IS THE THEORY OF GENERAL RELATIVITY REALLY NECESSARY

IN EXPLAINING THE CONSTANCY IN THE SPEED OF LIGHT

Light has puzzled scientists over the centuries. How is it possible that light has a
constant velocity when its source can be in motion? Why is light deflected by gravity? And
how deflection occurs without involving acceleration? Further more what is gravity?

At first glance it seems that physics law cannot explain these properties. Einstein
endeavored to explain these phenomena with logic just as complex and illogical as that of
which he was trying to explain. If all these same properties of light could be explained using
conventional physics law, then it seems reasonable that the special relativity theory and
general relativity theory should be brought into question.

The following shall present my case that light in fact does abide by and falls within the
realm of accepted physics law; it is just our perception and understanding that needs to be
adjusted. There is no warping of time, it is just humanity’s inability to comprehend and
measure micro-velocity and time that is responsible for our misunderstanding.

In an endeavour to explain the processes at work, a gradual introduction of common

events shall be used to introduce the new concept of energy exchange. Let’s begin with
examples where incomplete energy transfer occurs.

In the game of golf, a person swings a golf club and strikes a golf ball. The energy from
the club is transferred to the ball producing a reaction motion. Ideally the momentum which
is lost by the golf club is transferred to the golf ball. What happens if just after initial contact
a sturdy rock unseen in the grass impedes the club while the collision is still in progress? The
golf club will come to an abrupt halt, and then any energy that has not already been
transferred to the golf ball will suddenly be diverted to the rock. Subsequently, it can be
concluded that in the duration of time where energy is exchanging between objects, if for
any reason contact is disrupted, the amount of energy transferred will also be disrupted.
This is due to the fact that energy exchange requires physical contact to proceed.

Another example is of a man sitting in a moving train, if he extends his arm out of an
open window as the train passes slowly past a platform where an unsuspecting person is
standing, his hand will knock that person over. However, if he just realizes in time and
withdraws his arm back inside with a quick reflex action at the moment of contact, the
person on the platform will not feel the full force, which would knock him over, but rather
feel a slap, which is due to a partial force.

The length of time of physical contact in any collision can be a critical factor when
determining the amount of energy exchange.

Einstein overlooked this basic, but very important principle; he did not take into
account the variable of “collision contact time” when calculating the energy (or speed)
transferred to a photon of light from a moving source. Einstein presumed energy exchange

1
was instantaneous. It might seem instantaneous to man’s vision, but in sub-atomic terms of
nature instantaneous does not exist. All motion requires a finite time to proceed.

At this stage, I shall introduce two expressions:

1. “Ideal energy transfer period “(IETP) –which is the amount of time it takes for
complete energy transition through a medium where a maximum energy exchange
occurs without external interference of any sort.
2. “Actual energy transfer period” (AETP) – is the actual period of time in which energy
exchange proceeds prior to an interruption, where physical separation or
interference occurs.

When the AETP is less than the IETP, the energy transfer is incomplete; this means that
the time of contact determines how much energy is transferred.

Using an example involving light:

If one torch was placed flat on the surface of an airport runway and another identical
torch fastened to an airplane flying low over the runway. Then if at the very instant when
the two torches move into position perfectly in line where one is directly above the other,
both torches are simultaneously switched on. Hypothetically if time could be frozen with still
snap shots of the event. Then in one frame it would show the torches being in contact with
the emerging photons.

Stationary

Photons emerging

Moving

The next frame would show the very instant of separation where the photons break
free.

2
 Stationary

Photons break free from source

Moving

Both photons move away with what seems to be the same speed, which is the speed of
light.

Superimposing the photos reveals that the torches have remained motionless in the
same timeframe for separation to occur, or at least to the accuracy of human measurement.
On the other hand the photons have shown appreciable movement in breaking away from
the torches, as they move away with what is measured to be the same velocity.

How is this possible, that both photons possess the same velocity when one torch is
stationary and the other is moving at the speed of an airplane? The fact is; that hypothetical
infinitesimally small time frame where photons form and separation occurs represents the
energy transfer period. This is so insignificant that virtually no kinetic energy of the airplane
is transferred to the photon.

