# Doesn't Anyone Question How Weird Our Number For Light Speed Is?

#### pittsburghjoe

299,792,458 meters per second

I'm convinced it has to be this speed to allow a quantum/classical boundary. A Femtosecond holds the key of 0.3 micrometers. An object with this width is going to be auto-observed ..have a physical state. The speed of light is the speed it is in order for quantum events to occur. If it was any faster a Femtosecond could cover 0.2 micrometers and prevent quantum weirdness from being a thing.

The speed of light is directly tied to the spaceTime and it seems to be a frame rate.

I suspect the default speed of light is actually 200,000,000 m/s and a multiplier of 1.49896229 is added to the frame rate to equal 299,792,458 m/s

Again, the multiplier is to ensure the quantum/classical boundary size.

If we take the speed of light and multiply it by 5 we get: 299,792,458 m/s x 5 = 1.49896229×10^15 Micrometers per second (1,498,962,290,000,000)

I think it is telling us 1,498,962,290 m/s is the speed of light when spacetime isn't involved.

The speed of light gets divided by 5. Is it saying time gets split between 5 different dimensions?

299,792,458 m/s x 5 = 1,498,962,290 m/s or 1,498,962,290,000,000 Micrometers per second
1,498,962,290,000,000 / 5 = 2.9979246e+14 || 299,792,460,000,000

I think this is saying the auto-observe key is actually 0.29979246 Micrometers

speed of light 299,792,458 / auto-observe 0.29979246 micrometers to meters 0.00000029979246 = 999,999,990,000,000

Light has a max of auto-observing 999,999,990,000,000 clumps of matter each second.

1000000000000000 - 999999990000000 = 10,000,000

I think that is somewhere around 1.00000001% of a difference.

"The official definition of a meter today is: 1⁄299792458 of the distance traveled by light in a vacuum, in 1 second. ... A consequence of using this definition is that any attempt to measure the speed of light is cyclical; you must use a “meter” to measure it at some point, which relies on the speed of light"

A Meter is based on 10's, it scales.

Time is Spacetime. I bring up the parallel universes because the math implies it. It can't be a coincidence that the speed of light x 5 equals that many micrometers.

You can rest assured a femtosecond of light is a unit of spacetime. The quantum/classical boundary demands it.

The split in 5 might be telling use there are 4 parallel universes.

https://www.nature.com/news/2010/100317/full/news.2010.130.html

This link says: 0.3 becomes 30 ..errr, maybe just for objects allowed to interact with 0.3 objects and not give them a physical state.
This explains why quantum weirdness events are allowed to occur in plants and animals.

Space and Time are directly tied. Or should I say Distance and Time? The frame rate of spacetime has been increased for light to be the speed it is.

If I'm right, the quantum/classical boundary should be different throughout the fabric of spacetime ..like time dilation.

Time dilation and the boundary must be insane in cosmic voids. This has to by why they are expanding.

Spacetime converts quantum waves that have a width of 0.3 or larger and automatically gives them a physical state. The wave is now also a particle, it is in a duality ..the quantum field and spacetime are influencing it. It isn't going to perform quantum weirdness events but will wobble like a wave. Observation can be performed on purpose with smaller objects ..what I care about are the auto-observed sizes.

Matter waves not decaying is pretty strong evidence that spacetime isn't involved with unobserved quantum waves.

Side thought: I don't think the quantum field has a causality limit for unobserved quantum waves.

The reason Einstein failed at a unifying theory is because he refused to believe anything could be without spacetime.
I think spacetime is available everywhere ..but is not enacted everywhere. I think Mass enacts it (the boundary).

If you toss a rock into a cosmic void, spacetime will form around its mass like a bubble. It will experience the maximum time dilation and quantum/classical boundary spacetime can handle. Because of the spacetime bubble size. If the rock is around the size of the new boundary (for its new bubble) it would disappear into quantum waves and so would the spacetime bubble (assuming the rock didn't have a physical state at the time).

