User:Sagnac/sandbox

In physics, New Relativity (NR) is a theory that provides a revised view of the Universe proposed in 2010 by Selwyn Wright via a series of ten peer-reviewed published papers and conference presentations given in China, the USA, Morocco, Russia and Sweden. The theory extends work by Maxwell, Poincaré, and Lorentz's medium based motional theories. NR claims to be an enhanced version of Einstein’s Special Relativity (SR) (1905) confirming the same measured predictions as SR, but with an enhanced electromagnetic (EM) wave equation based on a propagation medium (PM) or classical ether. The author prefers the historical spelling of the word ether rather than aether.

Historically, Lorentz was the first to predict the complete measured effects of electromagnetic (EM) systems in motion based on a medium. Einstein partially solved the EM wave equation for EM systems, but did not distinguish (did not believe there was any difference) between sources and observers in motion. The verified aspects of Einstein's theory mirrors the Lorentz transformation (LT), predicting the same medium based properties as Lorentz. However, Einstein believed there was no medium, but used a medium in his field equations to make the same predicted measurements that we are familiar with today. NR is an extension of Lorentz’s medium based transform, distinguishing between measured source and observer motional differences and medium motional reference frames where the medium moves with the system (Earth or Solar System) by virtue of a novel reinterpretation of Stokes (1845) ether entrainment theory. The medium based NR provides a link between LT, SR, GR, accelerating frames and the equivalence principle.

NR is unique to both Lorentz's LT and Einstein's SR because it solves the general wave equation for both source and observer motion relative to the propagation medium, providing a complete solution. SR is incomplete because it is unable to distinguish and explain the measured differences between various moving systems: Earth centered, Michelson and Morley (MMX)(1886), and the heliocentric Solar System, Reasenberg et al (1972). The presence of a medium allows for other possibilities. For instance, that gravity attracts and compresses the medium (space-time distortion), according to the Schwarzschild metric (1915). To make the distinction, NR uses three pairs of time and space scales instead of two undefined pairs used in SR. Although the mechanics (first postulate) and the speed of light (second postulate) are invariant in Einstein’s inertial frame, the measured propagation time asymmetry (PTA) in a moving optical frame is asymmetrical and variant. Therefore, in new relativity, a third postulate is required, stating that the PTA and its variance exist in an optical frame moving relative to the medium.

This theory establishes that fundamental wave concepts, such as Huygens’s (1678) wave theory, Maxwell's Equations and the LT are based on a medium and all motional effects are therefore with respect to the medium and not through relative motion between systems. Basic optics tells us that waves are meaningless without their propagation medium to propagate their steady fields and disturbances. This includes the propagation speed, which also propagates relative to the medium. It is not generally understood that the speed of light is invariant only because time rate and systems shrink through motion relative to the medium, by exactly the same ratio, maintaining its propagation speed in the moving frame. Accelerating frames can be considered equivalent to gravity (equivalence principal) in that that for sources in motion time slows and space contracts. The same thing happens to observers in motion, however, the compression of the observer frame relatively expands the surroundings; time speeds up and systems expand. Observer acceleration is therefore equivalent to gravity, it can reverse the effect of gravity which compresses the medium and slows its time.

Lorentz is fundamental, Einstein’s ether-less SR is a misinterpretation of Lorentz and NR is an extension of Lorentz’s motional theory. Einstein’s SR is shown to be inconsistent, incomplete and its ether-less interpretation in error. NR removes discontinuity, restores the connection between classical and modern physics, and provides a unifying link between EM waves, gravitational fields and accelerating frames.

Main Claims

New Relativity (NR) re-unites classical and modern physics, re-establishes a preferred frame of reference and provides the bridge between the Lorentz transform, accelerating frames and gravity. NR is based on the following confirmed scientific observations:

• Maxwell established the propagation medium (ether) for electromagnetic (EM) waves (light) in 1865. He defined the medium characteristics in terms of a permeability (electrical inertia) μ, and a permittivity (electrical stiffness) ę (or ε), which allow the EM waves to propagate (bounce) through the medium.

• These properties are readily measured, permeability μ=1.25...×10⁻⁶ H*m-1 and permittivity ę=8.85x 10^-12 farads per meter (F·m⁻¹) in free space (vacuum), they determine the wave propagation speed in the medium. If there was no propagation medium their values would be zero giving infinite propagation speed, which is not the case.

• Maxwell's (1865) field equations (M E's) are based on his propagation medium, predicting causality (physically seen through wave propagation). It is only causal to view the past, but not to interfere (it has already happened). It is not causal to view the future (it has not yet occurred). Time travel and no absolute space are non causal.