In other words kinetic energy travels at a much, much slower velocity than light. This
enables a photon’s electromagnetic propulsion to move away so fast that it abruptly
interrupts the normal passage of energy, so that virtually none is transferred.

This is the reason why the speed of light remains virtually constant irrespective of
whether its source is stationary or in motion. From the photons perspective, both sources
are essentially stationary in the time it takes for separation to occur. Keep in mind that the
photon itself possesses no initial starting velocity, since it does not exist before the fact and
instantaneously moves away at the speed of light upon formation. This makes it impossible
for the airplane’s energy to be significantly transferred to any emerging photon.
The insignificant increase in velocity, which is experienced by a photon, is virtually
impossible to detect at lower velocities.

There are two forms of energy transfer occurring. One is electrical in nature, where the
electromagnetic photon moves away at the speed of light. The other is mechanical in nature
where the airplane’s energy of motion is being transferred to the forming photon. This
involves a series of sub-atomic collisions which relay kinetic energy at the speed of sound.
This is my presumption since the passage of energy is accompanied by vibrations which in
turn produce sound.

3
 The kinetic energy of the airplane and the electromagnetic energy of the photon move
at vastly different velocities, and these variances must be taken into account before energy
transfer can be evaluated.

My crude experiment involving colliding ball bearings hanging off lengths of string, or
rows of marbles verified this.

ooo ooooooooooo ooo

Energy is shown to travel through the medium in parcels equal in dimension to the initial
group momentum. The emerging velocity is equal to the initial velocity minus energy lost to
friction. The time or rate of passage through a particular medium is constant; it is
irrespective of the starting velocity before the initial collision. This can be compared to the
speed of sound being constant in a particular medium irrespective of how loud it is. In this
ball bearings experiment, if any of the three balls are physically interrupted before the
energy is transferred, only partial transfer will occur.

If during this process of energy transfer, an abrupt physical separation occurs that
interrupts the passage of energy, then only a proportion of energy succeeds in getting
through. This is the amount of partial energy that will emerge in the final propulsion. It is
precisely what occurs when a photon’s independent propulsion of electromagnetism
abruptly interrupts the transfer of energy by causing physical separation.

From a different perspective, let’s consider a scenario where a blind person is slowly
walking along an airport runway, with a hypothetical ability to move away at the speed of
light should contact with an airplane occur. Then that person could not identify if an airplane
he brushed up against was in fact stationary on the runway or coming in for landing at a
speed of 2000 km/hr. The energy transfer time would be so infinitesimally small that
virtually no energy from the airplane could be transferred to that person in the time frame
in which he moves away at the speed of light. In effect the blind person could not tell if he
walked into a stationary airplane or if a moving airplane collided into him. This is why a
photon seems not to change its velocity when emerging from a flying airplane, there is no
significant force experienced, and therefore virtually no energy exchange; the photon moves
away under its own electromagnetic propulsion, which is at constant velocity in a specific
medium, plus a negligible partial kinetic energy acceleration derived from the sources
motion, which is impossible to detect at low speeds.

Let us now analyze the process at work in greater detail so that a quantitative
evaluation can be conducted. Envisage that torch attached to the airplane, which is in flight.

The photon is produced when charge is being released from an electron which is
changing orbitals. The charge is moving away at the speed of light even though the electron
may be changing orbitals at a considerably less speed. The time delay of the change in
orbital gives the photon a dimension of length; however it still moves away at the speed of
light, which is the speed at which charge can move.

4
 The photon is in contact with the atom at its source for the time it takes the electron to
change orbitals. This means that photons from different elements, apart from having
different wavelengths may have different dimensions of length. If this was to be the case
then photons of varied dimensions may absorb different percentages from the energy of a
moving source (such as an airplane). On the other hand charge may be independent as soon
as it is made, considerably before it forms the basic unit of light. From the moment of
creation a photon’s physical contact is initiated, so if the source is experiencing motion it
relays that energy to the photon during the energy transfer period, where contact is
maintained. Effectively the airplane is transferring its energy of motion to the photon at the
speed of sound, unless it is travelling faster than the speed of sound, in which case the
energy transfer rate is equivalent to the velocity of the airplane.

