2011 Jeff Pluim
(permission to use kindly granted to keelynet.com 12/30/2012)
area of a magnetic field (I have used RAe
to represent a static magnetic field)
Physicists have been
using E=MC^2 as a measurement for the amount of energy released by
the separation of an atom. I believe that there is a more literal
use for the equation. Since it is also assumed that the equation
precludes travel of mass, faster than the speed of light, I believe
that the literal use of the equation should be explored and
Let’s take a
look at a literal view explanation of the equation. Currently the
equation is ONLY used as a form of measurement. But take a look at
the equation as a way to create energy and not just measure it. If
you take a literal view of the equation, it says that if you move
mass at the speed of light times the speed of light, you will create
This is difficult to argue against if you believe that
nothing can travel faster than the speed of light, because the matter
will then become energy.
Another way to look
at Albert Einstein’s E=MC^2
is this: once matter exceeds the speed of light, if
electrons of an atom are travelling around the nucleus at or slower
than the speed of light, they can no longer keep up with the speed of
the nucleus, which is travelling faster than light speed, and they
separate from the atom, releasing the atom’s energy through the
separation itself and causing the chain reaction which creates energy
(the light speed of the electrons times the light speed of the entire
atom creates MC^2). Although it is not yet recognized, I believe
that this reality holds true only in a static magnetic field.
I believe that the electrons relate to the surrounding, strongest
magnetic field in the same way that a fly in a car relates to its
immediate environment. A fly cannot fly at 100 kilometers per hour
without a 100 KPH tailwind. But if a fly is in a car that is
travelling at 100 KPH, then the fly can fly at 100 KPH in relation to
the outside of the car.
As Einstein’s theory of relativity
says, the fly is only travelling at its normal speed inside of the
car, but an observer outside of the car will see the fly flying at
100 KPH as the car passes the observer at 100 KPH.
In the same way that
the fly is relating to its environment inside the car, I believe that
the electrons are relating to the immediate, strongest magnetic
If the immediate, strongest magnetic field is a moving
magnetic field (referred to herein as the MMF) and the MMF is
travelling faster than the speed of light, then the Matter with its
electrons moving along with the MMF, will relate to the MMF and not
the space outside of the MMF. The Matter should then be able to
travel faster than the speed of light in relation to the space
outside of the MMF.
To prove my theory,
I believe that you only have to refer to a particle accelerator.
Using magnetic repulsion to guide the particles, a particle
accelerator pushes matter at great speeds and then shoots that matter
off into a target.
It was discovered though, that unless the electro
magnets are shut off prior to the target or the target is placed
outside of the magnetic field, the magnetic field interferes with the
results of the matter hitting the target. Thus it appears that the
moving magnetic field that is used to guide the matter is also
causing the matter to maintain its cohesion.
This also answers
the question as to why the universe is as large as it is considering
the following: time since the “Big Bang”, and Einstein’s
E=MC^2. Considering that
the universe is about 150 billion light years across, and the
universe is about 13.7 billion years old, if you believe in
Einstein’s equation, then the universe should not be much
larger than 27.4 billion light years across (13.7 billion times 2,
since the Big Bang would have expanded in all directions).
took time for matter to come together as the energy from the Big Bang
turned into matter, but we are looking at a difference of over 61
billion light years (the distance from the Big Bang, or center of the
universe, to the outer edge of the universe, less the age of our
universe, 13.7 billion years, times the speed of light).
speculation that the energy created in the Big Bang travelled out
from the explosion at a speed exceeding light speed, and then as the
energy cooled, it turned into matter and could only then travel below
the speed of light.
Does any reasonable physicist actually believe
that it took over 61 billion light years for the energy from the Big
Bang to cool and turn into matter?
I do not believe that that is a
reasonable assumption. Firstly, space is cool, and secondly, 61
billion light years is a huge distance and a lot of time for that
energy to cool into matter. If that was the case, matter should have
formed long before the 61 billion light years from the Big Bang and
our universe would not be as big as it currently is.
And what form
would this energy have taken? Since light itself cannot travel
faster than approximately 300 thousand kilometers per second, what
form of energy could travel faster than light speed? So what are we
left with? The idea is not reasonable that energy travelled 61
billion light years before it cooled.