• Lorentz's (1899) transform (LT) for systems in motion is based on Maxwell's propagation medium. Lorentz established both time and space contraction with motion relative to the medium, i.e. time slows and systems shrink in the direction of motion. This is a key observation, the contractions are in equal ratios maintaining the wave speed relative to the moving system.

• Schwarzschild's (1916) medium compression confirms the medium's presence around a gravitational body, showing that the medium is attracted to, and compressed around the body both time and space (space-time distortion), time slows and space shrinks through gravity, supporting a predictable Gravitational Entrainment Model (Figure 2).

• There is no evidence supporting Einstein's ether-less universe. Data originally believed to support the ether-less universe Bradley (1725), Michelson and Morley (1887), Sagnac (1913), Michelson and Gale (1925), Hafele and Keating (1972), Saburi et al (1976), and GPS (1992) are now proposed through NR theory to support Maxwell's propagation medium as described in detail via the listed references.

• NR solves general wave equation for sources and observers in motion. It shows Einstein's (1905) analysis is in error. He used a moving observer where time and space of the surroundings expand. He believed this represented motion in general. Source motion, where its time and space contract, which is not identified in Einstein's analysis.

• Einstein claimed there was no medium. However, he used Maxwell's medium and Lorentz's motional transform to derive his field equations, i.e. his equations work for the wrong reasons. Einstein's equations only work when they are based on a propagation medium. Without a medium, Einstein's ether-less claims become non causal (untenable).

• Einstein's medium based field equations cannot solve the complete wave equation; they have only two sets of motional scales. To describe the complete motional process of a moving source's emission position, propagation path and moving observer reception position with respect to the propagation medium requires three sets of motional scales.

• NR uses three sets of scales to derive and solve the wave equation (source, medium and observer, time and space). This allows the distinction between source and observer motion to be made and their flight paths to be plotted, for the first time on the same space-time diagram. Interchanging the source and observer for the same flight paths gives different observations, discrediting Einstein's relative motion concept between systems.

Propagation Time Asymmetry (PTA)

To describe the key elements of New Relativity (NR), it's best to begin by considering Propagation Time Asymmetry (PTA). The medium based Lorentz Transformation (LT) is the fundamental motional transform that predicts the complete motional effect. This includes the classical wave propagation time asymmetry surrounding a system moving relative to the medium, and the additional relativistic time rate and system contraction (LC) through high speed motion.

Confusion in relativity occurs through there being two types of reference frames. Einstein believed EM waves were somehow different from classical ones. It was acknowledged that the medium existed for stationary EM systems, but suddenly disappeared when the systems were set in motion. This inconsistency was suggested by Einstein’s ether-less invariant inertial frame, where the mechanics and physics are invariant. However, because Einstein’s ether-less invariant inertial frame does not recognize the medium’s existence, it is therefore incapable of predicting observations. Einstein's measured predictions are actually described by Lorentz’s variant optical frame containing the additional effect of the medium and its waves which make the judgment of observations possible. Although the propagation speed and observations are invariant within the moving frame, the propagation time asymmetry for all waves traveling around a moving system, including EM waves, always become asymmetric revealing the system's motion.

It is important to understand that PTA and LC occur with respect to the medium. Notionally the LT can be characterized by the incremental equation ∆LT=∆PTA+∆LC, where PTA can exist without LC, but LC cannot exist without PTA. The classical PTA is a vital part of all causal wave theories, absent in Einstein’s ether-less relativity. Lorentz’s theory, based on a medium, predicts PTA. It is causal (the cause always occurs before the effect (event)), it provides a solution of the wave equation, it predicts measured events for all kinds of waves including EM and classical systems. PTA is the Doppler effect in the frequency domain and the Sagnac effect in the time domain. Both PTA and LC are a result of motion relative to the medium as Lorentz predicted. To be specific, Einstein's ether-less SR breaks-down primarily because it cannot predict or account for the very real and extensively measured PTA illustrated here.

Figure 1(a) Unsteady source in motion. Water wave patterns illustrating the classical PTA (Propagation Time Asymmetry) for a single source frequency for source speed just over the half the wave speed (M=0.66)

Figure 1(b) Super ‘lightic’ simulation. Water wave patterns illustrating the classical PTA (Propagation Time Asymmetry) for a steady displacement source moving greater than the wave speed (M=1.66).

Figure 1(a) is a water wave pattern for the classical PTA part of the LT for a single frequency and system speed M=v/c=0.66, where v is the system velocity compared to the wave speed c. At low speeds, small M and negligibly small LC, the wave pattern is almost identical to that of EM sources of the same M. Figure 1(b) is a water wave equivalent of the PTA part of the LT for an electron moving for M>1.