In the transfer of energy to a photon from a moving source, the rate or speed of energy
exchange is at least equal to the speed of sound “K”, which is a constant in a specific
medium.

The ideal energy transfer period from the airplane to the photon is equal to the time it
takes for the energy to achieve a full transition, this is normally the time it takes for the
speed of sound to travel the distance of the length of a photon.

The actual energy transfer period is equal to the time it takes for the photon to break
away. This is equivalent to the speed of light traveling the length of a photon at which stage
separation occurs and energy transfer ceases.

By dividing the actual energy transfer period (AETP) by the ideal energy transfer period
(IETP) the fraction of energy transfer (FET) can be calculated.

The amount of time of contact

Actual energy transfer period where energy is being transferred to a photon
Fraction of energy transfer= =
Ideal energy transfer period Time required for kinetic energy to be
#completely transferred to the photon

D/“C”
= = “K”/“C” where D= diameter (length) of a
photon. D/“K”

The amount of energy/speed transfer from an airplane to a photon= (“K”/“C”) “V”

where “V” is the velocity of the airplane.

This calculation holds true only until the speed of the moving source (the airplane) is
less than or equal to the speed of sound. From this point the energy is forcefully transferred
faster than the speed of sound. Jet fighters can travel many times the speed of sound, so we
need to make adjustments.

At speeds greater than “K” the speed of sound (the minimum speed of energy transfer)

5
 The fraction of energy/speed transferred = V/C where “V” is the velocity of airplane

Amount of energy/speed transferred = (V/C) V = V2 /C

If a jet travels at 2000 Km/hr approximately 0.6 Km/s

Amount of energy/speed transferred from the jet to the photon = 0.6 2 /C

Approximately equal to 1mm/s

A light from a jet will have a velocity of 300000km/s + 1mm/s

= 300000000.001 m/s

Such an increase in velocity is too small to measure in practice. However if the velocity
of motion is increased considerably that insignificant immeasurable change in velocity would
become large enough to become significant. For example if the source of light is travelling at
the speed of light then the amount of energy transferred = (C/C) C = C

This means that the whole velocity of “C” is transferred to the photon. So the photon
will emerge with a velocity of 2“C”, twice the speed of light.

At this point I can only conclude that Einstein did not understand the reasoning behind
the constancy of the speed of light. If it was understood it would not have been necessary to
introduce the principle of time dilation. Time dilation is the reasoning behind the theory of
relativity, in my opinion it is a false theory.

One of the major justifications of this theory of relativity is the prediction and
subsequent verification that gravity could bend light.

This new theory, which I would like to name it after myself as the Stratos Lafcharis
Aristomenis theory of light, the S.L.A. theory as I call it, clearly explains these phenomena,
along with all the other properties, with the simplicity and reliability of commonly accepted
physics laws. If we refer back, the reason why light does not achieve a total transfer of
energy from a moving source is due to the inadequate energy transfer period.

However gravitational force is somewhat different in its effect. The force is continual
and applies over an extended period of time and distance. This enlarges the energy transfer
period enabling a complete energy exchange to occur. A photon which is moving in a
perpendicular direction to a gravitational force field experiences a continual force over a
significant period of time.

Gravitational field

Photon

6
 This enables energy exchange to accelerate the photon and therefore deflects the path
of motion. It is a natural interaction with an ideal energy transfer period that enables a
complete energy exchange. This means that even though a gravitational force is very weak
when compared to the velocity of an airplane, the energy transfer period is adequate in
enabling complete energy exchange to occur. For this reason gravity can and does accelerate
light causing a deviation in its intended path. The gravitational effect on light is rather
difficult to notice. This is because of its immense velocity, relative to the minor
perpendicular displacement that the gravitational field applies to it.

The resulting curvature is very slight even though the acceleration is perpendicular to
the direction of the normally straight motion of light. It requires immense distances before
the small deviation goes off track by a margin which is large enough to notice.

