OPEN LETTER TO THE ROYAL SOCIE
I am following discussion regarding the "Open Letter to the Royal Society." The topic is very interesting and that is worthy to organize the general discussion in order to get physically based attitudes related to EMW. I think that is good and addresses selected also. However, by posting such a topic we have to be careful and mast not to correct noticed errors with new ones. When I say this I have in mind the question: "What replaces contested attitude?" I consider myself a dissident, because many of my do not agree with the official views of scientific community. It can be concluded from some of my works and models of Nature, which I have developed (Natural Model of Nature - NMN model). But I can not agree with this question and request. The reason for my disagreement is following:
Electromagnetic waves are a process that spread across the space with constant speed of spreading, which depends on the appropriate characteristics of medium which is a carrier of this process.
It is not, therefore, error in the conclusion that the speed of EMW is constant, but the absence of physical models of EMT, and how this conclusion is implemented in the theory of Relativity.
I insist on the term of speed of spreading, which has nothing to do with the speed of movement of particles and bodies. Einschein and Newton made an error becouse they assume that a carrier of this process starts movement from the source of EMW to a sensor that will register it. Many errors in the theory of relativity come from these assumptions and it should be an item for discussion.
Upper definition is based on the assumption that the environment through which the stretch EMW has a particle nature with electrical charge. It must be of a permanently maintained system of particles that behave according to some natural laws (the most probably already known). In spite of that, the particles, which are several orders of magnitude smaller than electrons, are carriers of electromagnetic processes. They do not move through space, but only oscillate around your balanced position. Oscillations process one of them, regardless of how caused, transferred to the neighboring particles through the electromag¬netic process and spreads through the space. It is about an energy process that cannot be instantaneous but requires some time to be established, so that a new particle starts oscillate with some time delay, in relation to the actuator, which depends on the disposition of particles in space and their characteristics. Speed of establishment depends of the times derivation of appropriate energy function and the characteristics of this particles system that are constant. In such processes, and they are typical for waves, as the speed of spreading can mark
Speed of wave spreading is the sum of time delays activation of particles reduced to one second.
With this model EMW mentioned equation is not worthy. The starting waves process does not depend more nether from the sources speed nor of observers movement. It continues to autonomously spread even when the source of the EMW turned off. That does not mean that the speed of their movement does not have an effect on the information that observer receives through its senses or instruments on the progress observed waves process. From the relationship of these speeds depends on the registered frequency observed EMW, or we meet up with the appearance of Dopplers effect. Presented model is simplified, and by its detailed analysis would have to be taken into account and possible modulation of basically wave by some influence of the surrounding particles, but also about frequenters throughput of our sensors, were they biologically or technically.
This model EMW call into question many of the attitudes of the relativity theory and them could be and should discuss, but it is a special and complex issue that, I assume, is not the subject of this debate. According to this the Royal Society, if we want be correct, should not seek refutation the posture of constant speed of EMT but the determining their physical-based models.
I know that this attitude cannot be adopted immediately without further explanation, and I am available for discussion on this topic, if someone interested. Interested reader can some of my attitudes, related to this topic, found in my articles on NPA 16th conference this year and in the article PHOTON - REALITY OR FICTION" published on the site wbabin.net