Is this why we are seeing stars older than time? Are the stars in question living in cosmic voids?
Anything that ages, has a physical state.

lorentz doesn't apply to quantum waves without a physical state ..there is nothing to tradeoff

#### pittsburghjoe

If galaxies are these enacted spacetime bubbles ..do we need dark matter to be a thing anymore?

The stars we see moving so fast at the edges of galaxies is due to its own spacetime bubble is mostly sticking out of the galaxy bubble. That star is moving in space with extreme time dilation.

We should be asking ourselves how much mass = how much spacetime?

I wouldn't want to be the first person to leave the galaxy. You would age and the different scale of the quantum/classical boundary would probably do something awful to your body.

#### pittsburghjoe

Spacetime that isn't enacted would be like a deflated balloon ..lifeless. I'm asking what size the bubble gets per 0.3 micrometer of mass. Is the galaxy a giant spacetime bubble ..or more like a tent city?

We can compare galaxies with slow edge stars to ones with fast to give us a clue to the size.

#### pittsburghjoe

This thread contains all the ingredients to formulate a TOE.

The speed of light (causality) is the frame rate of spacetime. The frame rate determines the quantum/classical boundary.

Quantum weirdness events will not occur if the 0.3 micrometer object (not even touching a 30+ micrometer object) can be completely observed in a single frame. The exception being, 30 micrometer objects are allowed to interact without causing decoherence to a 0.2 micrometer object.

Unobserved QM = Quantum Field

Duality = QFT (both spacetime and the quantum field) (no quantum weirdness except for wobble ..and the quantum Zeno effect, the quantum field is still making it ageless. )

Spacetime = GR

Last edited:

#### William Pennat

In my understanding, the speed of light is directly related to the Planck Length and the Planck Time. In fact, the Planck time is the time required for light to travel a distance of 1 Planck length in a vacuum, and is a time interval of roughly 5.39 × 10−44 s. If you consider that the dependence is actually in the opposite direction, that is, the Planck time is the smallest possible basic (quantum) interval of time, then the speed of light limit makes perfect sense. I've also seen a more complicated formula for the relation of the Planck Length roughly equal to 1.6 x 10-35 m but that's the basic idea. Spacetime is quantized and it is this fact that accounts for the speed of light and (especially) for the fact that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. It's a basic quantum limit.

#### pittsburghjoe

The length of a meter is tailored to the distance light travels in a second. Any sane person would question why massless light has such a weird number.
If the numbers thing isn't your bag ..Matter Waves not decaying is another avenue to my theory. Matter Waves that don't decay are not using spacetime.

Last edited:

#### pittsburghjoe

Dark Matter can still exist ..but it is only inside black holes, it is virtual mass without the ability to ever be observable.

#### pittsburghjoe

I killed Dark Matter being throughout the galaxy, but that doesn’t mean it can’t exist in black holes.

Dark Matter is Virtual Mass.

All Unobserved Matter Waves have mass ..including Dark Matter. They all are not physical until observed, but Dark Matter is decapitated ..it doesn’t have the ability to gain a physical state. It remains quantum waves.

Dark Matter is a mass variable in the quantum field devoid of spacetime.
Virtual mass effects the bending of spacetime. Mass is virtual in a matter-wave, real when observed. Dark Matter can never be observed/decohere.

Dark Matter behaves like a ghost atom. It doesn’t interact with matter because it is only waves. It sinks into gravity wells because spacetime can’t tell the difference.

Quantum weirdness events (superposition, entanglement, tunneling) do not occur when spacetime is involved. They happen in their own Field of quantum waves. Observed particles are in duality mode, the quantum field is still treating it like a wave while spacetime is making it physical. Dark Matter doesn’t have a duality mode, it remains unobservable quantum waves no matter what.

Dark Matter is my proof of a field of unobservable quantum waves without the need of spacetime. Matter Waves that don’t decay also scream spacetime isn’t involved.
Lorentz doesn’t apply to quantum waves without a physical state ..there is nothing to trade-off. Spacetime is separate from the Quantum Field.