There is a possibility that light may slow down or accelerate depending on its direction
when it is travelling parallel to a gravitational field. It is not clear, but at the very best would
be virtually impossible to measure since there would be no deviation to make it easily
recognizable.

New properties of light due to the S.L.A. theory

Light no longer possess mystical properties, according to the S.L.A. theory, light
responds normally and abides totally with the laws of physics. The conservation of energy is
upheld between light and a moving source; it just requires the variable of the energy
transfer period to be taken into account.

How does this affect the properties of light? Light still possess a constant velocity of
300000 Km/sec, in a vacuum; but only relative to its source. Light does not have a constant
velocity in all inertial frames of reference, it can and does experience acceleration.

The level of energy exchange is determined by the Stratos conversion factor.

Actual energy transfer period/ ideal energy transfer period.

If the value of the converting factor is less than one, the energy exchange is incomplete
and not “ideal”, so only partial energy is exchanged.

There are two possible formulas for the” Stratos Converting Factor.”

At speed below that of sound KV/C

At speeds above that of sound V2/C

Where “K” is the constant of the speed of sound; “V” is the velocity of the moving
source; and “C” is the constant speed of light.

Notice how, at lower speeds the” Stratos Converting Factor” has an infinitesimal small
value. This is the reason why Einstein was not able to detect any changes in the velocity of
light. The speed changes are so small, that in most cases we are talking about fractions of a
millimeter being added to a value of 300000 Km/sec.

7
 However at speeds nearing the velocity of light, the” Stratos Converting Factor”
suddenly takes on a sizeable significant value , which eventually translates into a total
transfer of speed when its source reaches a velocity of “C”.

Effects due to the S.L.A. theory of light

What changes are brought about by the understanding that a photon’s velocity is
dependent on the “Stratos Converting Factor” to determine its velocity? And what
predictions can it make?

First of all science may one day be able to distinguish accurate measurements of light in
order to verify individual relative motion.

Present logic suggests that the speed of light is constant in all inertial frames of
reference. This means that individual speeds of converging or diverging objects in space are
difficult to measure.

Secondly, if we are moving at the speed of light, it would be impossible to see any
stationary objects at the rear. Alternatively any objects diverging at the speed of light would
be invisible to each other, as the light will never catch up.

This is a very significant finding as it predicts the existence of the so called black holes in
the universe. They are simply heavenly bodies such as stars which are moving away from
earth at speeds equal to or greater than the speed of light. Their existence can only be
noticed by the deflection of light rays from stars further back; but whose light can and does
reach us.

As further proof of the S.L.A. theory’s interpretation of a black hole; a scientific finding
claims that a black hole was in fact emitting light in a cyclic time scale. If this claim is true it
cannot be explained by general relativity theory that forbids light to escape. My theory finds
this totally possible and logical; it would mean that a star is moving away from the Earth at
or just over the speed of light. Meanwhile any violent eruption from the surface of the star
in the direction of the Earth would result in flashes of light moving faster than the general
background light speed. The cyclic time scale of intermittent flashes would mean that the
star is rotating so that the flare up is noticeable in regular cyclic intervals.

This interpretation where light does not possess a constant velocity has ramifications on
how we perceive the universe; it now depends on the absolute motion of the Earth and its
relationship to the environment around it.

This suggests that events could appear speeded up or slowed down, depending on
whether objects are converging or diverging at speed.

The S.L.A. theory predicts the possible existence of flickering or twinkling stars. Stars
which otherwise may normally exhibit consistent brightness and glow may appear to flicker
in the distance. This is because when objects are moving closer together at considerable
speed, any gradual fluctuations of light intensity over extended periods of time would
appear as sudden contrasts in quick succession.

8
 I am not absolutely certain that such stars exist, but it seems reasonable. Further more
it is important to appreciate that while a moving source of light only transfers a fraction of
its moving velocity to the emitting photons of light, any object which is converging towards
that oncoming light and receives it, will experience a change in the oncoming light’s velocity,
which is directly proportional and equivalent to the speed at which the receiver is moving
towards that oncoming light.

Visa versa for objects which are moving apart at considerable speed, events will appear
in slow motion. This is the outcome of light taking progressively longer to reach its
destination.

