The following frequently asked questions are given to provide a stimulus, a simple starting point, to introduce concepts of New Relativity (NR) and to promote questions and discussions. Click on any of the questions below to find out the answers, please feel free to register to the site to post questions or comments.
Q1 Why do we Need a New Relativity Theory
Q2 Is a Propagation Medium Essential to Propagate EM Waves (light)
Q3 Does the Vacuum Medium (Ether) Really Exist?
Q4 What is the Evidence for the Propagation Medium?
Q5 How is the Medium Distributed in Space/Around Gravitational Bodies?
Q6 Is the Sagnac Effect Really Explained by the Relativistic Effect?
Q7 Is the Fundamental Error in GPS Caused by the Relativistic Effect?
Q8 What are the Basics of New Relativity (NR)?
Q1 WHY DO WE NEED A NEW RELATIVITY THEORY?
There are, of course, going to be differences between a theory based on a propagation medium (ether) versus one without. One obvious difference is that without a propagation medium there would be no light propagation and nothing would be visible. Maxwell established the propagation medium and finalized his medium based field equations in 1865, forming the basis of all electromagnetic wave predictions. Dismissing the medium's existence is to reject Maxwell's EM theory.
Close inspection of Einstein's electrodynamic field equations readily confirms the use of a Maxwell's medium, enabling Einstein to predict causal measurable results, while at the same time denying the medium's existence. These are the same measured results we are familiar with today whenever claims are made that Einstein’s predictions have been verified. However, Einstein's non causal (non predictable) ether-less claims, such as time travel and no absolute time and space are irrational, existing only within the realms of popular science fiction as depicted in H. G. Wells' Time Machine etc..
We need a new relativity theory; to establish that ether-less claims are non causal, to correctly accommodate the medium, and to remove the constraint from just two pairs of time and space scales used in Einstein's relativity. A New Relativity (NR) theory, Appendix D , having three pairs of time and space scales, fully derives and solves the general EM motional wave equation for the first time. Besides predicting the same measured results as Einstein’s Special Relativity (SR) (1905) and General Relativity (GR) (1915), NR also distinguishes between readily measured and observed source and observer motion, which Einstein’s relativity cannot do.
Q2 IS A PROPAGATION MEDIUM ESSENTIAL TO PROPAGATE EM WAVES?
It must be emphasized that it is impossible to propagate waves without a propagation medium, it is a contradiction. The founding father of EM wave theory, James Clerk Maxwell, established the fundamental electromagnetic (EM) wave theory and his field equations known as Maxwell's Equations (ME’s) using a propagation medium. Hendrik Lorentz (1899), Henri Poincare (1900) and others built on Maxwell's ether theory using the same propagation medium.
Relativity theory is to do with observing events, requiring light waves. It is basic physics that all waves and fields require a propagation medium to transmit their disturbances and make their wave equation causal (predictable). There are no exceptions for EM waves, they too require a propagation medium. The medium is accepted as normal for stationary EM systems, but as soon as the systems are set in motion the medium is considered to disappear. This is irrational, the wave equation must have the same form whether system is moving or not, requiring the same medium for causality.
Einstein’s ether-less relativity is claimed to have no medium, it therefore cannot be a solution of the wave equation, it is non causal. For Einstein’s SR to be causal it must be based on a propagation medium according to ME’s. Although Einstein claimed that there was no medium, he actually used one in his electrodynamics analysis. His analysis is based on ME's and Lorentz’s medium based motional transform. Einstein’s measured SR predictions are therefore medium based, there are no known alternative mechanisms.
Q3 DOES THE VACUUM MEDIUM (ETHER) REALLY EXIST?
It certainly does, Maxwell established the basic field equations for Electromagnetic (EM) waves (light) propagating through a vacuum, based on a propagation medium (ether). Unless Maxwell's theory is found to be in error, and superseded by an ether-less theory, the medium should be accepted. In the absence of gravitational matter, including fields and particles, a vacuum is not empty space. In order for science to progress beyond Einstein’s ether less theories, the concept of light propagating through space without a propagation medium needs to be discarded.
It can easily be shown that a vacuum is filled with an electrical medium having measurable properties, (electrical permeability, inductance (inertia) μ=1.25×10−6 N/A2 and electrical permittivity, capacitance (stiffness) ę (or ε) = 8.85×10-12 F/m), which enables waves to ‘bounce’ through the vacuum. With these well defined properties, there is little point in denying the medium’s existence. The medium interacts with moving systems (atoms and molecules) contracting their system’s structure, both time and space.