In this example, the PTA predicts the main structure for an impulsive wavefront from an electron exceeding its wave speed, as in Cerenkov radiation (1934), where a high speed electron leaves a vacuum and enters a more dense medium. At these speeds the LC part will play a big part in modifying the waveform. However, without a medium Einstein’s ether-less aspect of Special Relativity (SR) cannot support the missing fundamental medium based PTA. Einstein’s omission of the PTA is not supported by the medium based LT. His ether-less claims, such as time travel and no absolute time and space are non causal, neither of which can be measured. His relative motion and ether-less non measurable predictions are based on his invariant inertial frame are unable to anticipate PTA. Measured predictions, are actually based on Lorentz’s moving optical frame, which describes waves and systems moving with respect to the medium. Measured predictions made by SR therefore rely on a medium via the medium based LT, in conflict with and discrediting Einstein’s own ether-less predictions.

NR utilizes Lorentz’s complete description, ∆LT=∆PTA+∆LC. Motion relative to the medium can be readily demonstrated either through classical PTA or relativistic medium based LC measurements. At satellite and Earth rotational speeds (M=v/c≈10-5), the relativistic LC effect is M-1≈105 smaller than the classical PTA effect. Therefore, apart from Lorentz’s gradual LC time slowing through satellite motion integrated over longer periods, the dominant instantaneous displacement error in GPS (1992) and satellite communications, Saburi et al (1976), is the medium based classical PTA effect where PTA is caused through satellite and Earth’s rotation relative to the ‘stationary’ medium surrounding and orbiting with the Earth.

PTA, absent in Einstein’s inertial frame, is a classical and causal prediction passing through into Lorentz's medium based motional transform, negating Einstein’s ether-less concept of relativity. Thus all sources including classical and EM behave similarly, to make waves they both require a propagation medium.

Support for the Medium

In the absence of all gravitational matter a vacuum is not empty space. It has well defined and established measurable properties; permeability μ=1.25...×10⁻⁶ H*m-1 and permittivity ę=8.85x 10^-12 farads per meter (F·m⁻¹). These are the characteristics of the electromagnetic medium (ether). The medium determines the wave characteristics, including the wave propagation speed. EM waves are no exception owing to the fact that their electrical medium properties are finite giving a finite speed of light. If there was no medium, the propagation speed in space would be infinite, which is not the case.

Motion relative to the medium is readily verified, either by inspection of Einstein’s field equations that use Lorentz's medium based transform, or derived directly from the medium based classical wave equation using Lorentz’s time rate and structural contraction through motion. In fact, the foundational results of the Michelson–Morley, the Sagnac and the Michelson-Gale experiments are described using classical physics alone. Relativistic effects (time rate and systems contraction) are caused by systems moving relative to the medium and gravitational effects are caused by gravity compressing the medium and enclosed systems (time rate and structure). Unless integrated over a long period of time, these velocity and gravitational relativistic effects accessible on Earth are barely detectable. Propagation Time Asymmetry (PTA) is the dominant effect in most historic experiments designed to confirm ether-less relativity.

The following key experiments are widely believed to show that the medium does not exist. However, NR provides a perfect working medium model (Figure 2) for each of the more commonly referenced scenarios and explains how a medium is required for each result:

• The Michelson and Morley experiment (MMX)(1886) cannot detect motion in the medium because the whole measuring system and the medium moves with the Earth's surface, there is no relative motion between the system and medium, creating symmetry in the propagation time and giving a locally null motional effect. Therefore, light propagation on the Earth’s surface would be expected to be unaffected by its motion through the Universe (medium moved with the Earth).

Figure 2. Gravitational Entrainment Model, GEM. Atmospheric medium around an orbiting planet. Model supports Michelson and Morley (1887), Sagnac (1913), Michelson and Gale (1925), Penzias and Wilson (1965), Hafele and Keating’s (1972), Saburi et al (1976), Reasenburg et al (1979), COBE (1992), GPS (1992). w= about 10km and W= about 50 earth radii

