If a light wave has no medium of propagation then it can have no propagation speed
In classical wave physics, a wave is a disturbance which propagates in a medium. The speed of a wave is determined by the properties of the medium. A wave therefore cannot propagate at any speed if it has no medium to propagate in.
Einstein’s 2nd postulate says ‘light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c that is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body.’
So he replaces the medium of light wave propagation, the aether, with ‘empty space’, therefore the speed of light c is not defined relative to its medium, aether, but to absolutelly nothing (in which light also propagates, making light a wave of nothing, or a disturbance of nothing). And then claims the exact same thing which classical wave physics said about waves. Taking out the most important thing, which is that the speed of waves is always defined relative to their medium of propagation- which is what causes the wave to propagate and have a definitive speed in the first place.
If a wave has no medium of propagation then it can have no propagation speed. Because the propagation speed of any wave is determined by the properties of the medium. Which of course do not change when the source or observer are moving relative to the medium, which means the speed of the wave is independent of their motion- so there is no mistery or paradox as to why the speed of light is constant and does not depend on the motion of source or observer, that Einstein had to solve by removing the medium. That is exactly how waves in a medium behave ! Einstein’s theory is therefore unnecessary and plain stupid because it takes away the only physical explanation for why light has a definitive or fixed propagation speed in the first place, and why it does not vary with motion of the source or observer in the 2nd.
And Einstein never said that light is made of particles, but quantised wave energy packets or something. If you treat light as a projectile like particle then you get different results than if light is a wave, because in that case galilean relativity applies to light, just like to a bullet. Even so, you will not measure a different speed of light v+vEarth if you fire a ‘light bullet’ from Earth, unless you are at rest or stationary relative to the Earth’s inertial frame. So you’ll have to go to the Sun to measure that variable speed. On Earth you will still measure the same speed in all directions.
But my whole point was that if light is a wave, as it is according to classical physics and all experiments like Young double slit, galilean relativity cannot apply to it.
And that most classical physicists wrongly applied galilean tranformations to waves and predicted that the speed of waves should compose to the speed of the observers, who will therefore measure different speeds of light based on their speed relative to the aether. This prediction was wrong because galilean relativity does not apply to classical wave physics, which therefore predicts the exact opposite: that all observers will measure the same speed of light. Lorentz and Einstein accepted the wave theory of light, but also accepted the false premise that the speed of waves should add to the speed of the observer, which is only valid if light was a particle and it had no medium or preffered frame of reference- and even then it doesnt give a variable speed v+Vearth, unless you observe it from the Sun. And when experiments infirmed that prediction, they were all shocked and tried to fix classical physics by dilating time and contracting space in their attempt of solving a problem which it never had. That’s like believing your car’s gas engine is broken because it doesnt work with diesel, and trying to build your own home made engine which works on mixing them together, or using good old vacuum instead as Einstein would do. This surely would contract the piston length and dilate the stroke time, causing the vehicle to travel at a definitive speed c relative to nothing. They were commically stupid, like Oliver and Hardy.
Comments
Post a Comment