In effect the individual participants of converging and diverging objects experience light
quite differently. The moving source has an indirect influence on the velocity of the light it
emits; while at its destination, any motion of the object receiving that light has a direct
influence on the speed at which it experiences the light’s oncoming velocity.

If the S.L.A. theory is correct, then it can be expected to reveal differences when light is
travelling between two converging or diverging objects.

This is exactly what occurs in the Doppler Effect; where the wavelengths of light
coming from galaxies which are moving away from us, appear elongated and in the red
spectrum; where as light coming from galaxies which are moving towards us posseses
wavelengths which appear compressed in the blue range of the spectrum.

Once a particular spectrum or wavelengths of light are emitted, any observer would
receive them in the same order and magnitude; unless there is some outside influence such
as a transition through a different medium. Light cannot change its wavelength midstream
without some outside influence. This can only be brought about by either a change in
velocity of the light itself, or of the velocity of the observer receiving that light.

In other words, If a specific light is perceived to posses varying wavelengths, as a direct

result of a change in direction; then it is only reasonable to conclude that the relative speed
and direction influence either the actual velocity of light emitted from its source; or
otherwise the speed at which an observer perceives that light to be travelling at.

The puzzling factor in all of this; is that both wavelengths do travel at the speed of light.
So how can this be explained? Once light is emitted, one wavelength cannot be transformed
into another wavelength without outside influence. This means that either the direction of
motion of the source of light influences the wavelengths being emitted or otherwise the
directional motion of the observer. It is possible that both occur simultaneously. The
Doppler Effect is in total agreement and even predicted by the S.L.A. theory. Motion
associated to any source emitting light has an indirect relationship to the velocity of that
light, according to the energy conversion factor. On the other hand any motion by an
observer has a direct relationship to the perceived velocity of that light being received.
Perceived velocity takes into account both the velocity of light as well as the velocity of the
observer by combining their individual relative speeds.

9
 Einstein’s theory of relativity is based on the assumption that the velocity of light
remains constant in all frames of reference. This would make the Doppler Effect impossible.
Time dilation offers an explanation for this phenomenon, using a logic which is not
applicable to anything we know and understand in the world around us; basically it is a
hypothetical solution that seems to fit where all else fails. The S.L.A. theory achieves virtually
the same results, in explaining all the complexities of the phenomenon, however achieves it
using conventional physics law. The same rules which govern the everyday world around us,
apply equally as well to the micro world of photons and light. If the S.L.A. theory is found to
be correct their will be undeniable consistency throughout the whole universe.

The Predicted Variable Velocity Of Light Using The Doppler Effect

1/ Galaxies moving towards us exhibit wavelengths of light which are blue shifted as
compared to a normal spectrum of light. When these wavelengths are compared it gives an
indication of their relative speeds.

Blue shift red shift

If normal light has an average wavelength of 5.87x10-7 m (mid yellow)

And a blue shifted spectrum light has an average wavelength of 4.9x10-7 m (green
light)

Then the ratio between their values gives an indication of there relative velocities

The percentage increase in the light’s velocity attributed to the relative motions of the
galaxy to the Earth is -:

= (5.87-4.9) 10-7 /5.87x 10-7 x100/1

= 16.5%

This is surprisingly large as it translates to

300,000x16/100

= 48,000 km/sec

This means that the Earth is moving towards the galaxy at 48,000 km/sec.

10
 OR ALTERNATIVELY

The galaxy is moving away from us at-:

(“V”)2/“C” = 48,000

“V” = √ (48,000 x 300,000) =120,000km/sec

In reality proportions of each of the above velocities may be applicable, relative to their
individual motions.

2/ Galaxies which are moving away from us exhibit spectrums with a red shift. This light
has elongated wavelengths.

If this red shift has an average wavelength of 6.2x 10-7 m

When compared to normal light of average wavelength 5.87x 10-7 m

This represents a (6.2-5.87)10-7 /5.87x10-7 =5.96% decrease in the velocity when

compared to normal light.