• Bradley's Aberration of light (1725). Light is not affected by the vacuum medium rotating with the Earth. This is because a vacuum medium has a unity refractive index, it cannot convect, deflect, diffract or change the direction of the light paths. In stellar aberration, light is NOT affected by the medium surrounding and orbiting with the Earth. Star light propagates in the medium generally at rest in space, passing through the orbiting medium and forming an aberration angle in a the moving telescope on Earth. This angle is formed in the medium, not a resolved angle with the speed of light that would have resulted if there had been no medium. Also, filling the telescope in the stationary medium on Earth with an obvious medium (water) does not affect the stellar angle, confirming a medium is already present. The medium forms a smooth transition (ray bending), between the moving and stationary situations.
• Fizeau (1851) demonstrated that the magnitude of the dragging effect of light traveling through a moving medium was far lower than expected. Moving more dense medium than a vacuum can drag the light along by a small (measured) amount. This is not a case of the simple sum of their velocities, but exactly according to Lorentz's relativistic addition of velocities. Fresnel predicted the formula and Fizeau confirmed it in measurement. This is a relativistic effect confirming Lorentz's transform and the existence of the propagation medium. It is the effect of one medium moving against another, without the concept of a medium, this phenomenon could not exist.
• Oliver Lodge's (1897) rotating disk did not drag the ether. The relative mass of a rotating disk is miniscule compared with the Earth and would not be expected to affect the stationary medium on Earth.
• Sagnac's rotating mirrors (1913) change of orientation with respect to the medium showed no effect. The null change in altering the mirror system plane of rotation within the stationary medium on Earth, shows that the medium is stationary and homogeneous. The fringe shifts are simply a detection of the Propagation Time Asymmetry (PTA) as the mirror system rotates through the stationary medium.
• The Michelson–Gale experiment (1926) shows that the rotation of the Earth's surface compared to the surrounding stationary medium is detected because the medium, clinging to the Earth's surface, travels at progressively faster speeds away from the poles to the equator. By measuring the difference in light speed (propagation time) in the same length segments and at different latitudes, a small propagation time difference can be detected, revealing the rotational speed of the Earth.
• Gustaf Hammar's (1935) lead did not drag the ether. The relative mass of lead is miniscule compared with the Earth and would not be expected to affect (drag) the stationary medium on Earth.
• Saburi et al. (1976). Communications across the pacific via Satellite and Earth rotating relative to stationary medium surrounding the Earth causes Propagation Time Asymmetry (PTA). NR mathematically confirmes Saburi's measured classical PTA displacement of 300ns (100m) in and against the earth and satellite's rotation with respect to the surrounding stationary medium.
• Reasenberg (1979). Medium moving with Solar System in Mars-Earth communication causes no Propagation Time Asymmetry (PTA). NR confirms Reasenberg's findings, that the medium is moving with the Solar System at high speed (M=10-3) through the Universe in Mars-Earth communication, confirming no relative motion, i.e. negligible PTA. Here if the propagation medium was stationary and not moving with the Solar System, as influenced by the Sun's field of dominance, then there would have been considerable PTA, transmitting in each direction, across the Solar System, relative to a stationary medium.
• GPS (1992). Satellite and Earth station rotating relative to stationary medium surrounding the Earth creates Propagation Time Asymmetry (PTA). GPS involves satellite and earth stations rotating relative to the stationary medium surrounding the earth. Classical one way Propagation Time Asymmetry (PTA) predicts a measured surface positional displacement at the equator of 30m. If the medium had rotated with the Earth up to and including the satellite, there would have been no displacement. For satellites, there is need for minor adjustments which results from the long term drift associated with relativistic and gravitational effects passing through non homogenous media such as the ionosphere.

All of these results confirm that the medium is generally at rest in space, is attracted to, and through its non-ridged structure moves with gravitational bodies (planets) as described by the Gravitational Entrainment Model (Figure 2).

There is ample evidence to support the propagation medium, but no evidence to support its non-existence. Disposing of the medium requires complex thought experiments backed-up with counter-intuitive mathematical proofs. NR provides an elegant and straightforward solution overcoming all previous arguments against the existence of the ether. To be rational all wave theories require a medium. Without a medium, they cannot be a solution of the wave equation or predict causal events. The medium is not a mathematical artifact that can be removed, as Einstein believed. The medium is needed to support the field that supports the waves that illuminate an observed event.

Without a propagation medium:

• There is no known way of transmitting EM waves.
• The wave equation cannot be solved.
• No ability to predict causal events.
• Time and space have no continuity or direction.
• Optical paths are indeterminate.
• Cannot distinguish between which system is moving, the source or the observer.
• Cannot determine which system is aging least.
• There is no way to create inertia.
• Medium based Maxwell’s Equations (ME)(1865)and the Lorentz Transform (LT)(1899) cannot be supported.
• Results in simultaneity (equal propagation times upstream and down) and reciprocity (interchanging the observer and source makes no difference, optically), are non causal (cannot be measured).

Within the context of an ether-less universe there are no simple explanations for these concepts. Yet everything fits into place with a medium. Unsteady electrical fields create EM waves, steady difference electric fields create gravity, and net residual gravity fields throughout the Universe create an inertial field predicted by Higgs (1966). Field disturbances can be represented by waves or non massive particles: light waves as photons, gravity waves as gravitons and inertial field disturbances by bosons, they all appear to be electrical and require a medium to propagate. This includes Einstein’s Special Relativity (SR) (1905) involving light, and General Relativity (GR) (1915) concerning gravity.

