Experiment of the Alice Law

Han Erim

May 7, 2012

EXPERIMENT OF THE ALICE LAW

After I started working on physics, what surprised me the most was seeing how ownerless physics is. Some important experiments that could guide us about the general theory of physics have never been brought up or conducted. As a result, the general theory of physics—painfully—remains entirely based on assumptions and methods. Can the general theory of physics be built on assumptions? You are bound to make a mistake somewhere. The mistake made in electromagnetic theory is the best example of this.

In this section, I will share my own views on how the (c+v)(c-v) mathematics of electromagnetic theory can be experimentally verified. This experiment could demonstrate that electromagnetic interaction occurs through fields and that light travels within fields. The logical principle of the experiment is based on detecting whether light carries the momentum of its emitting source.

I hope the proposed experiment is conducted under the best possible conditions and as soon as possible. Of course, other experiments can also be planned and conducted to verify the (c+v)(c-v) mathematics.

As shown in the figure, there are two frames, A and B, moving in opposite directions along their own X axes. In frame B, there is a lamp acting as a light source. We assume the lamp produces light in the form of a small, non-dispersing packet.

Our question is: At what point should frame B emit the light so that it can reach frame A?

Let me say this openly in front of everyone: No physicist today knows the answer to this question. Their inability to answer such a question points to a major lack of knowledge in physics. Because this kind of information is not something that requires special expertise. All similar questions, which fall within the scope of fundamental physics knowledge, should have been definitively answered in physics.

If someone says “I know the answer,” just laugh and move on, because they’re obviously bluffing. If they really knew, they would also know what I’ve written here. No matter who it is, their answer to this question is nothing more than a personal guess. And this is precisely what is dangerous in physics—thinking you know. Because once assumptions are treated as facts, something is bound to break.

The answer to the question relates to whether light carries the momentum of the source from which it is emitted. Therefore, this question can be answered based on two different assumptions. We will analyze both responses here. As a result of these analyses, we will see whether it is possible to design an experiment that can reveal the difference between the two views.

flash1

1st Alternative: Light carries the momentum of the source from which it is emitted. Let’s drop a stone from the mast of a ship and repeat this a few times. Whether the ship is stationary or moving, the stone will always fall in the same spot. Because the stone moves together with the ship and has momentum in the direction the ship is moving. We can apply this example to our case. For simplicity, let’s consider frame A as stationary. If light carries the momentum of its source, then it will follow the blue Y-axis that belongs to frame B. Just like the stone example above, the light will retain the velocity in the X direction of frame B from which it was emitted. Therefore, frame B must emit the light before it aligns with the X position of frame A. As a result, if this alternative is correct, the light will follow the blue Y-axis of frame B. As seen in the figure, at the moment the light arrives, the Y-axes overlap.

Alternative: Light does not carry the momentum of its emitting source. For simplicity again, let’s consider frame A as stationary. If light does not carry the momentum of its emitting source, then frame B must emit the light at the moment it reaches the same X position as frame A. In that case, as seen in the figure, the Y-axes align at the moment the light is emitted.  In this alternative, since the light does not carry the momentum of frame B, it will move independently of frame B. Therefore, it will follow the red Y-axis belonging to frame A.

flash2

flash3

Figure 1-A = Figure 2-A 1st Alternative: Light carries the momentum of the source from which it is emitted. Now let’s change our observation frame. Let’s assume frame B is stationary and frame A is moving. Since changing the observation frame does not alter the event itself, we should obtain the same results as in the previous cases we examined. Let’s recall: we have seen throughout almost all sections that it does not matter which frame is in motion—A or B. What matters is that the two frames are in relative motion to each other, and we should obtain identical results regardless of which frame’s perspective we analyze the event from. We directly transfer the result from Figure 1-A here without change. If the light carries the momentum of its source, it will follow the blue Y-axis of frame B. Frame B must emit the light before it aligns with frame A in the X direction. The light will follow the blue Y-axis. At the moment the light arrives, as seen, the Y-axes coincide. Let’s pay attention to the situation shown in Figure 2-A. For this alternative, the movement of frame A has no effect on the incoming light. We will use this result later on.

Figure 1-B = Figure 2-B 2nd Alternative: Light does not carry the momentum of its emitting source. Finally, let’s assume frame B is stationary and frame A is moving, and describe the situation that arises under this alternative as well. Just like in Figure 1-B, we should get the same result here. We will transfer what we wrote there directly to this point.  Frame B must emit the light at the moment it aligns with frame A in the X position. At the moment the light is emitted, the Y-axes are perfectly aligned. The light will follow the red Y-axis of frame A. Look at the rather interesting situation that occurs in Figure 2-B. Due to the movement of frame A, the light changes direction. In this alternative, we observe a result that can be expressed as: “the light carries the momentum of the arrival target.” We can say this because, for the light to reach frame A, its speed in the X direction must equal the speed of frame A in the X direction. So let’s rewrite this alternative with its updated interpretation: 2nd Alternative: Light carries the momentum of the arrival target. We now have a clear difference between the two alternatives. Based on the results from Figures 2-A and 2-B, we can now design an experiment.

flash4

1st Alternative: Light carries the momentum of the source from which it is emitted.
2nd Alternative: Light carries the momentum of the arrival target.

We examined both views here. Now let’s try to decide which one could be correct. Of course, no matter what we think or decide here, this detail absolutely needs to be determined by an experiment. Nevertheless, we will have our discussion here.

The first alternative, where light carries the momentum of its source, seems logical, but it contradicts a very important hypothesis in physics. Let’s take a look at what Albert Einstein’s Universal Velocity of Light postulate states.

Universal Velocity of Light: The light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body.

