Revisiting Emitter theory and Neutral Pion Decay

According to the Emitter theory, the velocity of an emitted particle is influenced by the velocity of its source. For example a bullet fired from a moving gun (from the top of a moving train) travels at a higher velocity than when it gets fired from a stationary gun. Of course this is what most of us would think to happen with any particle or projectile in our everyday life. So when a photon gets emitted from a decaying pion travelling at velocity ‘v’, relativists predicted that, if light particles behave like any other particles, the emitted photon would travel at a speed of ‘c+v’. But apparently the emitted photons from the decaying pions only travelled at velocity ‘c’ irrespective of the pion’s velocity. Hence relativists concluded that the speed of light is indeed constant and is not affected by that of the source.

Let’s now explore the truth without being biased by the scientific superstitions.

Is Emitter theory true?

Contrary to the commonly held belief, the velocity of an emitted body doesn’t get boosted by the motion of its source. And there is nothing special about photons in that regard.

To realise that, imagine a golf player standing on the top of a stationary train and hitting a golf ball. Imagine that the ball travels at 10meters/sec eastward. Now imagine that the train moves at 5meters/sec towards the east and the golfer hits another identical ball with exactly the same force as before. According to the Emitter theory, the golf ball should now travel at 15meters/sec with respect to a stationary observer. But it doesn’t because the ball now faces more resistance from air winds. As the source (which includes the train, the golfer and the golf ball) moves at 5meters/sec, it experiences winds coming from the opposite direction at the same speed i.e. 5meters/sec. So the golf ball now has to travel against strong winds unlike the situation when the train was stationary. And the faster the train moves, the stronger will be the winds, the more will the resistance to the ball and hence the slower will be the launching speed of the golf ball.

Similarly as the pion moves at velocity ‘v’ in the Ether medium, it feels Ether wind ‘blowing’ in the opposite direction at the same velocity. And this Ether wind offers more frictional force to the emitted photon. That explains why the speed of an emitted photon remains the same whether it gets emitted from a slow moving pion or a fast moving pion.

Having said that, Emitter theory holds true in one special scenario – when the golfer hits the golf ball inside the compartment of a moving train, the ball travels at a higher velocity. The reason is obvious- air resistance remains the same inside the compartment whether a train is moving or stationary. We can call this as ‘frame dragging’ though relativists may have a delusional description for the phrase.

Where were the photons before they got emitted from the pion?

Or from where do the photons come into existence when the pions decay?

When JJ Thompson observed beta rays being emitted from the ‘indivisible’ atoms, he didn’t make the stupid assumption that the rays suddenly popped into existence from nowhere by some divine synthesis. Rather he rightly concluded that these rays (later identified as electrons) must be coming from inside the atoms and hence must have existed inside them before the decay process. This was at a time when atoms were considered as fundamental and indivisible. Obviously an atom (or any object) can’t release something without being in possession of the same.

But when an electron releases a photon as it jumps to a lower energy level, or when a pion emits a photon as it decays, why don’t we apply the same simple logic? Why don’t the scientific folk think that the photons must have to be inside their ‘parental’ particles first, before they can get released or ‘fired’? Of course doing so would destroy their beautiful and mesmerising theory of relativity. So they feel comfortable by just saying- ‘a photon gets released’ or ‘photon just pops in’ etc and never try to clarify from exactly where and how that photon comes into existence.

The so called fundamental and indivisible particles may not actually be fundamental and indivisible. They could well have some internal architecture and composition, and photons may well be part of their internal milieu. We simply consider some particles as fundamental because we have not been able to ‘peep’ into these tiny particles. But our inabilities as humans can’t be sworn upon as Nature’s laws. The fact that photons get released during the decay of the ‘indivisible’ neutral pions indicates that the photons must be existing inside the pions in some yet undetectable format/ arrangement.

As pointed above, relativists won’t accept the above logical argument because that will destroy their superstition of constant speed of light – If photons are ‘allowed’ to exist inside the pions before getting emitted, then their relative velocity with respect to the pion before the decay would become zero and not ‘c’ (just like how a horse’s velocity with respect to the ‘horse-rider system’ would be zero).

