Copyright Carl Janssen 2024 January 18
Title : A theory about waves in a moving medium being influenced by the velocity of the medium and not the velocity of the observer nor reference frame as an alternative to special relativity
I am not claiming that what I am about to say is true nor am I claiming that it is false
Some of the things I am about to say are contrary to mainstream physics
What I present are simply ideas to think about whether or not they are true and possibly ideas to test with future experiments
What I am saying is a oversimplified ideal model that would not match real life conditions and thus an experiment would not match the results of the oversimplified model perfectly because of deviations from ideal assumptions such as mentioning of materials with physical properties that do not exist in real life and so on and so forth
Perhaps this might be called a thought experiment which involves assuming a different set of laws of physics than claimed by mainstream physics
I have mixed and matched various pieces, ideas or calculations from physical theories I have heard over the years some of which contradict with each other. I do not claim to be the original creator of this new theory in the sense that I am combining ideas from other theories of physics. I might or might not be the original creator of this new combination in which some parts of them are accepted and combined and other parts are rejected. I might or might not be the original creator of some of the specific objections of specific ways in which this theory disagrees with special relativity. I could potentially have novel and unique calculations in this but it is possible that perhaps I do not other than in my selection of which parts to reject and which to accept compared with other physical theories and even the selection of which parts to reject and which to accept might not be unique to my choice but others might have also chosen likewise in making physics models
I simply want to get the idea written down which is hard enough before trying to search for if other people did this before me or not
To put more simply I have not seen anyone combine this in this unique way so I am writing it down while I can think of it or before I forget it but I would not be surprised if other people combined these ideas in this way before and perhaps much better than in the matter that I have
Possible credit to unknown people for starting me on this path of thinking but not for my final model or theory that came as a result of starting on this line of thinking
Sometime after 2002 and before 2008 there were two physics students who I saw as far as I know only one time in my life ( although I could have seen them other times without knowing it ) and 1 or both of them told me something similar to that they were doing experiments involving sound traveling through a vacuum and that sound can actually travel through a vacuum because it is not a perfect vacuum. They might have mentioned something about Aether and light which I might have ignored because I did not believe in Aether. They or someone else might have given a presentation on another topic that as far as I know was not related to what they were telling me about sound in a vacuum and possibly also light and or Aether. They did not to the best of my knowledge so me any calculations, data, or equations involving whatever they were telling me about sound and possibly also how light and or Aether and the Lorenz Ether Transformation and the Special Theory of Relativity and the Michelson-Morley experiment might conceptually be related to sound traveling through a vacuum because it is not a perfect vacuum. If I saw any calculations, data or equations presented by them then as far as I know it was on a presentation of something else possibly a very expensive experiment on gravity waves and how it relates to cosmological or astronomical observations of stars but my memory is fuzzy and unclear and that was a very long time ago and I could be scrambling different events together in my mind. Years later, I thought that light never actually travels through a perfect vacuum, thinking about what they said about sound traveling through a vacuum might have influenced me to think that there is a third option other than light traveling through aether or a perfect vacuum and that is that light always travels through a medium because perfect vacuums have not been found, however I am not sure if that thought came to my mind in the past before I ever heard them say about sound traveling through a vacuum or if it would have come to my mind anyway later even if they never said that.
Sometime before 2002 I vaguely remember a physics teacher telling me a story that there was someone who did lots of experiments involving light but insisted on keeping the windows open because he thought interfering with the air or maybe the Aether or the vital force ( I do not remember which ) by closing the windows would interfere with the experiment, however unfortunately by opening the windows it prevented good temperature control for the experiment. This might have potentially influenced me to think about if the movement of air or wind effects the velocity of light and or sound or maybe I thought or would have thought of that question on my own anyway. Although I know who this physics teacher was, I do not know who the person who that teacher said did the experiments with the open windows was. My model shall likely be different because it shall involve closed not open windows to result in a moving medium for the thought experiment although I doubt that such an experiment could be done in real life as described in the thought experiment with the current technology
Assumptions
Let us assume there is no rotation or acceleration but only movement in straight lines at constant speed. This model is not designed to work for rotating objects or for objects that accelerate. This is similar to the criteria for when special relativity may or may not be used to the best of my knowledge even though this is a different theory.
