#1
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of C
Here is a simple speculation using Newtonian mechanics which may be
of interest. Lets suppose the properties of light [mass equivalence according to E=mc^2] are set by the value of the mass of the universe as a whole out to the visible horizon [sort of a Machs principle type of argument] Lets suppose that we treat the universe as a potential well [out to the visible horizon] and that the minimum kinetic energy of a photon is exactly equal to the minimum required to raise it out of this potential well. This would require that mC^2=GMm/R [where M=Mu mass of Univ (out to Horizon)] Plugging in the values yields. Mu/Ru=1.347x10^27 Kg/meter Mass of the universe divided by the current radius out to the visible horizon. You might ask, what the heck does Mu/Ru give us? But lets carry on and see where it leads. In order to see if this ratio is even in the right ballpark, we could use this Mu/Ru to calculate a density of the universe and see if it's even close to what is observed and now accepted, i.e. critical density. Using the currently accepted value of the Hubbles constant and latest research indicates a flat universe, we use Euclidean geometry where density=M/4.189R^3. Working out a density yields 10^-29 gm/cm^3. This not only is in the right ballpark, it's bang on, right at the critical density. What else might we do to see if Mu/Ru is correct? We arrived at Mu/Ru by using a photon traveling the maximum distance across the mass of the universe out to the visible horizon. Why not try the other extreme, and use the minimum distance and mass that a photon upon being created might traverse, and see if this ratio is even close? The plank units come to mind where the plank mass equals 2.1767x10^-8KG and the plank length equals 1.616x10^-35 m. Dividing yields, m/r= 1.347x10^27 Kg/meter It's Identical! The same ratio has returned! We seem to have arrived at the same ratio from three different starting points. Could this just be coincidence? The current contender against Inflationary theory, is a varying velocity of C theory put forward by John Moffat, University of Toronto as well as Dimitri Nanopoulos and Keith Randall of Texas A&M University. So for the final speculation we look to see what the original expression mC^2=GMm/R, has to say about C as a f(n) of time. If we assume the mass of the universe is constant [safe], And that G is a constant [not so safe, I suspect G may change & complicate things]. We see that the velocity C squared is a f(n) of the reciprocal of R and thus of time. I.e. C decreases as the universe expands [evolves] Example; At 10^-35 sec [plank time] after the big bang, it would yield a Velocity of C=10^39 m/sec. [At time of decoupling C would be less] Inflation doesn't enter into the equations at this point and complicate things, since VSL theories replace inflation. This value of M/R (if correct) may be significant, since it is determined using hard empirical constants rather than soft observational data. Thanks WG |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of C
WG wrote:
Here is a simple speculation using Newtonian mechanics which may be of interest. [Mod. note: entire quoted article trimmed -- mjh] Dirac numerology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_l...ers_hypothesis -- Dirk http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK http://www.theconsensus.org/ - A UK political party http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of C
On Dec 9, 11:41*am, "WG" wrote:
Here is a simple speculation using Newtonian mechanics which may be of interest. Lets suppose the properties of light *[mass equivalence according to E=mc^2] are set by the value of the mass of the universe as a whole out to the visible horizon [sort of a Machs principle type of argument] E=mc^2 is quite relativistic, and has nothing to do with Newtonian mechanics. Nor does it have anything to do with light. The Energy of a light photon is E=hc/ \lambda; the photon is quite massless. Mach's principle states: "Local physical laws are determined by the large-scale structure of the universe." Since your hypothetical universe is being dealt with as a whole, Mach's principle does not apply. Lets suppose that we treat the universe as a potential well [out to the I know you meant to say gravitational potential well, but for ****s and grins I used U(r) = cos(r/R_u). visible horizon] and that the minimum kinetic energy of a photon is exactly equal to the minimum required to raise it out of this potential well. This would require that * *mC^2=GMm/R * * [where M=Mu mass of Univ (out to Horizon)] Plugging in the values yields. Mu/Ru=1.347x10^27 Kg/meter Mass of the universe divided by the current radius out to the visible horizon. I used M_u = 10^80 atoms, with R_u defined to be the comoving distance between Earth and the edge of the Universe. It yields R_u = 46.5 x 10^9 ly * 10^15 m/ly to get M_u/R_u of O(10^55) atoms/meter, which even when you figure that there is Avagadro's number of hydrogen atoms to kilo of hydrogen, the finals answer is O(10^32), a factor of 10,000 off from your 10^27 kg/m. So I don't know where you are getting your numbers, but they are not representative of reality. You might ask, what the heck does Mu/Ru give us? But lets carry on and see where it leads. In order to see if this ratio is even in the right ballpark, we could use this Mu/Ru to calculate a density of the universe and see if it's even close to what is observed and now accepted, i.e. critical density. Using the currently accepted value of the Hubbles constant and latest research indicates a flat universe, we use Euclidean geometry where density=M/4.189R^3. WHAT? The mass of a 3-ball is (4/3)*\pi* R^3. Where the heck did you get M/4*189M^3? Besides, you already have a mass/ radius term, your M_u/ R_u term above. Working out a density yields 10^-29 gm/cm^3. Again, what universe are you drawing your numbers from? This not only is in the right ballpark, it's bang on, right at the critical density. I note with interest your lack of significant figures. What else might we do to see if Mu/Ru is correct? We arrived at Mu/Ru by using a photon traveling the maximum distance across the mass of the universe out to the visible horizon. Why not try the other extreme, and use the minimum distance and mass that a photon upon being created might traverse, and see if this ratio is even close? The plank units come to mind where the plank mass equals 2.1767x10^-8KG and the plank length equals 1.616x10^-35 m. Dividing yields, m/r= 1.347x10^27 Kg/meter This number means what exactly? It is not useful. It's Identical! The same ratio has returned! We seem to have arrived at the same ratio from three different starting points. Could this just be coincidence? Seeing as your first set of numbers are not listed, I am suspect of them. So I will say no, your work is doctored. [snip] So for the final speculation we look to see what the original expression mC^2=GMm/R, has to say about C as a f(n) of time. If we assume the mass of the universe is constant [safe], And that G is a constant [not so safe, I suspect G may change & complicate things]. We see that the velocity C squared is a f(n) of the reciprocal of R and thus of time. I.e. C decreases as the universe expands [evolves] If the speed of light changed with the radius of the universe, it would show up as a change in other fundamental constants, a change that would be measurable. To my knowledge, only one study has shown a systematic change in the fine structure constant, but that study is considered controversial, as no other study has conformed the results, indeed, most have gotten results that say the fine structure constant is constant. [snip] -Gordon |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Is speed of sound higher then the speed of light??? | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 1 | September 9th 08 12:48 AM |
The Speed of Light | G=EMC^2 Glazier[_1_] | Misc | 4 | April 23rd 07 10:20 PM |
Why is the Speed of Light the Limiting Speed. | [email protected] | Misc | 20 | September 4th 06 06:34 PM |
parllel universe have diffrent speed of light 128 168 300 299 thats how you find diffrent universe i'm from the planet earth that is the 7th from the sun stuck on one that the planet is 3rd from the sun the speed of light is 128 and 32 dimentions | Roger Wilco | Misc | 1 | December 30th 03 10:15 PM |