A physics question: To USE crutches and invent artificial (non-existent) foundational bridges to support flawed and misinterpreted theory, OR NOT? With a 3D view of E=MC2, artificial addons are not required to better understand reality.

Good to know: any number of observations, if made on a sufficiently limited scale, will tend to indicate that the earth is flat, rather than spherical.

Theory that challenges Einstein's physics could soon be put to the test

A theory by Imperial physicists that the speed of light is variable - and not constant as Einstein suggested - could soon be put to the test.

The testability of the varying speed of light theory sets it apart from the more mainstream rival theory: inflation. Inflation says that the early universe went through an extremely rapid expansion phase, much faster than the current rate of expansion of the universe. These theories are necessary to overcome what physicists call the 'horizon problem'. The universe as we see it today appears to be everywhere broadly the same, for example it has a relatively homogenous density.

A clearer, "more real" view using a refined, broader, 3D version of E=mc2

Gravity – As Viewed Through the Radius (VC)

Through the concept of the curvature of physical law, however, we see that the addition of mass to an existing body does not, necessarily, increase the force of attraction between its parts, but may, under certain conditions, cause the field to become negative, and the attraction to become a repulsion. We can explain the observed actions of the present universe by postulating that an attraction exists between the individual bodies within a galaxy, because their total mass and distance is such that they are within the positive portion of the gravitation curve with respect to each other. In the vast spaces between the galaxies however, the curve dips below the zero line with the result that a repulsion exists between the galaxies themselves. This also explains why matter, although rather evenly distributed throughout the known universe, is not distributed uniformly, but found in quite similar concentrations at comparatively regular distances.

This could only be true if all regions of the universe were able to influence each other. However, if the speed of light has always been the same, then not enough time has passed for light to have travelled to the edge of the universe, and 'even out' the energy.

The alternative theory is inflation, which attempts to solve this problem by saying that the very early universe evened out while incredibly small, and then suddenly expanded, with the uniformity already imprinted on it. While this means the speed of light and the other laws of physics as we know them are preserved, it requires the invention of an 'inflation field' -- a set of conditions that only existed at the time.

Turns Out The Speed Of Light Isn't So Constant After All

Light doesn't always travel at the speed of light. A new experiment reveals that focusing or manipulating the structure of light pulses reduces their speed, even in vacuum conditions. Generally if light is not traveling at c it is because it is moving through a material. For example, light slows down when passing through glass or water.

A clearer, "more real" view using a refined, broader, 3D version of E=mc2

The Nonlinearity of Physical Law

The quantity C is considered to be a constant, in fact the only constant which has survived in a relativistic world. In almost every text book on physics in the world today the statement is made that the quantity C represents the velocity of light (in centimeters per second), yet every student in the world who has studied the subject, knows that the velocity of light is not a constant. That its velocity, in fact, varies slightly with each different medium through which it is propagated. There are many who will dispute the statement that the change in velocity varies with the frequency, but when sufficiently precise tests are made entirely within a single medium, the results indicate convincingly that this is true.

Fortunately there is a value to which the quantity C can be assigned which is a constant. Moreover the assignment of the quantity C to this factor makes possible a much better understanding of the natural laws involved in the propagation of energy. The quantity C is actually the kinetic energy equivalent of the mass energy of matter. In other words, if we take a gram (or any other quantity of matter: Newtonian mass) and convert that matter gradually into energy according to the formula E = MC2, and the resultant energy, as it appeared, were constantly applied to the remaining matter in such a way as to accelerate it uniformly in a given direction, when all the matter had been so converted we would find that we had zero Newtonian mass, infinite inertial mass and a resultant velocity equal to the quantity C, or approximately 3x10(10) centimeters per second (with respect to the given reference or starting point). The maximum velocity attained would always be the same regardless of the quantity of matter with which we started.

Gravity may have chased light in the early universe

Now, in a paper to be published 28 November in Physical Review, he and Niayesh Afshordi at the Perimeter Institute in Canada have laid out a new version of the idea – and this one is testable. They suggest that in the early universe, light and gravity propagated at different speeds.

If photons moved faster than gravity just after the big bang, that would have let them get far enough for the universe to reach an equilibrium temperature much more quickly, the team say.

A testable theory

What really excites Magueijo about the idea is that it makes a specific prediction about the cosmic microwave background (CMB). This radiation, which fills the universe, was created shortly after the big bang and contains a “fossilised” imprint of the conditions of the universe.

Once grounded in REAL, desperate attempts to support current flawed theory with offbeat, tangential artificial mathematical structures will cease to contribute and reinforce outdated confusion.

OF NOTE: A paper published in The European Physical Journal H provides the first English translation and an analysis of one of Albert Einstein's little-known papers, "On the cosmological problem of the general theory of relativity." Published in 1931, it features a forgotten model of the universe, while refuting Einstein's own earlier static model of 1917. In this paper, Einstein introduces a cosmic model in which the universe undergoes an expansion followed by a contraction. A more coherent theory – see http://resonance.is/

In Summary:

…… the quantity C (velocity of light) as the radius of curvature of all natural law, the pivotal point upon which the natural laws become manifest, the kinetic energy equivalent of the mass energy of matter. Meaning if a differential of energy equal to this quantity exists between the observer and the point which he is observing, the natural laws will be suspended. If the energy differential is in excess of the quantity C, the laws will appear to operate in reverse at that point.
Field propulsion and antigravity become common sense, teleportation/quantum entanglement demystify, and erroneous limits dissolve, permitting application throughout the macro, meso, micro frames.
…… We must clear our minds of the thought block produced by the assumption that the quantity C is a factor of absolute limit. We must realize that it is a limiting factor only with respect to two given reference points, and that it is perfectly possible to conceive of a series of consecutive reference points between each two of which a differential equal to the quantity C may exist.

…… The quantity C is the factor which will enable us to determine precisely the degree of change in the curvature of one law which will be brought about by a specified change in the application of the others.

It is the factor which will eventually tell us how to place our spacecraft in either the positive or negative portion of the gravitational curve with respect to the earth or any other planet which we may choose to visit.

Towards more refined, jaw-dropping, seemingly miraculous, nuclear applications using frequencies and fields.