The radiation continuum model of light and the Galilean invarianceof Maxwell's equations

The original basis for the Lorentz transformations, and thus special relativity, was the assumption that the observed velocity of interaction of light with matter represents a unique velocity of the electromagnetic wave. This arbitrary decision is not borne out by Maxwell's theories or by any test that might prove that EM energy actually travels in a continuum of velocities. The second postulate as stated by Einstein does not deserve the status of a postulate, as it is at once overly restrictive and ultimately phenomenological-the nature of c is based on experimental measurement rather than on analysis of first principles. The radiation continuum model's (RCM) modified second postulate, however, says nothing about the actual propagation of EM energy, but only of the relative speed with which it must interact with matter to be detected. Utilizing this modified light principle we obtain an intuitive Galilean form invariance for Maxwell's equations. RCM places no upper limit on attainable velocities, and allows for the possibility of communications between humans or particles at speeds far in excess of c. This precludes many of the compatibility problems between the highly successful quantum mechanics and relativity theory     

The time delay of a solar grazing photon

Moving clocks and clocks in a gravitational field slow down, not due to the effects of special relativity nor to the space-time curvature of general relativity, but due only to the principle of equivalence and the conservation of energy. However, some might argue that there has been a further “test” of the effect of gravity on time, namely, the measurement of the time-delay of a round-trip, solar-grazing radar beacon performed by Shapiro in the 1960s. In this test, Shapiro bounced a radar pulse off Mars at superior conjunction (a feat in itself for the time), and compared the measured round-trip travel time of this pulse with the expected round-trip time of a signal traveling at c for the entire trip, as determined from highly accurate planetary ephemerides. Shapiro had predicted this time-delay long before being technologically able to make such a measurement. While general relativity can be used to correctly obtain the magnitude of this delay, it is not the only explanation. As earlier with the analysis of clocks in motion and of clocks in a gravitational field, this paper derives the same result without invoking the space-time curvature of general relativity     

The gravitational potential for a moving observer, the perihelionshift of Mercury, and photon deflection

Acceptance of Einstein's second postulate, combined with the Principle of Equivalence, requires the introduction of space-time curvature in the presence of massive objects. In this paper, it has been demonstrated that the radiation continuum model (RCM) of light results in a modification to Newton's static gravitational potential. Applying this modified potential to the case of Mercury's anomalous perihelion advance accounts for the entire 43" per century, and provides a form equivalent to that of GRT. Thus, this model will work equally well for any system to which it is applied, all without resorting to the space-time curvature of GRT. The same potential, applied to the problem of a solar grazing photon, gives a solution identical in form and content to that of GRT as well. Such results lead to the conclusion that these effects are not attributable to massive objects curving space-time     

A direct test of the Lorentz length contraction

One of the most basic tenets of special relativity is the concept of length contraction as seen by an observer in motion. Yet this aspect of relativity has never been tested directly, due to the negligible size of the effect when applied to most situations. However, as the Earth orbits the Sun, any two stars located out of the plane of the ecliptic will appear to change their angle of separation as viewed during three-month intervals. This is due to the fact that at one instant the motion of the Earth lies in the same direction as a line joining the two stars, while three months later the Earth's motion is perpendicular to that line. At a velocity of 30 km/sec, the expected length contraction would be approximately 18 micro-arcseconds (μas) per degree of separation. The Space Interferometry Mission (SIM) promises a resolution of ±1 μas in a field of view of one degree. Special relativity claims that this level of precision has no meaning, or only limited operational meaning, as it is smaller than the anticipated seasonal Lorentz contraction effects. Either, as the author believes, this level of precision is attainable, and special relativity is completely invalid, or the promised sensitivity level cannot be achieved without compensating for length contraction as well as aberration in published star charts     

Moving clocks, reference frames and the twin paradox

It is the act of moving a clock out of one inertial frame of reference (IFR) and into another IFR which causes the clock to slow. But what of identical clocks constructed and calibrated in different IFRs? This paper takes a look at such a scenario, demonstrating that two such clocks would tick synchronously and concludes with a new look at the famous “twin-paradox” of special relativity