The medium also determines the wave characteristics, including the wave propagation speed given by c=(μę)-1/2. The electrical medium properties being finite, give a finite speed of light. If there was no medium μę=0, there would be no Propagation Time Asymmetry ( PTA ) or Doppler effect around a moving system and the propagation speed in space would be infinite, which is not the case. Simultaneity (equal propagation times upstream and down, no PTA) and reciprocity (interchanging the source and observer makes no difference optically), are claims of an ether-less relativity, that cannot be measured. Simultaneity and reciprocity are not supported by the medium based Lorentz Transform (LT).
These problems are avoided by simply accepting the medium’s presence. EM waves, which are supposed to propagate without a propagation medium are a physical impossibility. Motion relative to the medium is readily verified, either by inspection of Einstein’s field equations that clearly use a medium in Lorentz's medium based transform. Or absolutely derived directly from first principles, where the medium based classical wave equation is modified by Lorentz’s time and structural contraction through motion. Either way, Einstein’s measured SR observations are predicted using a propagation medium.
Q4 WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE FOR PROPAGATION MEDIUM?
There are three important historical experiments that are usually thought to uphold Einstein’s ether-less claims; the Michelson and Morley Experiment (MMX) (1887), Sagnac’s (1913) rotating mirrors experiment, and the Michelson and Gale (M&G) (1925) fixed optical loop, which are now all shown to support Maxwell's medium theory.
The Michelson and Morley Experiment, originally performed to prove that the Earth moved through the ether by producing Propagation Time Asymmetry (PTA), found no PTA. The effect was interpreted to mean that the ether did not exist. However, the null result is now interpreted to support the existence of an ether that moves with the Earth's surface. The measuring equipment is stationary relative to the stationary medium on Earth causing the null effect.
It was thought also that a medium surrounding and orbiting with the Earth would affect Bradley's (1725) stellar aberration angle (small angular displacement in front of the star to be viewed through telescope forward motion). But this is not possible, a vacuum medium has unity refractive index, it cannot convect light, Fresnel (1818). Instead the medium's presence provides a smooth transition for the star light propagation in the stationary medium in space to the medium moving with the Earth. It converts a resolved apparent angle for no medium into an actual embedded angle in the medium. Adding an obvious medium (water) to the stationary medium in the telescope does not affect the aberration angle, confirming a medium is already present.
Sagnac’s (1913) rotating mirrors experiment, which led to the development of today’s inertial guidance systems, perfectly describes classical PTA on the Earth's surface, relative to the propagation medium. Whereas, relativistic motional effects, predicted in Equation 8.2 at these mirror speeds and short measurement times, are negligible compared to the classical PTA, as considered further in New Relativity (NR), Section 3.5 . The effect is purely classical, Wright’s medium based Equation 3.2 predicts the measurements exactly. This equation, without the propagation medium or if the medium rotated with the mirrors, could not predict the effect, there would be no relative motion, no PTA.
The third historical experiment is described by Michelson and Gale (M&G) (1925), where a fixed optical loop on the Earth's surface showed that the medium clings to the surface, increasing its speed as it moves towards the equator, relative to the surrounding stationary medium. This confirmed that there is an Electro-gravitational Boundary Layer ( EGBL ) between the medium moving with the Earth’s surface and the surrounding stationary medium. The early objection to the (M&G) experiment was that if the medium existed and rotated with the Earth out to infinity, there would be no measured relative motion, no PTA.
However, the medium is not rotating with the Earth out to infinity, the existence of the EGBL removes this possibility, invalidating prior objections. These three classical experiments independent of any relativistic involvement, support Maxwell's medium. The boundary layer above the Earth’s 's surface, exists up to an altitude of approximately 10km. Modern data; Hafele and Keating's (1972) flying atomic clocks, Saburi et al (1976) satellite communications, and GPS navigation (1992), confirm that the medium above the boundary layer is at rest (not rotating with the planet's surface), orbiting with the Earth. If the propagation medium was rotating with the Earth at the satellite altitude then there would have been no effect, no PTA. Further details can be found in Section 4 and Appendix A .
Q5 HOW IS THE MEDIUM DISTRIBUTED IN SPACE AND AROUND GRAVITATIONAL BODIES?
The closest scientists came in the past to discovering the actual distribution of the ether, was Max Planck in a letter to Lorentz in 1899. He proposed that the ether might be condensed by gravitation around the surface of the Earth, referred to as the Stokes-Planck theory. This has since been confirmed by Schwarzschild's medium compression (1916). The ether’s correct distribution, which now appears to fit all known observations and experimental measurements, turns out to be a more complete description of the Stokes-Planck model.