Those who believe that no medium exists or indeed is required interpret Minkowski’s (1908) rectangular axes space-time four vector analysis as requiring no medium. However, this is not possible, the vertical and horizontal axes of space-time still require Lorentz’s rectangular axes transform, representing time and space respectively. Normalized against the speed of light, the velocity becomes a 45 degree gradient. This is just a mathematical convenience of representing time and space, there is no mechanism to remove the medium.

On Earth, most motional effects, without involving particle accelerators, are predicted solely by the medium based classical wave theory. Relativistic effects are very small compared to the dominant classical instantaneous motional effect. At Earth speeds and field strengths, relativistic motional and gravitational contributions only become noticeable (measurable) when integrated over long periods of time, as indicated by GPS displacement drift (motional relativistic adjustments) or by the results of the Gravity Probe B (2011) experiment (gravitational compression of the medium).

Medium velocity measurements can be easily made through time change, either time rate using atomic clocks, or one way laser measurement of Propagation Time Asymmetry (PTA). Atomic clocks measure time change through medium compression by gravity and system contraction through motion relative to the medium. Whereas, optical systems measure propagation time change only through motion relative to the medium. For a one way propagation system (OWPT), the propagation time change becomes ∆t=2Mb/c. For practical speeds on Earth, for instance experiments made at the speed of sound, M≈10-6, propagation distance b=3m, c=3x108, gives ∆t=2x10-14. For an interferometer of light wavelength λ of 600 nm (frequency 5x1014 Hz), the number of fringe movements is N=∆t c/λ=2x10-14 x3x108x6-1 x107= 10, which is easily measurable. Incredibly this simple measurement has not been made.

Reference Frames

Ether-less relativity cannot distinguish between various types of frame motion. One is where systems move with respect to the medium, causing a measured propagation time difference between source and observer motion. The other is where there is no motion between the medium and the frame, as in distinguishing between propagation in the medium at rest in space, moving with the Earth (Earth centered) and moving with the Sun and Solar System (heliocentric). These frames are implemented without authority (cause), they can only be explained if the medium exists, is generally at rest, moves with the Earth and finally with the Solar System. The medium motion and motion relative to the medium cannot be supported by Einstein's ether-less concept of relativity.

Einstein’s ether-less claims are non-causal (false):

• Only relative motion between systems can be detected
• Distinction cannot be made between reference frames moving at various constant speeds
• The medium is redundant

Einstein’s inertial frame, responsible for these claims is inappropriate to predict measured SR observations. However, they are correctly predicted by Lorentz's medium based optical frame. Einstein's inertial frame has no medium and therefore cannot predict observations.

Einstein’s ether-less SR predicts no absolute time and space, and the possibility of time travel, both of which are non-causal (impossible). According to new relativity, it is possible (causal) to travel visually to the past (viewing light from a distant star), but not to interfere or change it, as it has already happened. It is not possible to visually travel to the future as it has not yet occurred. Neither is it possible to materially (physically) travel into the future or past. But it is possible to slow one’s time down through material transport, by physically moving at high speed or visiting a gravitational body. However, this is not reversible time travel, it is just relatively changing the rate of aging between systems. Using a propagation medium, and presuming that the speed of light cannot be exceeded, M=v/c<1, where M is the system speed ‘v’ compared to the light speed ‘c’ in the medium. It appears that the speed can be exceeded across frames, M*>1, where M*= M/α. The speed and distance capability is much greater across the hybrid frame by α-1, where α is the Lorentzian contraction factor. Distance is measured in the stationary propagation medium and the slower time in the moving system frame. As M→1, a→0 and M*→∞, allowing the hybrid speed of light to exceed the speed of light in the medium, resulting in the ability of huge distances to be achieved in space travel within human life span.

Finally, ether-less predictions were supported by Born (1924) who adopted Minkowsky’s oblique transform axes representation, rather than the rectangular axes used in the Lorentz transform. Again, these simulations are based on no medium, they cannot be a solution of the wave equation, they are non causal and they cannot be measured. A causal EM motional analysis (EMMA) by Wright (2011), based on the medium, has been developed that extends the medium based Lorentzian transform to include both source and observer motion. It distinguishes between measured motional differences using individual pairs of time and space scales representing source, observer and medium, rather than the two unspecified pairs in the incomplete SR. This extension predicts the measured observations that Einstein’s medium based SR predicts. However, it predicts additional measured properties that SR cannot predict, such as the different properties that sources and observers have when in motion.