If you say the first alternative is correct, then I say to you: “Fix the postulate and then come back to me.” Look, the postulate clearly says that the speed of light is independent of the emitting source. Of course, changing this postulate is nearly impossible, because even the smallest change would mean losing the Theory of Relativity. Besides, the idea that the speed of light is independent of its source is not exactly an unknown concept.

The second alternative does not contradict the Universal Light Speed postulate. However, it does contradict the current electromagnetic theory. Because the behavior of light in this way—that it carries the momentum of the arrival target (remember figure 2-B)—is not defined anywhere in electromagnetic theory. Supporting this alternative would mean abandoning electromagnetic theory (or at least correcting the error it contains). This behavior of light is defined in the ALICE LAW and in its (c+v)(c-v) mathematics, but it has not yet been verified experimentally.

Well, since there’s no consistent answer through reasoning alone, what shall we do? No matter which alternative we choose, certain aspects of physics get strained or compromised. If you have a different idea for answering the question, please step forward and share it. Or let’s conduct an experiment and observe the result together. Let the experiment determine the outcome. If such an experiment is never conducted, we will never know the answer to the question.

ANALYSIS: I have prepared an animation so that you can analyze the subject from all angles. In the animation, you can move either frame A or frame B. You can observe the results that arise from both alternatives.

EXPERIMENT PROPOSED BY THE ALICE LAW FOR RELATIVITY THEORY AND ELECTROMAGNETIC THEORY

The (c+v)(c-v) mathematics is the mathematical foundation that electromagnetic theory should be based on. It is also the mathematics of the Theory of Relativity. I have previously mentioned these.

An experiment to verify the (c+v)(c-v) mathematics can only be conducted by measuring the speed of light that is sent from a stationary frame to a moving frame. In such an experiment, the speed of light must be measured from the stationary frame that emits the light. Measurements from the arrival frame will not reveal the (c+v)(c-v) mathematics; instead, the speed of light will be measured as "c". I have explained the reason for this many times throughout this study, so I won’t repeat it here.

Designing experiments related to (c+v)(c-v) mathematics is actually easy. However, implementing these experiments is extremely difficult. Because light is truly very fast. If light weren’t this fast, we wouldn’t be having this discussion today.

In the previous section, we examined whether light carries the momentum of its emitting source and obtained two possibilities. These possibilities were as follows:

1st Alternative: Light carries the momentum of the source from which it is emitted.
2nd Alternative: Light carries the momentum of the arrival target.

If we can experimentally determine which of these alternatives is correct, we will also obtain an important result about the (c+v)(c-v) mathematics. For this purpose, I have designed an experiment that I believe can be conducted. I will explain this experiment to you here.

HOW THE EXPERIMENT IS CONDUCTED

This experiment is based on the situations that appear in Figures 2-A and 2-B. There is a square-shaped fixed platform, and in its center, a second platform that can rotate. A thin beam of light from the light source is projected across the entire platform. Here, the stationary frame is the light source (FRAME B), and the moving frame is the rotating platform (FRAME A). We rotate the platform at the highest speed possible and take a photograph of the light line falling on it.

I assume the rotation speed of the platform used in this experiment must exceed all existing world records many times over. The light source might also need to be placed kilometers away. In short, this is not an easy experiment at all. I don’t know whether it is practically possible— that’s a question for engineers to answer. I’m only offering a proposal here. If you ask what kind of result this experiment would yield, I can answer that based on my own perspective.

1) If light carries the momentum of its emitting source, the light line falling across the platform will not show any distortion. (This matches the situation observed in Figure 2-A). Therefore, in the photograph, the light line will appear as a straight line.

2) If light carries the momentum of the arrival target, then the light will change direction while approaching the rotating platform due to the platform’s rotation. (This matches the situation in Figure 2-B). Depending on the distance of the light source and the rotation speed of the platform, the light line will deviate from its ideal position. In the photograph, the light line on the rotating base will appear tilted. 

WHY DOES LIGHT CARRY THE MOMENTUM OF THE ARRIVAL TARGET?

The answer to this question is clear according to the Alice Law. 

First of all, a beam of light is a collection of electromagnetic waves, containing countless electromagnetic wave components. 

Electromagnetic waves do not travel in a vacuum but within fields. Electromagnetic interaction occurs via FIELDS. Every object has a field of its own. When an object moves, it carries its associated field with it. If the object is in motion, the electromagnetic waves within its field also move along with the field. The rotation of the rotating platform carries the electromagnetic waves traveling in its field in the direction of rotation. 

The rotating platform is a collection of objects. Even the smallest part that forms it can be considered a separate object. Assuming that each point on the surface of the rotating platform has its own field is sufficient for logical reasoning. The movement of an electromagnetic wave toward the target on the rotating platform depends solely on the movement of the point on which it travels, because it moves within the field of that point. What truly carries the momentum is not the electromagnetic wave itself, but the field of that point. 

Sounds crazy, doesn’t it? I think so too. 

RESULTS OF THE EXPERIMENT?

The results of this experiment will be truly profound. Regardless of the outcome, it will have a major impact on the general theory of physics. It is a fact that some mistakes have been made in physics’ main theories. This experiment is capable of showing us what is wrong and what is right. 

Of course, I wish this experiment would yield results with such certainty that it leaves no room for debate and confirms the (c+v)(c−v) mathematics. That would be to everyone’s benefit. In that case, the Electromagnetic Theory and the Theory of Relativity would merge and be largely freed from their respective flaws and incompleteness. Physics would move forward tremendously. 
If the result turns out the opposite, that would be unfortunate. Because it would plunge physics into a dark era where it’s unclear what is right or wrong. That is not something anyone would desire.

As for me, I am not pessimistic about the outcome of the experiment. Because I am placing my trust in Albert Einstein’s Universal Light Speed postulate for this experiment. I have always trusted that postulate.