Consider this: when
there is an atomic explosion, there is a corresponding magnetic
pulse. With the Big Bang, there must have also been an enormous
magnetic pulse. I will call this the “Magnetic Pulse Theory”.
If that magnetic pulse from the Big Bang was travelling faster than
the speed of light, then all matter travelling along with that pulse
would have been able to travel faster than the speed of light also.
This explains how the universe can be 150 billion light years across,
bigger than is possible if erroneously using only E=MC^2.
When a star goes
supernova, we receive the neutrinos prior to receiving the light
photons from that same event. Again, according to Einstein’s
theories, that is not possible because the matter, neutrinos, have to
be travelling faster than the light, which goes against his famous
equation. The nuclear explosion that occurs with a supernova event
creates a magnetic pulse and any matter moving with that pulse can
potentially travel faster than the speed of the light photons from
that same supernova. This is an explanation for neutrinos
travelling faster than light and reaching Earth before we see the
light from the supernova event.
A theory called the
“Theory of Inflation”, speculates that the universe only
expanded slowly for the first while, and then for some unknown
reason, started to expand rapidly. This theory of inflation was
speculated because it would explain why the universe is more or less
of a uniform temperature.
I believe that the Magnetic Pulse Theory
gives a more reasonable explanation as to the uniformity of the
temperature of the universe. As with any atomic explosion, the
temperature of the space involved will be uniform until the expansion
of the explosion starts to slow, and since our universe is still
expanding at an increasing rate, it is reasonable to assume that the
temperature of the universe will be relatively uniform.
As for the question
of Dark Matter and Dark Flow, both of these theories can be explained
by gravitational /magnetic attraction. You cannot see gravity or
magnetism. You can only see the effects that they create. As with
the entire universe, there are greater and lesser areas of matter.
And so it should be no different with magnetism and gravity.
the mass of matter is so great that it creates gravity sufficient to
keep light from escaping, it could be called dark matter. And the
attraction that is referred to as Dark Flow, is no more than either
the gravitational/magnetic attraction of great mass, or, in the case
of our universe continuing to accelerate expansion, it is merely the
continued expansion from the Big Bang.
For those who say
that magnetism cannot travel faster than light because light is an
electro-magnetic wave, I say that if that was true then you would be
able to disrupt light by superimposing a powerful magnetic field over
a beam of light. But that does not work so light must be a stream of
massless photons and not an electro-magnetic wave.
When you take a
super magnet and move it next to a smaller, weaker magnet, the
magnetic field of the stronger magnet always overpowers the weaker
magnet to the point where the weaker magnet’s magnetic field is
severely disrupted. If light was any kind of magnetic wave, you
could disrupt it with a powerful magnetic field. Also, magnetism is
not affected by water or glass.
When you pass light through water or
glass, the light is refracted. When you put a straight object in
water, the object appears to bend. When you pass light through a
glass prism, the light is bent so that it separates into different
colors of the light spectrum. A magnetic field will pass through
water and a glass prism with no effect at all. Therefore light
cannot be an electromagnetic wave.
As for the
experiments that were done to prove that time slows with greater
speed/mass: An atomic clock was sent into orbit around the earth
while its sister clock remained on earth. When the clock that was in
orbit, was returned to earth, the time on the two clocks was
different by about a couple of seconds. This can also be explained
by the MMF Theory.
The clock on earth was in closer proximity to the
earth’s magnetic field than the clock in orbit. The atomic
particles, as per previous explanation in this paper, will act
differently in a moving magnetic field than in a static magnetic
field. Keep in mind that the earth, and its magnetic field, are
moving through space continually.
So it is not time that is changed,
it is merely that the clocks were operating at different speeds
because of the effects or lack of effects, of the magnetic field of
the earth. Therefore, time does not change with speed or mass.
At the Hadron
collider outside of Geneva, the physicists at CERN clocked a neutrino
travelling faster than light. And yet when neutrinos are clocked
that did not have the benefit of travelling inside a moving magnetic
field, as with naturally occurring neutrinos from atomic decay, they
do not travel faster than light, unlike the neutrinos in the magnetic
fields of the Hadron collider. This answers many questions that
physicists and astro-physicists have had and is easily verified.