So, what is in a black hole? Dark Matter without spacetime.

#### pittsburghjoe

I think the default frame rate of the smallest spacetime bubble is 200,000,000 m/s. The one we are in is scaled/sped up via 1.49896229, this also sets the quantum/classical boundary.

Time dilation must influence the multiplier 1.49896229 because stars in their own spacetime bubbles age/move extremely fast.

Last edited:

#### pittsburghjoe

The fabric of spacetime is a little more interesting than GR defines. We now know spacetime is enacted based the amount of mass at the quantum/classical boundary. It isn’t enacted everywhere but can be naturally with a certain amount of mass. A supermassive black hole at the center of a galaxy starts the core gravity well. It isn’t a strong enough well to hold the entire galaxy in but planets/stars daisy chain off the core gravity well. When an object has enough mass to enact spacetime, it becomes accessible to the universal spacetime net/fabric and will flow as gravity tells it to. Spacetime objects on the out edges are going to experience extreme time dilation and move quickly.

#### pittsburghjoe

Physical Mass IS Spacetime that is connected to the enacted fabric/net of Spacetime.

Doesnt it actually change every few years?

#### pittsburghjoe

It would change where time dilation changes

So its never a constant right? "Time dilates as the speed of light approaches." I remember thats an old quote from somewhere... maybe il go find that quote in its entirety.

#### scvblwxq

I killed Dark Matter being throughout the galaxy, but that doesn’t mean it can’t exist in black holes.

Dark Matter is Virtual Mass.

All Unobserved Matter Waves have mass ..including Dark Matter. They all are not physical until observed, but Dark Matter is decapitated ..it doesn’t have the ability to gain a physical state. It remains quantum waves.

Dark Matter is a mass variable in the quantum field devoid of spacetime.
Virtual mass effects the bending of spacetime. Mass is virtual in a matter-wave, real when observed. Dark Matter can never be observed/decohere.

Dark Matter behaves like a ghost atom. It doesn’t interact with matter because it is only waves. It sinks into gravity wells because spacetime can’t tell the difference.

Quantum weirdness events (superposition, entanglement, tunneling) do not occur when spacetime is involved. They happen in their own Field of quantum waves. Observed particles are in duality mode, the quantum field is still treating it like a wave while spacetime is making it physical. Dark Matter doesn’t have a duality mode, it remains unobservable quantum waves no matter what.

Dark Matter is my proof of a field of unobservable quantum waves without the need of spacetime. Matter Waves that don’t decay also scream spacetime isn’t involved.
Lorentz doesn’t apply to quantum waves without a physical state ..there is nothing to trade-off. Spacetime is separate from the Quantum Field.

So, what is in a black hole? Dark Matter without spacetime.

#### scvblwxq

Black holes apparently evaporate emitting ordinary matter which new experiments seem to confirm.

#### pittsburghjoe

That would be matter that didn't make it to the stage of being dark matter.

Giving a particle a physical state is the same thing as saying: it is now a spacetime object.
Is virtual mass the spacetime fabric/net? Enacted regions would be physical mass.

The fabric of spacetime is responsible for gravity, time (time dilation), and the quantum/classical boundary size. A spacetime object (a certain amount of mass) accesses the fabric and follows GR. Yes, you can force smaller massed objects to decohere and become spacetime objects.

Last edited:

#### pittsburghjoe

Is the fabric evenly spaced virtual mass acting as vertices to accommodate the bending of it? Spacetime is all about mass and this would explain how gravitational waves reach us from across cosmic voids.

Dark Matter can still exist ..but it is only inside black holes, it is virtual mass without the ability to ever be observable.
Dark matter would .. possibly be the Aether that Tesla spoke of,? Like as in the DMT experiances portion of the perceptual reality?....or another way if saying The other side of the light spectrum that we cannot interact with in this physical reality?