‘Particle engines’

Imagine a horse that normally runs at a velocity of 10meters/sec. And imagine that the horse is made use of to ‘drive’ a cart. Obviously the horse can’t drive the cart faster than its lone velocity. Say for example the horse-cart moves at a velocity of 8 meters/sec. Now imagine that the horse gets ‘released’ from the cart and runs on its own. What would the velocity of the horse now? Obviously it would only run at its normal velocity i.e. 10 meters/sec. It would be stupid to apply the emitter principle here and expect the horse’s velocity to get boosted by the cart’s velocity.

Similarly imagine that a spaceship (pion) is flying at a speed of say 1000meters/sec with the help of 4 rocket engines (photons). If one of the rockets gets detached, this detached rocket will only fly at its own speed and will not get ‘boosted’ by the spaceship’s motion.

We believe that photons are the fundamental particles of energy. So it is logical to imagine them as providing the driving force to various particles of the quantum world, whether it is electrons or neutral pions or others. Obviously for any mass or particle to move through space, it needs energy. Because we believe that photons are the fundamental particles of energy, it must obviously be these particles which are responsible for the motion of any object at the most fundamental level. In other words, photons must be seen as the engines of the quantum world.

So when a particle decays, photons do not get ‘ejected’ but just get freed. And just like how a horse’s velocity doesn’t get boosted by the velocity of the cart it was driving, a photon’s velocity can’t get boosted by the velocity of the particle that it was moving.

Go to Next Page

Go to Previous Page

Go to Main Index

Comments

  • Harold Johnson  On December 5, 2014 at 8:36 am

    “As pointed above, relativists won’t accept the above logical argument because that will destroy their superstition of constant speed of light – If photons are ‘allowed’ to exist inside the pions before getting emitted, then their relative velocity with respect to the pion before the decay would become zero and not ‘c’ (just like how a horse’s velocity with respect to the ‘horse-rider system’ would be zero).”

    I talked to one of my profs (more than one actually) about this not too long ago. When exactly is the photon emitted? Are we to deduce that its speed ‘c’ is reached instantly upon being emitted?
    The answers to both were, 1) Heisenberg’s uncertainty says we don’t know exactly when, and 2) it is instantaneous.

    I get the first answer because that’s where physics’ understanding is today, though I’m not sold on it as the correct answer and even my prof admitted he suspects there is a missing link somewhere but its the best we’ve got until further notice.

    I don’t buy the second answer and that prof never explained further. I’ll probably ask him about it again tomorrow just for thought’s sake, now that’s its on my mind.

    Like

  • Galacar  On December 5, 2014 at 12:07 pm

    to Harold Johnson

    Good thing you do! However,keep in mind that it is the prof’s job to sell you this rubbish! NOT finding any truth! want to know about this statement, read prof Dingle’s book : “Science at the crossroads”
    As I said before ‘science’ has nothing to do with finding the truth and anything to do with hiding or keeping us away any truth.
    It is a pity these prof’s get paid so much. That is not because they are ‘good’ or something. They are paid very verry well because they are obedient, And because of their post they can steer ‘public opnion’ . That they are being paid for! I can talk for ours on this one alone!!!

    Like

  • Sourav Ghosh  On April 11, 2016 at 9:13 pm

    So you are telling that the particle will emmit at a speed of c+v without aether but with aether it will emit at a speed c. Aether will diminish its speed by an amount v.Funny thing is that if this explanation is true then the speed of the photon for an observer in the source will see the speed at c-v but in reality he will see c

    Also if that is true then aether will slow earths rotation as a result earth will fall in
    sun in a spiral motion

    Like

  • John Davis  On May 10, 2016 at 11:45 am

    This video is pretty interesting. It talks about magnetons being the carriers of photons.

    Skip to 2:08 to hear him talk about light being carried by Magnetons.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s