This means that either the Earth is moving away from the Galaxy at a speed of

300,000x5.96/100 =17,880km/sec

OR ALTERNATIVELY

The Galaxy is moving away from us at a speed of “V”

(“V”)2/“C” =17,880

“V” =73,239km/sec

Once again differing proportions may apply depending on their relative motions.

It is interesting to note that the immense difference in velocity between Galaxies

moving towards or away from our Earth; may be due to the possibility that the Earth is
moving in the same direction as the majority of the Galaxies moving away from us. It would
also suggest the existence of a variance in the depth of the red shift, and for that matter the
blue shift as well; to represent the extent of the relative individual motions.

The Stratos Lafcharis Aristomenis theory of light explains the multitude of

inconceivable properties of light with the reliability of conventional physics law.

It explains the perceived constant of the speed of light, while at the same time abiding
by the conservation of energy principle, which is so prevalent and accurate in our everyday
world.

11
 Secondly it explains gravity’s ability to deflect the path of light.

Thirdly it justifies the existence of the Doppler Effect.

Fourth, it predicts the existence of invisible black holes and flickering stars.

Finally! Einstein’s interpretation of gravity which involves time and space being
interlinked and warped around larger objects is in question. This interpretation, as illogical
as it may seem, does offer an explanation to gravitational force. However in my view it fails
to explain the existence of dual ocean high tides at opposite sides of the globe; especially
when all the objects causing it, such as the Sun and the Moon both exist on the one side of
the planet. In other words, if space is warped as Einstein suggests; then all the pulling force
is in one direction, and there should be no pulling tendency to produce a high tide on the
other side of the Earth. It is rather like placing a full glass of water on a slope and finding out;
that water is spilling out from both ends, with and against the slope, both at the same time.

OCEAN
TIDE

MOON
EARTH
GLASS
SUN

This cannot be explained; so Einstein’s warping of space and time breaks down when applied
to the duality of tides at opposite sides of the Earth.

I have reason to believe that gravitational force has magnetic origins. It is derived from
my theories on magnetism, and atomic structure. They are much more involved; explaining
magnetism in all its forms and properties with incredible detail. These laws of magnetism
reveal the structure of the atom so precisely that it includes the nucleus. I am not in a
position to reveal these presently, but over ten years of work is involved. The S.L.A theory is
relatively simple; it took about 3 to 6 months (over 10 years ago) to establish, as did a more
recent theory of mine which concerns the Coriolis force. This is based partly on a very
comprehensive yet different logic than currently available for the East West Coriolis Effect; I
will soon make it available for scrutiny.

Essentially this logic is consistent in explaining the close-up nuclear forces and the origin
of gravitational force, and the dual ocean tides at opposite ends of the globe.

Einstein’s theory of relativity seems too unconventional and rather illogical; it is rather
fanciful creativity which is molded to suit. It is time to investigate the velocity of light, incase

12
it does abide by the normal conventional laws of physics as the S.L.A. theory suggests. If is
proven to be correct, it would represent reliable consistency throughout the whole universe.

-----------------------------------------------------

The Michelson-Morley interferometer experiment (so often used to prove that light has
a constant velocity) using a light source and an array of perpendicular mirrors is inconclusive
if we take into account the S.L.A. theory. This is because any physical speed of the Earth is
virtually not transferred to the photon due to the energy transfer period. On the other hand
the movement of the mirror away from the photon has a direct influence on the speed at
which it experiences the oncoming light as it is moving away from it. This is measurable even
though it is in such a small time scale. However any such difference is cancelled out on the
return journey when the opposing mirror is moving in the opposite direction towards the
photon at the same pace; these actions cancel each other out, so effectively the only
difference in velocity between the perpendicular mirror paths is the ratio of speed of Earth’s
rotation to the speed of light, which is so insignificantly small in percentage terms that it is
likely the wavelengths of the two light beams may still be relatively in phase with each other
and therefore undistinguishable.

