Another key ‘proof’ of Relativity Theory dismantled - with the full endorsement of an international panel of top experts. (Plus a bit of applied commonsense.)

Some straightforward scientific reasoning (with peer-reviewed evidence) showing exactly why light appears to do exactly what it appears to do.

With a substantial dose of maths, including detailed diagrams.

Looking at light from the perspective of a moving observer makes it all very clear: that moving observer has their own take on reality ‘tilted’ to give precisely the impression that Relativity claims is the true picture. The fact of an objectively static rest frame (denied by conventional Relativity), from which the motion of that observer can be measured, is demonstrated from cosmic observations (as well as by the universal electromagnetic field, referred to in various posts including notably this one). At a stroke, this does away with all the counter-commonsense assertions of Special Relativity.

Detailed maths for the post: Light Speed: The Inside Story

A seasonal departure from the main theme of these Substack posts.

A not-too-technical overview of the Lorentz Transformation as used in Relativity, showing how the spun-light perspective on material particles gives rise to exactly this transformation as a perceptual experience in a moving observer or object. Includes shifting from static to moving frame and vice versa, also shifting between one moving frame and another - all mirroring the claimed ‘objective reality’ of Special Relativity.

Considering the scientific fact of physical contraction of objects moving at speed, the Relativity-based fable of reciprocal contraction of static or near-static objects when observed from a fast-moving object, and the implications of this notion.

A thorough mathematical breakdown of how the light-formed nature of material particles gives rise to the illusion of the Lorentz Transformation as an objective reality, rather than simply a perceptual experience. Supporting maths for the free post: Relativity Unmasked: How energy flows shape our experience of Reality.
As detailed in this In-Depth Look, this illusion has led to:
(1) A false belief in an absolute cosmic speed limit;
(2) A false belief in the risk of a catastrophic disruption in the flow of time;
(3) A failure to understand, or even consider, the nature of time itself;
(4) Spurious assumption of obstacles blocking our understanding of gravitation;
(5) Total misperception of the nature of inertia (i.e. resistance to acceleration);
(6) Preoccupation with false assumptions, obstructing vital future research.

A serious consideration of the concept of the Luminiferous Aether, and how the continuing need for this has been swept under the carpet whilst still implicitly assuming its existence in some (self-contradictory) form.
This is followed by an index of posts to date at that time, as given above.

With a substantial dose of maths, including detailed diagrams.

A simple-to-follow derivation of the well-known mass-energy equivalence, without reference to Relativity, using just similar triangles and a few well-established scientific relationships.

A calculus-based proof of E = mc², independent of Relativity (presented from two alternative lines of reasoning).

A rather different, more right-brained, take on the cosmos.
This is an account of an actual experience along the Devon, UK, coast in August 2008.

The very first clear and coherent explanation of the causal mechanisms that give rise to the effect known as gravitation, opening the way to a cogent rationalisation of how "Spacetime tells matter how to move; matter tells spacetime how to curve" (given in detail in a follow-up post: Gravity II: the Sequel)

A sequence of highly significant points relating to each of Special and General Relativity, distinguishing physical realities from proposed overarching properties of the universe for which no causation is offered, and no justification given other than that - if they were true - they would lead to observed effects. Since those effects can be explained by much more straightforward mechanisms, introduction of such esoteric cosmic principles (with apparently counter-commonsense side-effects) would seem contrary to the best principles of good scientific method, which majors on identifying causal mechanisms for observed effects.

The follow-up post to Gravitation: What's the Big Attraction? This post describes in detail the mechanisms that produce what is generally termed the gravitational field as a direct consequence of the energetic structure of bodies of physical matter, varying dynamically in space and time as those bodies follow their respective paths. It also describes how all material objects, by virtue of their own energetic makeup, are influenced by that field, bringing full circle the effect described by physicist John Wheeler as: "Spacetime tells matter how to move; matter tells spacetime how to curve". This is the very first time that a causal explanation has been presented for this relationship between gravitating bodies and gravitationally-influenced objects (both of these roles being played to some degree by every element of matter in the universe).
This post goes on to give explanations for: (a) The Equivalence Principle; (b) Gravitational Lensing; (c) Slowing of light in a gravitational field, including Black Holes; (d) Gravitational Time Dilation.