This is referred to in this new theory as the Gravitational Entrainment Model ( GEM ), which describes medium regions moving at different speeds around the Earth’s surface and describes the extent of the Gravitational Field of Dominance (GFOD), where the planet's gravitational field dominates that of its sun and the sun's GFOD. This results in a region of width W around the planet where the medium is at rest with the planets axis and orbits with the planet.
The width w identifies the extent of an Electro-gravitational Boundary Layer (EGBL) between the medium clinging to and rotating with a planet, and the stationary GFOD medium surrounding it. For the Earth, W appears to be about 50 Earth radii, and w less than 10km above the Earth's surface, further details can be found in New Relativity (NR) Appendix A .
Einstein's non causal ether-less uniformly empty space cannot describe the reality of actual space. It cannot predict the complexity of measured propagation through the medium rotating with the Earth's surface, through the stationary medium orbiting with the Earth, around the Sun and through the Solar System. To explain these effects a propagation medium is required that moves with gravitational bodies.
Einstein’s ether-less theory was adopted over a hundred years ago simply because at that time it raised the least number of objections, although it created many paradoxes and ambiguities. New Relativity (NR) has none of these problems, it is straight-forward and consistently predicts measured and observed effects.
Q6 IS THE SAGNAC EFFECT REALLY EXPLAINED BY THE RELATIVISTIC EFFECT?
The short answer is no. The Sagnac Effect, illustrated in New Relativity (NR) Figure 4.2 actually has nothing to do with relativistic motion. The velocities available on Earth are so small that changes in time rates and spatial contraction with frame speed are negligible compared with the classical PTA effect, as discussed in New Relativity (NR), Section 3.5 .
The Sagnac Effect is explained exactly through instantaneous classical Galilean motion relative to the propagation medium. It is calculated exactly according to the medium based Equation 3.2 . The motion creates a Propagation Time Asymmetry PTA, illustrated in Figure 3.1 , which only occurs if there is relative motion (source moving relative to medium), measured within the moving system, demonstrating absolute motion with respect to the medium.
Although the Sagnac system is a rotating one, it can be considered also as a linear one as illustrated in Figure 4.2(b) . In comparison, the Michelson Morley Experiment (MMX), is a round trip measurement, which is very insensitive to motion, as the path difference between the two directions is almost zero. Sagnac’s one way path difference is about million times more sensitive than the round trip MMX.
The physics and mathematics describing the Sagnac effect, explained from a relativistic perspective, is improbable and complex. Whereas it is easily comprehended and calculated using a medium for anyone with a little knowledge of physics using New Relativity (NR). Comparison of the MMX and Sagnac sensitivities is given in Section 7 .
Q7 IS THE FUNDAMENTAL ERROR IN GPS CAUSED BY THE RELATIVISTIC EFFECT?
No, it is not. The fundamental displacement error is caused by the classical Propagation Time Asymmetry PTA through the satellite and Earth station moving relative to the stationary propagation medium surrounding the Earth. If there was no propagation medium, or the medium rotated with the Earth there would be no effect, no displacement. The displacement is instantaneous, whereas other errors such as relativistic and gravitational require considerable measurement time to detect there effect.
Assuming for simplicity, a synchronous (stationary) satellite rotating with the Earth's station, there would be no relative motion between the two systems, and if there were no medium as Einstein claimed, there could be no effect, no displacement. Or if there is a medium and the medium rotated with the Earth up to the satellite altitude (no EGBL ) there would still be no relative motion between the satellite and the Earth and therefore no displacement. For the displacement to occur the satellite has to rotate relative to the medium at rest above the Earth's EGBL.
The time for the satellite signal to travel to the Earth station is t=h/c, where h =20,000 km is the satellite height above the Earth and c =300,000 km/s is the propagation speed in the propagation medium, making t=66ms. In this time, the Earth surface moving at the equator v=440 m/s, displaces the Earth station from its original position by ∆d=vt=30m. The displacement varies with the Earth surface velocity from the pole to the equator. This is the basic, easily predicted medium based classical instantaneous error, which is automatically taken into account by the GPS satellite when calculating the position on Earth.
The relativistic and gravitational effects which compound this fundamental error, although small, do accumulate with time. The clock rates have to be adjusted (either slowed on-board the satellite or increased at the ground station) to prevent this error from diverging, exactly predicted by New Relativity (NR) .
The relativistic time change requires an error adjustment due to the satellite moving through the stationary medium surrounding the Earth. It is calculated from Equation 8.2 and described in precise detail in Appendix G . Here the satellite velocity is 14,000 km/hour=14,000 km/3,600=3.8 km/s relative to the surrounding stationary propagation medium. From equation 8.2 the time slowing at the satellite is 6.9 µs per day. The Earth surface time loss at the equator rotating at 440m/s relative to the surrounding stationary medium is 0.91µs/day. The relativistic difference in time loss between the satellite and the Earth is -(6.9-0.9)≈-6µs/day.
