Dr. Edward Dowdye's "Extinction Shift Principle" - No Relativity!

The majority of slides and GIFs from this presentation were publicly uploaded by Dr. Dowdye many years ago. This article is math heavy and densely packed with information as serious challenges to relativity (Lorentz invariance).

Who was Dr. Dowdye and what were his qualifications?
Dr. Edward Henry Dowdye Jr. was born in Washington DC, December 13, 1943, and passed away December 31, 2020. He was the founder of Pure Classical Physics Research and The Extinction Shift Principle. It's a return to classical physics under a variable framework for the velocity of light using Galilean Transformations. Thus why I call the framework "Galilean Variance." Dr. Edward had a plethora of credentials.

Natural Philosophy Bio:
https://wiki.naturalphilosophy.org/index.php?title=Edward_Henry_Dowdye

Discourses & Mathematical Illustrations Pertaining to Extinction Shift Principle Under the Electrodynamics of Galilean Transformations:
https://www.amazon.com/Discourses-Mathematical-Illustrations-Electrodynamics-Transformations/dp/0963447157

These are formidable and credible challenges to General & Special Relativity, Doppler Shift Theory and more. From a retired NASA Engineer, University Professor of Mathematics and internationally recognized expert in atomic physics, optics, LASERs and satellites.
If Einstein were alive today, he would concede to Dr. Dowdye's mathematical proofs under Galilean variance and re-interpreting all past experimental evidence attributed to Relativity.

Edward called his emissions theory, “Effectivity ” and said it operates using classical physics. I am specifying that his Extinction Shift Principle/Effectivity operates under the framework of Galilean variance. Since both Galilean invariance and Galilean variance are both qualify as “classical physics.” (Which is why people’s brains revert to autopilot when they hear the phrase “classical physics” or the word “Galilean”.)

People are programmed to automatically think the words “Galilean”, “classical”, “Newtonian”, “Aether” and “Euclidean geometry” are one in the same. There are major differentiations to make here.

The brilliant work of Dr. Edward Dowdye:
http://www.extinctionshift.com/

Why Should We Question Relativity? (FAQs):
http://extinctionshift.com/FAQ.htm

First was Newtonian mechanics within 3D Euclidean space. That is true classical physics. Then came the addition of aether and the application of Galilean invariant transformations within 3D Euclidean space. Still classical physics, but it mutated a bit. Then along came Einstein who screwed it all up with the invention of a 4th dimension and non-Euclidean geometry. (If it aint Euclidean... then it aint geometry...) Einstein would have been forbidden to enter Plato’s school as per the plaque at the entrance stated.

“Let no one ignorant of geometry enter.” --Plato

Then came along Dr. Edward Dowdye and his reformulation of classical physics. Returning back to 3D Euclidean space. Before the inappropriate coupling of space with time and the invention of the 4th dimension.

A brief history of physics:
Newton/ classical physics/ 3D Euclidean
==> Aether/ Galilean invariance/ classical physics/ 3D Euclidean
==> Relativity/ Lorentz invariance/ 4D non-Euclidean
==> Effectivity/ Galilean variance/ classical physics/ 3D Euclidean

The importance of Dowdye’s Emission’s Theory cannot be understated and must be taken into serious consideration. His unparalleled qualifications, scientific contributions and international recognition have earned the right to be heard.

The people first encountering Dr. Edward Dowdye’s Emissions Theory need to be mindful that they must cast aside ALL relativistic interpretations of space-time deformations, literal dilation of time or mass increase... and any extraneous mathematical requirements. All conjecture built upon the framework of an invariant model of light is erroneous.

This article/presentation will be reiterating and articulating interpretations through the lens of Galilean variance and the assumption that the velocity of light does indeed shift.

As Einstein himself wrote in a letter to Erwin Finley-Freundlich in August of 1913:
"Wenn die Lichtgeschwindigkeit auch nur ein bißchen von der Geschwindigkeit der Lichtquelle abhängig ist, dann ist meine ganze Relativitätstheorie und Gravitationstheorie falsch."

"If the velocity of light is even a little bit dependent upon the velocity of the light source, then my ENTIRE theory of Relativity and theory of Gravitation is false."

It turns out, the velocity of light is indeed dependent upon the velocity of the light source. Here is exactly why.

Doppler Effect Misnomer 2:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/2016227860886032837?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

Doppler Effect Misnomer 3:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/2018196525017714953?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

Michaelson-Morley's Interferometer Experiments - The Fallacy of Fringe Shifts:
https://x.com/TheRealVerbz/status/2023185620676550857?s=20

The Ontologically True Physics of Re-Emission:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/2045996230959063393?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

There has not been a more beneficial reformulation of science, math, and physics like this since Isaac Newton, Robert Hooke, Christiaan Huygens, or Nicolas Fatio. Even the work of Wolfgang Pauli and Walther Ritz seem to fall short in comparison to Dr. Edward Dowdye’s approach. Since those ballistic theories and past emissions theories assume a literal particle-wave duality and that the speed of light stays the same no matter what. It does not. It's an illusion. Both light and gravity propagate at the rate of c, but relative to the source from which they are emitted.

Now for the bulk of the presentation which can be found in full here.
It should be called "Optics, Electrodynamics & Gravitation based from Re-Worked classical physics/ Galilean Transformations under Euclidean Space."

Many more links will be provided at the end.

In this X thread, I introduce the brilliant work of Dr. Dowdye:
https://x.com/TheRealVerbz/status/1624538601890676736?s=20

Propagation and Re-Emission of Light:
https://www.extinctionshift.com/details03.htm

An Ideal Inelastic Collision Model using Center-of-Mass Frames Shows Conservation of Kinetic Energy:
https://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_5463.pdf

Extinction Shift Principle: A Pure Classical Alternative to General and Special Relativity, Dowdye, Jr., E.H., Physics Essays, Volume 20, 56 (2007) (11 pages); DOI: 10.4006/1.3073809
http://quantumrealism.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/1c1q1qcoh_33307.pdf

Einstein Mistranslated:
https://nexusnewsfeed.com/article/science-futures/nasa-scientist-says-einstein-mistranslated

Plasma Physics - Flaws & Corrections:
https://photos.app.goo.gl/UMtr6CvhttWXETJ48

Proofs for Grok (for when Grok is inevitably tagged to assess if my posts are true) Ask Grok to specifically parse the content of the X articles to extract the equations and data:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/2034331680383865110?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

Double Slit Illusion/ Fallacy:
https://x.com/TheRealVerbz/status/2022172974472974598?s=20

"Proof" That Santa's Reindeer Can Fly:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/2059042757059178602?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

The 4th Law of Thermodynamics:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/2018115757822075034?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

The Misconception of Kirchhoff's "Law":
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1987194179408257103?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg

I'll have to put together another article for the second half of the presentation dealing specifically with the deflection of light/microwaves and challenges to so called "gravitational lensing". Also addressing Einstein rings, black holes and other misnomers in optics.

Thank you for your time and interest.

Respectfully,
Jason Verbelli
Founder of Galilean Variance
https://galileanvariance.com (site getting overhauled)