Before finishing, I must include a segment about the precise clocks which Einstein
predicted to differ when velocity and altitude are taken into account. I am not particularly
familiar with the process; however, it seems plausible that other factors may be responsible
for the discrepancy. Since these clocks utilize vibrational measurements, any elevation
change would alter the gravitational force and thereby influence the effective weight.
Heavier objects require greater energy to initiate any motion or vibration (this is why the
same mass is easier to move on the moon because of the weaker gravitational force). Lighter
matter is likely to vibrate faster. This means that greater vibrations will occur in a lighter
object when compared to a heavier object. Greater numbers of vibrations mean that the
ratio of vibrations to time becomes larger. In other words if one second is measured as a
specific number of vibrations, and vibrations are quicker, then one second will occur in a
slightly quicker period.

In point form it can be portrayed as:

Higher elevation produces weaker gravity

Weaker gravity lowers the effective weight of matter

Lighter matter vibrates faster than heavier matter
Higher elevation vibrates matter faster than lower elevation
Clocks at higher elevation go faster than lower elevation

For this reason clocks speed up and go faster at higher elevations.

Another factor is that of centrilfugal force; any velocity around the Earth would
experience this force. Centrilfugal force effectively compresses matter so that the atoms
become confined and move closer together, similar to what occurs in a centrifuge.
This contraction inhibits and limits the available space so vibrations become less
pronounced with a shorter return time. This would have the effect of increasing the
vibration rate and results in the clock time going slightly faster.

13
 There is also a very important influence which is derived from the East West Coriolis
force; it is completely different from all the Coriolis forces I have reviewed (including
internet search). It will be explained in detail in a forthcoming article sometime in the future.
It reveals forces likely to cause the discrepancy between the clocks flying in opposite
directions around the Earth. I firmly believe that each of these factors combine to explain all
the time anomalies associated to motion and elevation. If this is accepted by science, then it
will discredit another justification of the special relativity theory. 

Applications and comparisons between the general relativity theory and the S.L.A theory

Here, we shall now look at examples, using Einstein’s theory of relativity and then
compare them with the logic of the S.L.A. theory.

A mirror is fixed to the ceiling of a moving train. Two observers are positioned
separately, so as to compare what they see. Inside the carriage is a seated person with a
flash light facing the mirror on the ceiling. On the outside is a stationary person with a clear
view of events.

The current logic based on Einstein’s theory of relativity, states that each person sees
the light travelling along different pathways unequal in distance, yet in the same period of
time. To explain this, Einstein concluded that time dilates as motion tends towards the
speed of light.
mirror
Flash light

A
Person A sees the light go straight up and down.

At the same time person B sees the same light travel the angled path below

d’

B
Notice how the distance d is shorter than d’. This is why Einstein
concluded person A and person B experience the same light covering different distances in
the same time scale. So if light was to have a constant velocity, then time must change to

14
allow for the differences. Einstein’s explanation is unconventional which goes against all the
laws of physics.

We shall re-visit the same example using the Stratos Lafcharis Aristomenis theory of
light.

The S.L.A. theory offers an explanation which abides by these laws of physics.
Essentially only a very small fraction of the velocity of the carriage is transferred to the
motion of the photon. This is because the energy transfer period is disrupted by the self
propulsion of the photon. That is; the photon has its own independent electromagnetism
which propels itself to leave its source before all the energy from the moving carriage can be
transferred to it. Once the photon moves away it breaks contact and is totally independent
and not responsive to the train motion. In the time taken for the photon to be produced and
break free, any motion experienced by its source is transferred directly to the photon by way
of energy. However, the magnitude of this energy and motion is so insignificantly small that
it cannot be measured at the speed of the train; nevertheless it does exist and is directed
towards the forward motion of the train. When the photon reaches the mirror, the process
repeats itself when contact is made. In between collisions the photon is totally independent
and moves at a constant velocity.

In reality the photon’s path can be described as having partial energy transfer in the
direction of the train’s motion, but it is insignificant because the Stratos transfer fraction is
so infinitesimally small. It, then, continues in a straight line until the next collision with the
mirror. This causes another partial energy transfer, then rebounds and continues in another
straight line.

If the photon only receives a very insignificant fraction of the carriage’s velocity; it
means person “A” in the carriage is actually moving faster than the photon in the direction
of the moving train.