Let us assume that there are two types of time. The first type of time is the order in which events occur. The second type of time is the measurement that a clock reads. Let us assume that the order in which events occurs is the same in all reference frames. Let us assume that the order in which events are observed occurring can be different for different observers because for example if sound is emitted from a source the sound wave can reach the observers ears at different times if they are at different locations, even if the sound wave is emitted at the same time in terms of order of events from all reference frames.
A clock is not the same thing as an observer who is reading the value on a clock and a observer is not the same thing as a frame of reference
Let us assume that if the reading from the same clock is observed by two different people at the same time in terms of order of events ignoring the delay in time for the light to reach their eyes that the clock would be read or ignoring the delay in time for the sound of the clock to reach the ears then the two different people will read the same time value on the clock when the same event occurs in terms of the order of events. If there are two different clocks then the two different clocks can measure two different times for the same event, but each observer would read the same time value when looking at each specific clock. If there is clock 1 and clock 2 and there is observer 1 and observer 2 then both observer 1 and observer 2 would read the same time value for clock 1 as each other and would also read the same time value for clock 2 as each other but they could potentially read different time values from clock 1 and clock 2 all for the same event. This might be fundamentally different than the assumptions in special relativity in which different observers in different reference frames would measure different times for the same event.
Let us assume that if all clocks are working properly and all clocks are set to measure 0 seconds when event A occurs that if event B occurs before event C occurs then any clock compared with itself will list event B occurring at a later or higher or greater time quantity than event A and also that any clock compared with itself will list event C occurring at a later or higher or greater time quantity than event B but that two different clocks can list event B occurring at two different time quantities and also two different clocks can list event C occurring at two different time quantities. Time quantities measured can not decrease when going from earlier events to later events if clocks are working properly. Which event occurs 1st, 2nd and 3rd are the same for all clocks even though different clocks might list different times for the 1st, 2nd and 3rd event. The 1st event will always have a lower time value than the 2nd event and the 2nd event will always have a lower time value than the third event for the same clock.
The shape and size of an object is always the same for all observers in all reference frames for the same event ignoring things like photographic blur for fast traveling objects or optical illusions that make an object of the same shape and size and location appear to be in a different, shape, size or location than it really is. Let us assume that the shape and size of a object is a function of the distribution of the magnitude and direction of pressure on all parts of the object and that the shape of a object can not change as a result of an object moving as long as the distribution of the magnitude and direction of pressure on all parts of the object remain the same and that the shape of an object is the same in all reference frames at the same moment in time in terms of order of events. Note that there can be many sources of pressure including force from gravitational fields, electric fields and magnetic fields. Note that an object accelerating would mean the existence of a force which could change the distribution of pressure which could change the shape and size of a object. Note that an object can move at a constant speed in a straight line without accelerating and therefor an object could have the same distribution of the magnitude and direction of pressure on all parts and thus have the same shape and size while traveling at a different velocity. Note that because the force from a B field or magnetic field is a function of velocity the same object moving at a different velocity in the same reference frame in the same surrounding environment might experience a different distribution of the magnitude and direction of pressure among it's parts thus resulting in a different shape or size for the object even if it is moving at a constant velocity without accelerating. Note that because of friction or other factors I have not listed the same object moving at a different velocity in the same reference frame in the same surrounding environment might experience a different distribution of the magnitude and direction of pressure among it's parts thus resulting in a different shape or size for the object even if it is moving at a constant velocity without accelerating. This is fundamentally different than the special theory of relativity in which the length of an object can be different for different observers and or reference frames during the same event.