Significant Predictions

• Medium required. A propagation medium (ether) is essential to transmit fields, including electric, gravitational and an inertial field. The medium determines the wave propagation speed for their disturbances i.e. photons, gravitons and bosons respectively. The measured medium properties are finite giving a finite propagation speed, no medium would give infinite speed. Without a medium there is no wave equation solution resulting in non causal predictions.
• Common link. The medium is the common link between system motion, accelerating frames and gravity. The medium fills the space part of space-time, referred to in gravitational theories, and space-time distortion around bodies is the compression of the medium’s space and time rate, by gravity.
• Vacuum medium. Extensive data shows that the mass-less medium (vacuum), having no atomic structure, behaves as a fluid, which is attracted to and moves with large gravitational bodies. If the body rotates and there is a gravitational atmosphere, the medium close to the body’s surface will rotate.
• Motional effects. All observations and measurements, including classical and relativistic, (time slowing, systems contraction, propagation time asymmetry (PTA) and invariant speed of light) are caused through motion with respect to the medium, as Lorentz predicted, not through relative motion between systems, as Einstein believed.
• Causal wave theories. All rational wave theories are shown to be medium based, including the EM wave equation, Maxwell’s equations, Lorentz transform and Relativistic addition of velocities. The speed of light is invariant only because its time rate and systems shrink through motion relative to the medium, by exactly the same ratio, maintaining its propagation speed in the moving frame.
• Space-time. Minkowski’s rectangular axes four vector space-time analysis is medium based. The vertical and horizontal axes of the space-time diagram use Lorentz’s rectangular axes medium based transform, representing time and space. There is no mechanism to remove the medium. Born’s oblique transform axes are a simulation, they are not a solution of the wave equation, they are non causal.
• Two types of frames. There are two types of reference frames: Einstein’s ether-less invariant inertial frame, where the mechanics and physics are invariant, which is not capable of making observations. And a variant optical frame containing the medium and its waves, which facilitates judgment of observations.
• Two types of motion. There are two types of frame motion. One is where systems move with respect to the medium, causing a measured wave propagation time difference between source and observer motion. The other is where there is no motion between the frame and medium, as in distinguishing between the medium at rest in space, moving with the Earth (Earth centered) and moving with the Sun and Solar System (heliocentric). Recognizing the presence of the medium allows these motional distinctions to be made.
• Lorentz fundamental. The Lorentz Transform (LT) is based on the propagation medium. It predicts the general solution of the motional wave equation. Its motional effects are therefore predictable (causal), represented by LT=PTA+LC. It includes the essential classical wave Propagation Time Asymmetry (PTA), and an additional modifying Lorentzian time rate and system contraction (LC) at high speed. At Earth speeds, LC is dominated by Propagation Time Asymmetry (PTA).
• Einstein’s ether-less SR. Einstein assumed there was no medium needed to propagate light (observed events) though space. Without its medium, the EM wave equation cannot be solved, without its solution measured events cannot be predicted. This theory, without a medium, cannot support the basic Propagation Time Asymmetry (PTA). It lacks the fundamental requirement of radiating systems, it is non causal.
• Einstein’s false predictions. Einstein’s ether-less claims are: i) only relative motion between systems can be detected, ii) distinction cannot be made between reference frames moving at various constant speeds, iii) the medium is redundant, iv) material time travel is possible and v) there is no absolute time and space, they are all non causal (false). Einstein’s inertial frame, responsible for these beliefs, is inappropriate to predict measured SR observations. It is the medium based optical frame that correctly predicts the events.
• Measured predictions. Einstein’s field equations use the medium based LT. Its solution of the EM wave equation is therefore causal, predicting measured observations. The same predictions can be obtained directly from the classical wave equation, modified by the LC. Therefore, Einstein’s measured predictions are medium based.
• Incomplete theory. Einstein’s medium based theory is not complete, it does not distinguish between measured source and observer motional differences. A general EM motional analysis (EMMA) determines source and observer motional effects relative to the medium, using three sets of time and space scales, rather than the two used in SR
• NR does not provide for the possibility to materially time travel and visit the future. Causally it is possible to visually visit the past, but not to interact with it.
• The speed of light can be exceeded across hybrid reference frames, allowing huge distances in space travel to be achieved, without exceeding the speed of light in the medium.
• The effect of Lorentz’s time and space contraction through motion, relative to the propagation medium provides that it’s not the medium that changes through motion. It’s the electronic structure of matter in the moving frame that changes, in space and time i.e. any kind of system made of atoms or molecules, including life itself.