This means that although the photon is moving slightly but insignificantly to the right,
the person A notices it moving towards the left of the carriage, heading behind him. As the
photon strikes the mirror the photon continues moving towards the back for the same
reason. Photon mirror

A Photon

15
 Person “B”, stationary outside, can see the carriage moving towards the right, however
the photon is still noticed going towards the back of the carriage towards person “A”. The
photon is moving slightly but insignificantly towards the right of vertical, but due to the
faster actual velocity of the train, he notices the photon heading towards the left of the
carriage, since the carriage is moving to the right with velocity “V”.

In actual fact both persons “A” and “B” see the light moving along the exact same
pathways and in the exact same time. In reality the photon is moving straight up with an
insignificant lean to the right, however both “A” and “B” see the photon moving towards the
back of the carriage. In fact it is the carriage moving towards the right, as the photon moves
up and down. This indicates that light behaves normally with respect to the S.L.A. theory, its
motion is exactly the same in all inertial frames of reference.

---------------------------------------------------------

The next example once again involves a moving carriage; in the middle of this carriage is
a passenger. At either end of the carriage there is a torch facing the center. Both torches are
switched on simultaneously. The light from the right will reach the passenger first. This is
because, even though the light from the left is moving faster than the light from the right
towards the center, the Stratos conversion factor signifies that the energy transfer to the
light ray is insignificant compared to the motion of the train. This means the passenger is
moving faster to the right photon even though the left photon has a slight insignificant
greater velocity.

The incomplete energy transfer of the train’s motion is responsible for the passenger
moving faster than the photon’s energy convection velocity.

>>>>>>>>>>>>> “V”
A
>

>>>>>>> < < < < <

“X” << “Y”

16
 The frequency of arrows symbolizes the relative velocities of all the participants which
takes into account the velocity of the train. In terms of the stationary person “B”; the light
from the left side will reach him first before that of the right side. This is because the left
side light rays have a very slightly insignificant faster velocity than the rays from the right.
Keep in mind the differences are totally insignificant in magnitude at actual train speeds.
This is in accordance with the Stratos energy conversion factor.

Note:

If the train could travel at half the speed of light“C”, the outcome would become more
obvious. At these speeds the changing velocities of light would become noticeable in
accordance with the Stratos converting factor.

“C”/2
0.5“C”
A CC
1.5“C” 0.5“C”

X Y
θ θ

B
If all the velocities are taken into account:

Person A will see light from torches “X” and “Y” at the same time.

Person B will see light from torch “X” at a velocity of 1.5“C”tanθ and light from “Y” at a
velocity of 0.5“C”tanθ.

Using the S.L.A. theory each and every motion is taken into account; adding or
subtracting their velocities in accordance with the conservation of energy principle.

At slow speeds the very small Stratos converting factor makes any changes in velocity
insignificant and very difficult to measure. This is why light seems to possess a constant
velocity.

Einstein’s theory seems too unconventional and therefore in my opinion very unlikely;
time dilation is an untested mystical solution to a real event. The S.L.A. theory of light
explains the same phenomenon using tried and tested conventional physics law. At the very
least the S.L.A. theory offers an alternative to Einstein’s theory of relativity; experiments will
one day prove or disprove its validity.

17
 In conclusion the S.L.A. theory of light offers a different perspective which rivals that of
Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. It justifies the perceived constant velocity of light in a manner
which upholds the conservation of energy principle; and in doing so predicts the existence of
the so called black holes, flickering stars, and the Doppler Effect. On the other hand it brings
into question, the Special Relativity Theory by justifying the discrepancies of time as being
unassociated; while at the same time redefining gravitational force in a manner which does
not require the warping of space and time, and is consistent in terms of explaining the dual
nature of ocean tides. This S.L.A. theory is very logical and represents a real and orderly
consistency that applies equally across the whole Universe.

I hope and trust S.L.A. theory offers a new perspective about light. I do not pretend to
be an expert on the subject, there are bound to be some very basic mistakes. However, from
a theoretical viewpoint it seems to carry some merit, which offers a viable alternative to
Einstein’s theory of relativity.

Thank you for your time and look forward to any feedback on the subject.

Stratos Lafcharis, Melbourne, 17/10/2009.

18
19