to remain acceptable.  Of course Mich and Morley did their famous experiment and had great difficulty in accepting its failure, but I don’t think it was a failure, not at all.

If they had found a difference in light speed they would have proven light to be capable of linear motion, but they did not prove anything of the kind.  If light has no actual speed the results of their experiment demonstrated the point very clearly because direction would not matter in the slightest.

The only thing being measured in respect to light speed is a time delay and nothing more.

The motion of the light is not a factor as the motion of light cannot be measured in terms of so many meters per second.  Consequently the size and age of universe remains an unknown.

A time delay corresponding to the assumed speed of light is as fast as any reaction can be affected in the context of our relative existence on this planet.  But it has nothing to do with the motion of light traveling from point A to point B, because light does not travel in a linear fashion as does a train or a speeding bullet.

The existing perception of universe is limited to the scope of our existing scientific dogma, which is not at all helpful in moving us forward to a fundamental comprehension of universe and our relationship to universe.

It might get you high marks on an exam, but it wont get you any closer to knowing much about our universe.

Light speed is a critical point and deserves a complete rethink and a complete overhaul.  We need to know one way or the other if light has a speed…it either does or it doesn’t.

Light is either on or off, if it’s on it’s visible and if it’s off it’s not.

It only takes light 8 minutes to travel from the sun to the Earth if light is actually in motion, if it is not in motion there is no travel time because it’s not traveling.

If in fact there is a time delay between the sun and the earth that time delay remains relative to our planet earth…put the same instruments on the moon and the time delay will be considerably shorter.  But in neither case is the lights motion required or even possible.

Think about it…peer reviewed papers cannot change the reality of universe, the universe dictates the laws and principles applicable to understanding and comprehension.

Why should the fossil fuel industry receive subsidies, huge sums of money, when solar power is more efficient and cheaper to produce….it saves money.

Solar power cells could make the USA energy self sufficient if the same level of funding was applied as is now applied to the fossil fuel industries.

Huge profits are made from fossil fuels, yet these industries are also collecting corporate welfare which amounts to billions of dollars all of which is funded by the tax payer who is also the consumer.

Adequate funding of solar power would create many thousands of new jobs, jobs that are desperately needed…it would also allow North America to become self sufficient in respect to its energy needs now and in the future.

Solar power cells are efficient and cost effective, with minimal pollution.

Let’s get solar cell technology out into the light of day and reveal it for what it is…the answer to our energy needs.

It has been proven in countries receiving a fraction of the sunlight the USA receives during a year and it’s working very well.  It would work even better in Canada and the USA.

There are answers, there are solutions, but is there the will to make the leap?

nice solar demographix