Mathematical Form

These equations support all known experimental results, including the same measured aspects as SR. The equations extend Lorentz and Poincaré's work to resolve other inconsistent electromagnetic phenomenon still debated by many scientists until this day. To completely define the radiation process, distinction has to be made between source and observer time and space, relative to the medium. Three time and space scale pairs are therefore essential and specified (source, observer and medium). Whereas only two unspecified scale pairs are used in Einstein’s incomplete SR, where there is no distinction made between source and observer motion. A new ElectroMagnetic Motional Analysis, the author refers to as EMMA is required to provide a complete solution. The segment of integrated or accumulative observed event time for arbitrary source and observer flight paths through the Universe is given by the final solution to the EM wave equation for source and observer motion:

$t_{0}={\frac {R_{0}}{c+\tau _{0}}},\qquad R_{0}=\alpha _{0}R_{p}$

Where $t_{0}$ is the observer time, $\tau _{0}$ is the observed event time in terms of the source event time. $R_{p}$ and $R_{0}$ are the initial propagation distances in the stationary and moving frames. $\alpha _{0}$ is an individual motional operator described in detail in the referenced paper Bold text(add ref).

The complete time transform is:

$t_{0}=\tau _{0}+{\frac {R_{0}}{c}},\qquad \tau _{0}=\int \left[\varepsilon _{s}\alpha _{s}^{-1}\varepsilon _{0}^{-1}\alpha _{0}\right]_{tp}d\tau _{s},\qquad R_{0}=\alpha _{0}R_{p}$

This is the Electromagnetic Wave Equation (EMMA) for source and observer motion.

This provides a mathematical solution for the net plural/poly chromatic observed effect for both red and blue shifting simultaneously for sources and observers in motion relative to the medium. The observed event time history depends on the initial propagation distance $R_{p}$, source emission event time, $\tau _{s}$ and on how the individual motional operators $\varepsilon _{0}^{-1}$, $\alpha _{0}$, es$\varepsilon _{s}$, and $\alpha _{s}^{-1}$ change with time during the source and observer journeys through the propagation medium (space).

Details concerning the derivation of these equations along with examples, including NR's treatment of Einstein's famous twin paradox, are provided in the referenced papers

Ten Fundamental Concepts that Differentiate NR from SR

1. All previous medium entrainment models (Stokeset al) are flawed and presented as evidence for the lack of a medium. However, the medium entrainment definition established by NR remains unchallenged and perfectly predicts Bradley’s forward aberration angle and the results of the Michelson Morley (MMX) and Michelson Gale Pearson experiments. SR requires non intuitive mathematical constructions to account for various observations. NR is straightforward.
2. Ether-less aspects of SR are fundamentally flawed, unable to distinguish between source and observer motional properties, SR cannot be extended to predict source and observer physics. Ether-less SR inadequately describes a Universe in which time has no direction, there is no way to determine which system is moving (source or observer), or which system is aging the least. NR has none of these problems and provides a complete solution.
3. Minkowski’s (1908) rectangular axes space-time four vector analysis is interesting. The vertical and horizontal axes of space-time requires Lorentz’s rectangular axes transform, representing time and space, respectively. Normalized against the speed of light, the velocity becomes a 45 degree gradient. This is just a mathematical convenience of representing space and time, and contrary to popular belief, it does not remove the medium. NR has no inconsistencies and mathematical ambiguities.
4. The use of oblique transform axes in SR is a simulation. They simulate simultaneity and reciprocity, neither of which can be measured. The use of oblique axes cannot provide a solution of the electromagnetic wave equation. They are an attempt to remove the effect of the propagation medium by using medium based concepts (circular argument). NR uses Lorentz's rectangular axes predicting causal events.
5. SR predicts that the speed of light is invariant. However, it is not generally understood that the speed of light is invariant only because time rate and systems shrink through motion relative to the medium, by exactly the same ratio, maintaining its propagation speed in the moving frame. This does not make SR special in any way, NR also predicts this.
6. NR predicts that gravity compresses the propagation medium, according to Schwarzschild. For example, gravitational lensing is simply the distortion of the light path as it passes through the compressed transmission medium surrounding large gravitational objects. NR predicts that systems (both sources and observers) moving through the medium contract, according to Lorentz.
7. It follows that observer acceleration relatively expands the surrounding medium and its contents. Therefore there is an ability to neutralize gravity, giving an optical explanation of the Equivalence Principle. Both accelerations are equivalent to a velocity (acceleration over a given time).
8. SR's ether-less aspects cannot predict measured propagation time asymmetry (PTA), where movement through a medium always produces PTA in front of and behind a moving system. Propagation relative to the stationary medium on Earth (MMX) provides null results (no Propagation Time Asymmetry (PTA)). Common examples of detectable PTA include the Sagnac effect (fringe shifts) and lateral GPS positional displacements (30m at UK latitudes). Relativistic and gravitational effects are insignificant at speeds on Earth compared to classical PTA, unless integrated over long periods. Most observations and measurements on Earth can therefore be predicted almost entirely based on classical physics alone.
9. We are yet to find evidence for non-causal (cannot be measured) predictions of SR, such as time travel. NR does not predict non-causal results.
10. SR predicts that a vacuum is empty space, yet it clearly has well defined and measured properties: electrical permeability inertia permittivity stiffness. These measured properties of empty space are finite giving a finite propagation speed. Having no medium, predicts infinite speed of light which is not measured. NR does not predict this.

