E=(RAe)MC^2 and E≠MC^2(AeV)

©copyright 2011 Jeff Pluim
(permission to use kindly granted to 12/30/2012)



C……..Speed of light


Ae…..Effective 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 explained.

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 energy.

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 field.

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).

Yes, it 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).

There is 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.

When 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.