An in-depth look at some of the remarkable properties and behaviours of photons, showing how they form the bridge between the realms beyond spacetime and our physical realm of time and space. The evidence suggests that if we can figure out how photons do what they do - i.e. we get our heads around the physics of that deeper level of reality which creates our experience of time and space - we may be able to find ways around perceived limitations of our spacetime existence.

The vast disparity between abundances of matter and antimatter is one of the great unsolved mysteries of the cosmos - for those who haven't yet taken on board the message of the spun-light formation of matter. From the spun-light perspective the existence of antimatter, with its anticipated Charge-Parity (CP) symmetry that doesn't quite work out in every case, is totally to be expected. More than that, breaking of CP symmetry, with restoration of symmetry if we include time-reversal to give CPT symmetry (now regarded in mainstream circles as de facto), is likewise totally to be expected. Another resounding confirmation of the spun-light perspective on matter, and a major step in understanding both the origins of the material universe and its present form.

It's generally accepted that outcomes of quantum events are intrinsically random (though subject to a statistical distribution defined by the wavefunction for the event), with no underlying causation for choice of outcome. Such proposed totally non-deterministic randomness is completely unique, all other 'random' events have underlying causes - often too complex to analyse or predict, but nevertheless there. This raises the question: how is such absolute randomness possible? What cosmic mechanism generates the gadzillions of random results required every nanosecond for quantum outcomes across the universe? How is nondeterministic randomness even achievable - given that every other random event or random number depends on deterministic factors to achieve that apparent randomness? Random numbers don't just happen, they are notoriously difficult to generate; what's the truth behind this apparent magic trick (rather than science) inherent in every quantum event? There is an answer - and it's totally logical. (And it's not MWI.)

An audio account of a dream I dreamed in the middle of lockdown three years ago.
Those who have ears to hear, let them hear.

Starting with the question of "What makes time happen?" - as I did, over 26 years ago - we find ourselves on a fascinating journey of discovery (as I have, over the past 26 years). Join me on a brief travelogue of that journey: The complete saga of so-called 'relativistic effects' opens up before your very eyes! If I had to choose between a Dartmoor stream and a particle accelerator from which to learn more about underlying truths of material reality, give me the stream every time!

The entire universe is defined by one vast wavefunction: every smallest element, matter or energy, in the universe is subject to quantum interaction with every other element in the cosmos. This explains, at a stroke, the apparent randomness inherent in every quantum event, every quantum process. It also gives a compelling insight into clearly-defined possible means of interaction between the timeless unlimited realms of universal consciousness and the individual processes of living organisms, notably ourselves.

Ever since Einstein declared his Special Theory of Relativity in 1905 there have been countless 'experts' who have claimed to have found serious flaws in that theory. Almost without exception those proposed 'flaws' have in fact been errors in the thinking of those critics of Einstein's theory, resulting from a fundamental lack of understanding of the underlying rationale of that theory. As a consequence it has become the norm for any new perspective on Relativity Theory to be dismissed out of hand, on the basis that it must be based on a fundamental error in understanding; regrettably this has made the theory, which is in fact deeply flawed in its primary assumption, effectively impregnable to any rational critique, however well-reasoned - to the severe detriment of scientific progress.

Colour perception is generally reckoned to have evolved in the same way as every other feature of every living organism: by natural selection of those fittest to survive and reproduce as a consequence of beneficial random mutations - standard Darwinian evolution. However, this begs the question: how does random mutation give rise to a radically novel mental concept - colour - which bears no relation to any quality or characteristic which has ever been experienced before?? Such total originality-of-concept points unerringly to some unmistakably creative activity - a sure tell-tale of consciousness at work in the evolutionary process.

Following the Nobel Physics prize award in 2022, the scientific press widely publicised the news that those 2022 Nobel laureates had 'proved Einstein wrong'. This was in relation to the fact that widely-separated particles do at times communicate, one with another, faster than the speed of light - contrary to Einstein's proposal that light-speed is a universal absolute, a cosmic speed limit. This has huge implications for Relativity Theory: that theory depends crucially on the universal reliability of the Lorentz Transformation - which in turn depends on the absolute nature of the speed of light. A radical rethink of Einstein's Theory is clearly needed, putting a whole new perspective on the nature of physical reality. The Spun-Light understanding of matter readily resolves this knotty issue. It also fits 100% with two other recent discoveries headlined in the scientific press.

A simple explanation, using only High School Maths (GCSE Higher Level in UK), of what it is about the structure of matter that gives the result immortalised in Einstein's famous equation. Einstein himself never worked out WHY it was so, he simply figured it must be so in order for his Relativity Theory to fit the facts. The explanation provided here, in simple step-by-step terms, doesn't in any way depend on Einstein's Theory.