The gravitational time change on the Earth's surface, of radius 6,400 km, through medium compression, compared to free space is calculated from Equation 8.5 and in detail in Appendix G . It is found to be -59.7µs/day. The gravitational time change at the satellite where the radial distance from the center of the Earth is now 26.4×106m, becomes -14.5 µs/day. The gravitation difference in time loss between the Earth and the satellite is -(59.7-14.5)≈-45µs/day.
Thus, the gravitational effect is much larger (slower) on the Earth than at the satellite and that the relativistic effect is much less than the gravitational effect by 45-6=39 µs/day. This means that the clock on the satellite needs to be slowed down by 39 µs/day to stop a time drift accumulating between the satellite and the Earth. None of these effects (PTA, relativistic or gravitational) could happen without a propagation medium.
Q8 WHAT ARE THE BASICS OF NEW RELATIVITY (NR)?
Probably the first thing to understand is that Einstein’s Special Relativity (SR) (1905) has two aspects. One aspect is based on the Lorentz-FitzGerald ether theory, which first began to take shape around 1889 with major contributions by Poincare (1900); but usually attributed to Lorentz (1899).
This aspect is commonly referred to as the Lorentz Transform (LT). The LT predicts both the classical measurable Propagation Time Asymmetry ( PTA ) around systems moving in the propagation medium, and the time and space contraction through high speed motion relative to the medium.
The other aspect is the either-less part of Einstein’s theory that predicts non-causal motional events that can never be measured, such as time travel, no absolute time and space, simultaneity (equal propagation times up stream and down, no PTA) and reciprocity (interchanging source and observer makes no difference to the observations). These aspects are irrational (non predictable). The ether-less aspect is compared with Lorentz's medium based theory in more detail in Appendix B and Appendix C respectively.
However, Einstein’s EM medium based theory is incomplete. Because of the disbelief in a propagation medium it has remained undeveloped for over a century. Einstein used only two sets of indistinguishable time and space scales corresponding to observer motion. The LT has been extended to include both source and observer motion with respect to the propagation medium using three sets of time and space scales. This is the real essence of the theory referred to as New Relativity (NR).
The measured classical and relativistic motional properties are predicted through the medium based LT. The prediction is dominated by the motional distortion of the original disturbance. It is characterized by the classical wave Propagation Time Asymmetry (PTA) of the original spherical propagation shown in Figure 3.1 . Asymmetry surrounds the system, moving relative to the medium, it is evident in all measured waves, including EM.
However, in EM theories, there is the additional modifying time and structural Lorentz Contraction (LC), only detectable at extremely high velocities or long integration periods. It is possible to have PTA without LC, but not LC without PTA. Classical medium based PTA is therefore the basic distortion for all motions, absent in Einstein’s ether-less invariant inertial frame.
After a century of adjusting to an assumed ether-less universe and the possibility of time travel, NR confirms that it is possible (causal) only to travel visually to the past, but not to interfere or change the past, as it has already happened. However, it is not possible (non causal) to travel to the future, it has not yet occurred. But it is possible to slow one’s time down by physically moving at a high speed relative to the medium, or visiting compressed medium surrounding large gravitational bodies. This is not reversible time travel; it’s changing only the rate of aging between systems.
Accepting the reality of the medium now re-instates absolute time and space. One can now compare moving frames with the stationary medium out in space. Here it is presumed that the speed of light cannot be exceeded in the medium. However, the speed of light can be exceeded across frames, allowing a hybrid system speed to exceed the speed of light in the medium in a spectacular way. Space craft shrink, both time and structure, but not the distances they travel. The hybrid speed results in almost unlimited distances to be achieved in space travel in a human life time, as explained further in Section 6.
Systems (gravitational mass, atoms and molecules) moving through the medium contract both their time and space, and gravity compresses the medium and all within, both time and space. The complete derivation and solution of the wave equation for both source and observer motion is considered in Appendix D . The source and observer flight paths can now be plotted on the same space time diagram, as discussed in Appendix E .
Interchanging these system's flight paths gives different observations for the same flight path, in direct conflict with Einstein's relativity. The nature of gravity is considered in Appendix F . The equation for predicting PTA is Equation 3.2 . For relativistic time and space contraction for source motion is given by Equation 8.2 and for observer motion Equation 8.3 . Gravitational time and space compression is given by Equation 8.5 all referred to the New Relativity (NR).