The Illusion of the Invariance of the Velocity of Light in All Frames of Reference
This article expands on the other title, "Invalidating Doppler Shift".
The velocity of light is always relative to the source from which it originates. As a brand-new light is continuously emitted from a source, it propagates with a velocity that is dependent on the source's velocity at the precise moment of emission, regardless of the source's acceleration. Therefore, . Consequently, this newly produced light maintains a consistent trajectory in a straight line/ rectilinear path relative to the source's motion at each point along the source’s path.
To put simply, the light from a given source will move faster than c compared to you if that source is moving toward you. Like how the bullet from a gun will hit you with a higher velocity if someone is shooting at you while they are on a train heading towards you.
The illusion is that all observers and detectors are only capable of measuring the re-emitted light from the electrons making up themselves. So even though the wavepacket could be traveling relative to an observer… the electrons making up that observer will absorb that incoming primary… which will diminish to zero... extinguishing the primary's velocity.
The light from a given source will move slower than c compared to you if that source is moving away from you. Like how a bullet from a gun will have less speed compared to you if you are traveling away from the bullet as it approaches you. The emission is still coming out of the gun or the light source at the same velocity… but relative to YOU it could be faster or slower if you’re heading towards or away from the source its emission.
Those same electrons will crescendo a brand-new secondary packet as an equal and opposite reaction, and that new re-emitted secondary wave-packet will be propagating relative to the electrons making up that observer. That process itself happens at c. And since the electrons of an observer are traveling relative to that observer… it serves the illusion that ALL wavepackets are the same velocity and that the velocity of light is invariant in ALL frames of reference to ALL observers. It is not. It’s an illusion dealing with the re-emission of light from the electrons making up ourselves.
All the light you ever see is ultimately the re-emitted light from the electrons making up yourself.
All observers only assume they are measuring the primary packet because the velocity of light is c to all who measure. But that is only apparent due to the re-emission from one’s own electrons. Imagine you’re encased in a block of colored glass. You can only measure the refractive index of the medium surrounding you. The velocity of light is propagating at the rate of c/n within the medium. Outside of the medium... the source emitting the primary packet might be approaching you or receding away from you.
You’d have no way of knowing that.
Therefore, the emissions coming from that approaching or receding source might be propagating at (depending on if the source is approaching toward or receding away from the medium encasing you.) So, the velocity of the incoming primary extinguishes, and the re-emission is now propagating at c in relation to the refractive index of that medium.
High precision tests were conducted in 1967 by Petr Beckmann and Peter Mandics. The following page from my Book 1 on LIGHT shows the nullified results. (The same reason for the nullified results of the Michaelson-Morley interferometer fringes).
Here is more information from Petr Beckman's clippings and regarding his book titled "Einstein Plus Two". (Was very difficult to obtain a physical copy of this book)
Laser vs Mirror - The Impossibility of "Proving" a Theory by Experiments:
https://x.com/TheRealVerbz/status/1788284452843692208
Let’s visualize a scenario. A source of light is approaching you. The incoming light from that source is traveling c+v relative to you. Meaning, that particular light is traveling 299,792,458 m per second PLUS the speed of the source itself traveling toward you.
The incoming primary light is absorbed, and a secondary light is re-emitted at c but with a refractive index of n. That’s, c divided by n, or c/n .
The so-called “Fresnel dragging”/ index of refraction of media is correctly expressed as a function of frequency n (ν), NOT wavelength n (λ) as erroneously taught in textbooks.
I present the same argument with a single laser pointer fixed window of a glass of water.
Velocity of Light - Extinction Shift Example:
https://rumble.com/v24lyag-velocity-of-light-dr-edward-dowdye-extinction-shift-example-jason-verbelli.html
Since the frequency, doesn’t change, the Energy, must be conserved:
hν Before Interfering Medium = hν Within Medium = hν Re-emitted
The measured value of the wavelength and the re-emitted/ Extinction Shifted wavelength of a packet emitted from an approaching source is expressed as:
λc = λ(c+v) (1 + v/c)^(-1)
Photons are NOT particles. In this emissions theory... there is no particle-wave duality. Light does NOT behave like bullets. (I'll get into the fallacy of the double slit experiment(s) in another article).