Very recently, totally independently, another researcher has produced an in-depth rationale for all the findings of Quantum Mechanics, from the wave equation and quantum wavefunction to the characteristics and behaviours of subatomic particles. This rationale starts with the premise that a subatomic particle such as an electron is formed from energy cycling on the spot - as defined in the spun-light understanding of matter. Full details in this post.

Quantum Entanglement is an ongoing hot topic in the field of Quantum Mechanics (QM), and has been since Einstein and two colleagues raised it almost ninety years ago. According to QM, Local Realism - the fairly obvious requirement that two interacting particles or systems must have some form of viable connection in spacetime - is not something that can be taken for granted. In fact, according to the equations of QM, two particles or photons of energy can be entangled in such a way that they can interact, regardless of the distance between them, instantaneously - faster than the speed of light. This post looks at the implications and proposes a rather startling explanation in terms of the nature of our space-time reality

Consideration of the unlimited extent of electromagnetic field effects, coupled with the fact that particles of matter are formed from such electromagnetic effects, leads to the conclusion that material particles, when considered from the quantum perspective rather than our own limited perception, also extend across the whole of the cosmos:
Everything is Everywhere!
This is shown to not only explain the connectedness of particles or photons linked by quantum entanglement but also offer explanations for gravitation and quantum randomness, as well as confirming that the universe is holographic.

An intro to an incredible truth about the true nature of the physical reality we all inhabit - our universe. Quantum Mechanics is telling us that the cosmos is way, way different from how it seems. Are you ready for that ultimate red-pill/blue-pill moment??

A deep dive into the foundations of our physical existence, as revealed by the inner workings of Quantum Mechanics. The whole of the material realm is shown to be an unthinkably vast electromagnetic field effect, in which nothing actually moves!! But that's just the beginning of the story...

An in-depth analysis of a paper published in Physical Review Letters which appears to show photons reaching back in time to influence earlier events!! But as so often is the case in the quantum field, nothing is quite what it seems...

A critical appraisal of the peer-review process: is it more about validating new science or maintaining the status quo? Are the people with a strong vested interest in the latter always truly impartial judges of the former? With this in mind, we take an in-depth look at how the 'Higgs boson' concept stacks up in the light (literally!) of the past 100 years or so of physics research & discovery - and how a much simpler rationale drops out quite naturally from that century of 'new' (and not-so-new) findings.

An invitation to step outside the groupthink that's dominated the world view of time and space for the past 120 years. Includes simple explanations for things that have been made unnecessarily complicated, and a move away from that's-just-how-it-is thinking to 'this is why it is how it is' (or in some cases, how it seems to be).

A brief plea for recognition of the obvious.

Overview and link to a scientific paper which overturns an unproven assumption that's not been questioned for 120 years. This paper was submitted to a leading journal, passed all the preliminary checks - but then was rejected without any serious consideration - presumably because it challenges that unproven assumption. That same assumption is blocking any chance of us finding a pathway to the stars.

A 5-minute read, a 2-minute pause for thought - and a 34 millionths of a second journey. All pointing unerringly to the need for a serious rethink of assumptions that have domiated science for over 120 years. [Includes links to some equally serious science.]

An article originally published in the journal of the Scientific & Medical Network, Dec 2007. This treatise explores the true nature of time, the place of light in the universal process, and the role of consciousness in our physical experience. An overview of who, and where, you really are.

The Einsteinian view of reality is founded on a concept known as Local Realism. Research over the past 50+ years, as confirmed in a recent triple Nobel prize award, shows that this view is fundamentally flawed - our reality is intrinsically nonlocal. The implications are pretty awesome.

There's been quite a bit of speculation, particularly recently, over whether our reality is in fact a simulation. A fully scientific analysis tells us that the answer is no - but also yes.
Confused? You won't be, after reading this post.

Simple logic offers a clear reason why Relativity theory is not only redundant, but also therefore wrong. AI takes this logical reasoning and lays it out in a form that anyone can understand.

There are various substantial indications that Relativity theory is fatally flawed. But with thousands of institutions, tens/hundreds of thousands of high-status positions, and billions in infrastructure all resting on that theory, the resistance to change is almost insurmountable. Which way would you wish things to go, for your children's sake and that of their children's children?