Conclusion

New relativity clarifies our understanding of the Universe:

• Extensive data supports the propagation medium (ether).
• All motional effects and measured predictions are medium based.
• Einstein’s measured (causal) SR predictions are medium based.
• Einstein’s ether-less (non-causal) SR predictions are fallacious.
• SR cannot distinguish between source and observer motion.
• A new medium based general theory ‘EMMA’ is developed.

Einstein’s medium based SR, which predicts many of today’s measured observations, is founded on Lorentz’s medium based motional theory. Einstein’s ether-less aspects of SR (simultaneity, optical reciprocity, no absolute time and space, and time travel) are a mathematical simulation equivalent to an oblique time and space axes transform. This model, which attempts to remove the effect of the propagation medium by using medium concepts (circular argument), does not represent reality. It is not a solution of the wave equation, it is non-causal and not supported by the medium based rectangular axes Lorentz transform. To restore reality and propagation with respect to the medium, the oblique transform axes are returned back to their original rectangular Lorentzian positions. This breaks the propagation time symmetry, removes the unnatural simulated concepts of simultaneity and reciprocity, and restores the variant Propagation Time Asymmetry (PTA) measured in the moving frame. Thus, there are two aspects of SR; an ether-less non-causal simulated aspect that is not reality, and a medium based aspect that is.

There is no basis for the ether-less SR, apart from attempting to satisfy the Michelson and Morley experiment null result (MMX) (1887), which was judged to support an ether-less Universe. It is now accounted for quite naturally through the propagation medium being at rest on the Earth’s surface. The ether-less non causal aspect of SR cannot be measured, those who claim they have measured it have usually measured motional aspects of the medium based LT. Although Einstein denied the medium’s existence and creatively described elaborate details of an ether-less SR, these details have never been measured. Einstein actually used a propagation medium in his motional electrodynamics, rendering his own ether-less SR model as untenable. Einstein’s space in his space-time, used to measure distance in his SR and space compression in his General Relativity (GR), are in fact the same space, but filled with the propagation medium, used by Lorentz. Also it is the same medium used in accelerating frames, linking these concepts together. In many ways, New Relativity (NR) does nothing remarkable, it simply restores the rationality of EM theory by re-establishing the medium. This in-turn restores the connection between classical and modern physics, removing the inconsistency in SR.

NR predicts the same measured aspects of SR, and additional measured properties only possible by distinguishing between source and observer motion with respect to the medium, and medium movement in Earth centered and Heliocentric frames, and further identifies ether-less properties of SR that cannot be measured.

New Relativity (NR) is in agreement with:

• Transverse Doppler.
• Changes in time, space, mass, momentum and ${\color {CadetBlue}E=mc^{2}}$, Einstein’s famous energy equation.
• Schrödinger’s wave equation(1926)
• Relativistic Quantum Mechanics (RQM) which is Lorentz invariant.
• Theories of Dirac (1928).
• Quantum Electrodynamics(QED).
• The Standard Model (SM) in particle physics.
• Einstein’s GR which results through expressing the LT in terms of Minkowski (1908) space-time four-vector analysis and gravitational theory.
• Schwarzschild metric (1915) metric and event horizon.
• Robertson-Walker metric (1936) in cosmology (assuming the medium to be homogeneous and isotropic).
• Friedmann Equations (1925).
• The Hubble constant (1929).

All of these form the basis of astrophysics and cosmology and can be shown to be based on the same medium.

It is believed that new relativity shows beyond doubt that the EM medium exists and that that EM fields and their disturbances cannot propagate through space without a propagation medium. Without the medium none of the measured motional effects, usually thought to prove ether-less SR, could occur. There is no need to remove the propagation medium as Einstein attempted to do, the universe works extremely well with it. Ignorance of the medium continues to hinder progress and delays the advancement of our understanding of the Universe.

External links

• New Relativity (NR) web site