But, if you were to shoot a bullet in microgravity, it would TRACE a straight-lined/ rectilinear path just as a collimated beam follows a straight-lined path. Also, like how the bullet from a gun will travel relative to the gun in came from… light also propagates relative to the bulb or source it comes from.
Wolfgang Pauli’s ballistic principle applies in the regard that the initial wavefront of a given packet will propagate in a straight-lined path from a source to a target. Over long distances, that packet will have a delay at the velocity of light, c. The packet propagates relative to the source it comes from. If that source is traveling a given rate, you must add or subtract that rate on top of the velocity of light itself.... adding to the velocity of light c if the source is approaching towards the target and subtracting from the velocity of c if the source is receding away from the target.
We must always be mindful that the electrons making up the target itself will absorb that primary and re-emit a secondary which then travels relative to those electrons from that point on. So, even though the incoming packet might be approaching at , the target will measure its own re-emitted light at c.
There is a distinction between the velocity of light being constant from its source versus the concept of the constancy of the velocity of light being the same in ALL frames of reference. The “velocity of light constant ”, c, is different than “the constancy of the velocity of light,” especially in all frames of reference.
Imagine a person with a gun. The person is standing on a train. The train is traveling by a grassy hill. There is a target on the hill. The bullet from the gun will hit the target at a higher speed if the person shoots that bullet while traveling on the train towards the target.
The bullet will hit the target at (Bullet + v).
You must account for the speed of the bullet towards the target PLUS the velocity of the train itself towards the target. If the bullet left the gun at the speed of light, the bullet would travel c relative to the gun, but relative to target.
No photon particles 1:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1975981866110025872?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg
No photon particles 2:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1975626697203753414?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg
Please watch parts 50, 51 and 52. They are about 1 minute each.
Laser Experiments to Provide Evidence Against Einstein
Relativity vs Reality 50/71:
https://x.com/TheRealVerbz/status/1774458059949273585?s=20
51/71:
https://x.com/TheRealVerbz/status/1774538405399200156?s=20
52/71:
https://x.com/TheRealVerbz/status/1774820646364856731?s=20
This shows an unreconcilable discrepancy between relativity and reality. Even though the incoming light will be faster for one observer… Both observers will still measure the velocity of light as being the same!
How can that be?!
Because the electrons making up the observers themselves will absorb any incoming primary light… And those same electrons will simultaneously re-emit a brand new secondary light as an equal and opposite reaction.
If I am holding a flashlight, and I am standing stationary relative to you, the light from that flashlight will be propagating towards you at the velocity of c. 186.282 miles per second.
Let's say I am moving towards you at 100 mi./s while holding the flashlight. The light from the flashlight is still propagating at c relative to the flashlight. But compared to YOU, the light from that particular flashlight is traveling
c + v.
186,282 miles per second PLUS the speed I am traveling towards you, 100 miles a second. So the light from that particular flashlight will be traveling 186,382 mi./s when it reaches you.
But... you will still measure the velocity as being 186,282 miles per second.
It doesn't matter if the incoming light is traveling 2 times the speed of light... 10 times... 1 trillion times.... the velocity that YOU measure will ALWAYS be c. 186,282 miles a second.
Doesn't matter if the incoming light is traveling at 1/2 c, if the flashlight itself is traveling away from you at half the speed of light.
c - v
ALL the light you can possibly measure is the re-emitted light from the electrons making up yourself. And since the electrons are traveling relative to yourself… and you're only capable of interpreting the re-emitted light from the electrons making up your self... every measurement of any incoming packet will always be detected as c.
Thus the illusion of relativity and the invariance of light speed. It's not invariant. It's re-emitted at a constant. It's never the same light.
