Gravity is a product of the strongest force in the universe,electro magnetism,
Electromagnetic force is about 10^36 more powerful than gravitational force.
======================================
So, Doc. Are we going nake it back to the future alright then?
So, if EM force is about 10^36 more powerful than gravitational force,
then a few electrons wouldn't allow gravity to gather all masses of universe
into a singular point and later create the modern and famous BB theory.
=============================
Electromagnetic force is about 10^36 more powerful than gravitational force.
======================================
Yes it is but gravity is indevisable from the electromagnetic force.
https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2017/02/21/gravity-in-the-electric-universe-space-news/
Gravity in the electric universe. A very interesting short lecture.
"If you take a highly intelligent person and give them the best possible, elite education,
then you will most likely wind up with an academic who is completely impervious to reality.”
Halton Arp one of of the greatest scientist ever. see redshift
A strange new world of light.
Date:
November 2, 2017
Source:
Harvard John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences
There's nothing new thing under the sun -- except maybe light itself.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/11/171102141857.htm
=============================================================
The usual symbols are E for the electric field, B for the magnetic field, you can see them in the equations engraved on the pedestal that supports the statue of James Clerk Maxwell in Edinburgh. Both are vector quantities, usually indicated in text by bolding them, they are both transverse and at a right angle to each other, and the wave propagates in the direction given by their cross product, ExB, which by definition will be at a right angle to both of them. That's straightforwardly derivable from Maxwell's equations, which also contain the critical clue to SRT, the constancy of the speed of light.... EM , magnetism is the transverse carrier of E the longitudinal carrier
....
I think that's how it goes, if I remember correctly.
Why would the speed of light through something that is not a a vacuum be different?? If one beam of light is not reflected from it's path it should show no change in speed. Light that is reflected should interact with the host as far as direction adding to or taking away from the original speed the light was traveling. Perhaps light acts like air moving over a plane's wing in that it splits only for the time it takes to pass over the wing's surface.Sorry, I want to rewrite my post.
================
1. Light quanta move trough an absolute aether medium: T=0K.
a) this was Maxwell and Lorenz point of view.
b) Minkowski hid this absolute aether medium into mathematical unity
of 4D spacetime (an other name is : negative -2D Pseudo-Euclidian space)
2) the speed of quantum of light in zero vacuum (T=0K) is constant (c=1)
3) all movements (including the constant speed of quantum of light)
are relative motions in the respect to an absolute aether medium T=0K.
4) It is possible if constant speed of quantum of light is minimal and
quantum of light can have speed faster than minimal (c>1).
(tachyon solution).
5) the speed of quantum of light is independent of its source.
It is possible only if the source of its speed is self-quantum action (h or h/2pi).
The result of self-quantum action is described by Lorenz transformations.
========================================
Because different things are happening. Light passing through a substance interacts with it at the quantum level, which in the simplest terms can be understood as it being constantly absorbed and re-emitted, and that slows it down.Why would the speed of light through something that is not a a vacuum be different??
The usual symbols are E for the electric field, B for the magnetic field, you can see them in the equations engraved on the pedestal that supports the statue of James Clerk Maxwell in Edinburgh. Both are vector quantities, usually indicated in text by bolding them, they are both transverse and at a right angle to each other, and the wave propagates in the direction given by their cross product, ExB, which by definition will be at a right angle to both of them. That's straightforwardly derivable from Maxwell's equations, which also contain the critical clue to SRT, the constancy of the speed of light.
Thankyou, I will read a bit this evening and try for better understanding.
I'm confused about the two separate fields you mention because as
I understand E and M they do not exist autonomously.
Am I wrong?
They can exist autonomously if they're constant, but a changing electric field induces a magnetic field, and vice versa, a changing magnetic field induces an electric field. A close analysis will show that the magnetic field is actually a relativistic effect of electric charges in motion. I've got that all somewhere in my notes from my second year class in EM theory--Physics 217 it was called--and I'm pretty sure it's in one of the three volumes, I think the second one, of The Feynman Lectures on Physics.Thankyou, I will read a bit this evening and try for better understanding. I'm confused about the two separate fields you mention because as I understand E and M they do not exist autonomously. Am I wrong?
According to science gravity can attract light. Just on that point alone the speed of light when it first leaves the sun would be as fast as it ever goes and from that moment on the gravitational forces of the sun would be slowing it down. How much slower would it be going when it left the solar system and if it happens to be headed for the center of the galaxy what is it's speed when it is at the core?Because different things are happening. Light passing through a substance interacts with it at the quantum level, which in the simplest terms can be understood as it being constantly absorbed and re-emitted, and that slows it down.