Last edited:

#### pittsburghjoe

Aether could be the virtual mass that structures the fabric of spacetime. DMT experiences would be a connection to the quantum wave side that doesn't have spacetime. Side note: I think DMT could be used to jump someone out of a coma.

Aether could be the virtual mass that structures the fabric of spacetime. DMT experiences would be a connection to the quantum wave side that doesn't have spacetime. Side note: I think DMT could be used to jump someone out of a coma.
On a further note id like to say ive been experimenting with light and ive found a way to create metals from magnifying light into specific types of materials. Slightly off topic but nonetheless interesting

#### CTYankee

For the past 40 years I've been using c=1.0 and all the weirdness goes away. e,g, E(kg*m/s^2)=M(kg)c(m/s)^2 becomes E(kg*m/s^2)=M(kg*m/s^2) -- simple!

</tongue_in_cheek>

paulpassarelli

#### James DeMeo

Actually, yes, many scientists question both constancy in the speed of light and also reject Einstein's theory of relativity. I am one of them, and even wrote a book which goes into the matter: The Dynamic Ether of Cosmic Space: Correcting a Major Error in Modern Science. https://www.amazon.com/Dynamic-Ether-Cosmic-Space-Correcting/dp/0997405716

Most reading this will never have read the original Michelson-Morley published paper, to know they clearly stated to have detected a light-speed variation approaching 5 to 7.5 km/sec. That was much lower than the anticipated velocity of 30 to several hundred km/sec as expected according to Newtonian static ether theory. It suggested however that there was an earth-entrained ether, slower at the earth's surface due to laminar frictional resistance, similar to how water flow slows down near the interior surfaces of a pipe. That velocity was later recalculated to be around 8 km/sec by Dayton Miller, who later worked with Morley to build the largest and most sensitive light-beam interferometer ever. The Morley-Miller experiments yielded velocities of no greater, but later Miller undertook experiments atop Mt. Wilson, over four seasonal periods in 1925-1926, obtaining light-speed variations from 9.3 to 11.2 km/sec. His work was the most precise and ambitious ever. A few later experiments, in recent years also, obtained similar or slightly higher or lower results, depending upon altitude and other factors.

Miller's work particularly preoccupied Einstein, who worriedly wrote his anxieties to his associates, saying that if Miller's work was accurate, then his entire theory of relativity would "collapse like a house of cards".

But oh don't mention any of this if you are a university student, as odds are you will be thrown out of your study program! I know as this has happened to many. Modern astrophysics is caught up in a series of metaphysical speculations which have no unequivocal proofs, and often violate Popperian logic in that they could never be observed so as to either prove or disprove them. Einstein's space-time gravity wells, big-bang singularity billions of years past, redshifts as distance indicators, gazillions of unseen "black holes" (with one highly questionable "image" from M87), invisible MACHOS, quantum magic, all of it has been critically reviewed by top astronomers and physicists, who in every case were professionally punished and isolated, censored from publishing their criticisms in mainstream journals, and if lacking tenure, or being a graduate student, simply excommunicated. Astrophysical theory has become a religion, a belief-system that tolerates no heresy. Meanwhile empirical science continues, observations and facts as found by ordinary working astronomers, space engineering and materials science make legitimate and solid new findings daily. Behind them comes a battalion of astrophysical priests, making sure that all new findings conform to their metaphysical unrealities ... and nearly nobody blinks an eye about the fantastic and bizarre nature of their theories. Their theories are then endlessly discussed in the top ranks of astrophysics, like Ptolemaic astrologers once did about the epicycles. But dare mention the cosmic ether -- much less one with dynamical and material-gravitational properties as appears to be the case, and you'll likely be crucified. A sad truth.

Read my book if you want full details, citations, and a re-education about the ether, which was repeatedly detected, defeating so much of modern astrophysical theory, and helps to explain our universe without the bizarre things that often are proposed on space.com -- which I read and enjoy, and recommend to others (with caviets) nevertheless. Again, the empirical facts are never in question, only the "theories about facts", a difference which ever good scientist will know.