Let us assume that perfect vacuums do not exist so light or sound waves are always traveling in a medium that is not a perfect vacuum nor Luminiferous aether
Let us assume that if light or sound is said to be traveling in a vacuum that it is not actually traveling through a perfect vacuum but through a very low density substance of greater than zero density
Let us assume that no model needs to be developed to explain light traveling through a perfect vacuum because light never travels through a perfect vacuum and always at best travels through a low density medium
Let us assume that Luminiferous aether does not need to be used to explain light traveling through a perfect vacuum because light never travels through a perfect vacuum
Let us assume that if light is treated as a photon particle instead of a wave that the photon particle would travel the same velocity that the wave would travel
Let us assume that if sound is treated as a phonon particle instead of a wave that the phonon particle would travel the same velocity that the wave would travel
Let us assume that when a medium is stationary relative to a reference frame that the speed of both light and sound are the same in all directions that it can travel in that medium as measured in that reference frame. Let us call that the wave speed it would be measured as traveling when the medium is stationary relative to the reference frame the Unmodified Wave Speed for that medium. This would be the same speed for a particle if light is treated as a photon instead of a wave or if sound is treated as a phonon instead of a wave. This is an oversimplification because anisotropic medium can exist but this model is for isotropic mediums only.
This model does not presume that the speed of light is necessarily the same as the speed of sound in a medium
Variables that would normally be lowercase might sometimes written in upper case or vice versa in this article to make them easier to see
When a medium is moving at a constant velocity of positive V as observed in a reference frame than let us assume that the light or sound wave or particle would move at a velocity of the Unmodified Wave Speed plus V for the medium in the same direction that the medium it is traveling inside of is moving and at a speed and that a light or sound wave or particle would move at a velocity of the Unmodified Wave Speed minus V in the opposite direction of the medium that it is traveling inside of. I will not go into calculations for waves or particles moving in other directions in this model. This is different than special relativity in which light travels at the same speed in all reference frames.
If a light or sound source does not send a light or sound signal when it is off but sends a signal when it is on and it turns on and then immediately off again then the velocity of the source does not change the velocity at which the light or sound wave travels but it may effect how frequently the observers receives the signal or the time period between the signals the observer receives. If a light or sound source sends a continuous light or sound wave then the velocity at which the light or sound source travels does not change the velocity at which the light or sound wave travels but it may effect the frequency and wavelength.
The velocity at which some person observing a light or sound signal is moving as measured in a reference frame does not effect the velocity at which the light or sound signal is measured as moving in that same reference frame but may effect the wavelength, period, or frequency that the person observes the light or sound signal to be.
One Way Non Trivial Examples
Let us call C the speed of light in a almost perfect vacuum and assume it is close enough to the speed of light in air to use the same quantity as the Unmodified Wave Speed in the examples below.
The two examples shall be with someone standing inside a train and someone standing outside a train such that light travels through two different mediums made of the same material but with each medium that the light goes through traveling at a different speed relative to the other medium
The person standing outside the train shall be called the Light Watcher
The person standing inside the train shall be called the Light Shiner
The Light Shiner turns on and off a light signal every 1 second from the frame of reference in which the Light Shiner is stationary and aims the light signal at the Light Watcher through a train window either in the front or back of the train depending on which example
The Light Shiner is stationary relative to the following objects, the train, the train window, and the medium of air inside the train
The Light Watcher is stationary relative to the ground and train tracks either in front of or behind the train and stationary relative to the medium of air outside the train
The train is moving either towards or away from the Light Watcher relative to the Light Watcher depending on which example
The examples below are oversimplifications because different sections of air outside the train would move in different velocities and directions in response to the train moving through where the air was prior to it being displaced by the moving train. These examples are oversimplifications because they ignore the refraction of light as it goes through a train window, the train window is assumed as an oversimplification to have no effect on the light and only exists in the example to separate the two mediums of air so that they are moving relative to each other.
