subject: Einstein In Error. Light Not A Constant. Part 2 [print this page] Light analyzed from quasar light sources has implied that one of the central ideas of Special Relativity, the postulate demanding the constancy of the speed of light, may be completely wrong; this would have the unfortunate result that much of the theory is incorrect, including E=mc2. Paul Davies who is a professor in Arizona would use his profound mathematical ability to determine whether or not Einstein, Special Relativity and our current scientific worldview would remain intact. As he analyzed the data from many perspectives, Davies came to a startling conclusion that the observational data did not comply with theoretical restrictions. The end result is that the great German scientist's idea requiring a constant speed for light would have to be rewritten.
Recoiling with horror at the possibility that Einstein and his revolutionary theory might be wrong, Davies spoke on an Australian radio network that he could not come up with a reason for this discrepancy:
"one of the basic laws of physics" that can not be wrong because so many other theories depend on this assumption "yet the evidence seems to suggest that it might be varying.'
As is readily apparent from the above statement, light speed cannot be constant according to observational data; this information comes from an extremely well respected team of scientists that indicate that a presumption of modern physics that has stood for over one hundred years is completely wrong. Thus, according to a valid source, it seems that light's velocity is not a constant at all. I repeat, it should be understood that Mr. Davies is no light-weight from the borders of physics that few 'respectable' scientists wish to go; on the contrary he is an award winner from the generally accepted areas of physics.
Additionally, his analysis showed that light speed 'c' not only is not constant but that it is slowing down! That's right scientists seem to have gotten it all wrong from the beginning. Instead of light be a constant it is in fact changing apparently all the time! The unbelievable implications of all of this is that if Albert Einstein is wrong then we will have to change many fundamental areas of physics that are affected by these momentous changes.
As stated above, this result will necessarily impact other parts of physics including the mysterious quantum physics. Would there be an affect on the ubiquitous E=mc2? Specifically, since the constancy of the speed of light is one of the fundamental concepts of special relativity and E=mc2 what impact will this have on this formula? It appears without a doubt, that the verification of the stellar results would require that textbooks would have to rewritten and a new idea on space-time reality would necessarily replace Einstein's ideas.
However, most scientists are not yet ready to abandon Einstein, relativity theory and E=mc2. It has become too ingrained in the minds of most people to so easily abandon a long held theory. Something more substantial than a research team's experimental analysis must be found to clearly discredit E=mc2. Thus, invalidation of its most basic equation E=mc2 would require a clear indication of error from the basic equations that support relativity theory.