Last edited:

#### CTYankee

Actually, yes, many scientists question both constancy in the speed of light and also reject Einstein's theory of relativity. I am one of them, and even wrote a book which goes into the matter: The Dynamic Ether of Cosmic Space: Correcting a Major Error in Modern Science. https://www.amazon.com/Dynamic-Ether-Cosmic-Space-Correcting/dp/0997405716

Most reading this will never have read the original Michelson-Morley published paper, to know they clearly stated to have detected a light-speed variation approaching 5 to 7.5 km/sec. That was much lower than the anticipated velocity of 30 to several hundred km/sec as expected according to Newtonian static ether theory. It suggested however that there was an earth-entrained ether, slower at the earth's surface due to laminar frictional resistance, similar to how water flow slows down near the interior surfaces of a pipe. That velocity was later recalculated to be around 8 km/sec by Dayton Miller, who later worked with Morley to build the largest and most sensitive light-beam interferometer ever. The Morley-Miller experiments yielded velocities of no greater, but later Miller undertook experiments atop Mt. Wilson, over four seasonal periods in 1925-1926, obtaining light-speed variations from 9.3 to 11.2 km/sec. His work was the most precise and ambitious ever. A few later experiments, in recent years also, obtained similar or slightly higher or lower results, depending upon altitude and other factors.

Miller's work particularly preoccupied Einstein, who worriedly wrote his anxieties to his associates, saying that if Miller's work was accurate, then his entire theory of relativity would "collapse like a house of cards".

But oh don't mention any of this if you are a university student, as odds are you will be thrown out of your study program! I know as this has happened to many. Modern astrophysics is caught up in a series of metaphysical speculations which have no unequivocal proofs, and often violate Popperian logic in that they could never be observed so as to either prove or disprove them. Einstein's space-time gravity wells, big-bang singularity billions of years past, redshifts as distance indicators, gazillions of unseen "black holes" (with one highly questionable "image" from M87), invisible MACHOS, quantum magic, all of it has been critically reviewed by top astronomers and physicists, who in every case were professionally punished and isolated, censored from publishing their criticisms in mainstream journals, and if lacking tenure, or being a graduate student, simply excommunicated. Astrophysical theory has become a religion, a belief-system that tolerates no heresy. Meanwhile empirical science continues, observations and facts as found by ordinary working astronomers, space engineering and materials science make legitimate and solid new findings daily. Behind them comes a battalion of astrophysical priests, making sure that all new findings conform to their metaphysical unrealities ... and nearly nobody blinks an eye about the fantastic and bizarre nature of their theories. Their theories are then endlessly discussed in the top ranks of astrophysics, like Ptolemaic astrologers once did about the epicycles. But dare mention the cosmic ether -- much less one with dynamical and material-gravitational properties as appears to be the case, and you'll likely be crucified. A sad truth.

Read my book if you want full details, citations, and a re-education about the ether, which was repeatedly detected, defeating so much of modern astrophysical theory, and helps to explain our universe without the bizarre things that often are proposed on space.com -- which I read and enjoy, and recommend to others (with caviets) nevertheless. Again, the empirical facts are never in question, only the "theories about facts", a difference which ever good scientist will know.

Working scientists do not question the *constancy* of c. That's to say no scientists a priori questions it, with the exception of a possible few *inspired* by Michaelson & Morley who are *expecting a null result, but are open minded enough to analyse the data anyway. That said, no casual experiment which indicates the speed of light to be anything other than the accepted value of c is going to escape ridicule and be questioned for experimental error.

But if you're only here to plug a book on Amazon, well, I'll wait for the Audible version, see if you can get Mike Meyers to narrate it using a mix of Austin Powers & Wayne Campbell voices. -- That I'd pay for!

#### pittsburghjoe

If you believe in time dilation ..why wouldn't you think the speed of light would dilate also?

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K