(42 - 46 as well if you're really into it)
https://x.com/TheRealVerbz/status/1773415894393459015?s=20
I need a lot of help to turn my diagrams and explanations into animations and videos. So that people can grasp the idea of different speeds of light. The scenarios can be easily created with blender and existing software. AI has not yet been able to produce the results that I want. These are very complex scenarios, dealing with fractions of the velocity of light.
It is imperative that people understand the argument. Light is not instantaneous. Any given light from any given source has a delay before it reaches a target. Yet everything we observe is happening now in real time. Because time is not relative. Light is not a recording of reality. It's never the same light. There is no medium distorting a primary packet at a constant.
There is no Doppler Shift. The entirety of relativity's interpretation is incorrect.
The laser pointer diagram leads into this other larger scenario about the initial wave packet from a star reaching Earth or a planet ... with a delay.
https://x.com/TheRealVerbz/status/1773728674594140662?s=20
But reality never delays. Just the properties of illumination, which allow you to see reality in real time.
The disembodied light which allows us to see reality has a delay.
https://x.com/TheRealVerbz/status/1797046860169064925?s=20
This real world experiment by AlphaPhoenix demonstrates what I am talking about. I need help from graphic designers, animators and people who can prompt AI with videos to produce moving visuals to turn my diagrams and explanations into moving/interactive scenarios people can easily grasp.
Take note that the laser beams re-emitting off of each mirror… are brand new beams of light at the point of each mirror. The electrons making up the surface of the mirrors are producing brand new laser beams as equal and opposite reactions.
I need a lot of help with different scenarios like these. Not one person in over a decade has taken it upon themselves to try and make these visuals or turn these diagrams and explanations into animations and moving visuals for themselves. Just to help out. Or out of their own interest. Or because they are retired and do graphic design for fun.
Been asking and waiting for people to help the complex ideas advance because they care. But alas... No help = no care. I know people have the skills, so that's not the issue. Money is usually the hurdle.
Help with Approaching star visualization
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1977408698239930370?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg
Help with Double star visualization
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1973047922528014718?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg
Help with Daredevil visualization
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1979208784531890307?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg
Help with faster than light communication visualization
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/1978509682034802883?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg
Help with double slit visualization
https://x.com/TheRealVerbz/status/1820032216300441961
4 Different Experiments and what they Actually Achieve:
https://x.com/therealverbz/status/2008626881449652410?s=46&t=JhcGFRVj667kIEx6GxtHvg
All of this information and discussion was banned by the Demystify Science Podcast.
They said it's "too off the rails" and "not up to editorial standards."
The hosts couldn't discern between a signal propagating with a delay at the velocity of light versus reality itself being observed in real-time across vast distances.
We filmed a 2 and a half hour episode in June of 2024.
https://x.com/TheRealVerbz/status/1802140503871561759?s=2
We discussed the work of Dr. Edward Dowdye, microwave deflection at the surface of the sun, the change in the velocity of light and then the last 20 minutes I introduced the concept of absolute time with examples. Like the "Lighter Flick From Mars."
The hosts just could not grasp what I was saying and kept conflating the incorrect notion of instantaneous light with being able to observe in real-time, because light is not a recording of reality.
(Take note the same hosts entertain talks about Leprechauns being real, remote viewing through the eyes a cat and other concepts that might seem "off the rails" to many others. But when it comes to me talking about seeing across vast distances with our own eyes in real-time... they just can't allow their audience to hear that.)
Banned/Censored Information
Mind Melting Thought Experiment About Absolute Time:
https://x.com/TheRealVerbz/status/1832848624822473187
Viewing an Astronaut Holding Up a Sign on Mars and Flicking a Lighter:
https://x.com/TheRealVerbz/status/1775972235964219733?s=20
Flicking a Lighter and then Outrunning the Shockwave/ Wavefront:
https://x.com/TheRealVerbz/status/1776691340740591707?s=20
Proper Foundation of Light and Prisms:
https://x.com/TheRealVerbz/status/1899879205774700771?s=20
I think that's enough info for this section on the constancy of the velocity of light in all frames of reference versus the velocity of light constant.
Respectfully,
Jason Verbelli
Founder of Galilean Variance