Cook's Relativity

While some may read over Jeff Cook's New Electrogravity Theory equations and still wonder to his or herself, what does all this really mean for Physics if anything? If Stephan Hawkings were reading over it, however, surely his wheels would be turning at light speed. One should pick up Einstein's short book once again, "Relativity: the Special and General Theory," and take a look at some of the theorist's own interpretations.

Just a few quotes by Einstein in this text regarding the velocity of light in regards to his example of the uniformly moving train (carriage) on the embankment:

1) "The velocity W of the man relative to the embankment is here replaced by the velocity of light relative to the embankment. w is the required velocity of light with respect to the carriage, and we have w = c - v. The velocity of propagation of a ray of light relative to the carriage thus comes out smaller than c. But this result comes into conflict with the principle of relativity set forth in Section V." - Einstein

Einstein goes on to explain how there really is no conflict due to the time-relative nature of his theory. And Cook would agree there is no conflict.

Cook equations' response to the conflict: no conflict in the first place, according to the Quantum Terminal Velocity Function of equations (58) & (59). It appears that Einstein is not sharing with the reader that w = c - v = c + v / i in accordance with standard Complex Arithmetic rules, which came into the picture long before Einstein. The light is being refracted in a curved motion respective to the carriage. The speed of light is still constant from the train's POV, but due to the Doppler effect, coupled with Cook's equations, the ray is experiencing a spectral shift to a lower wavelength. However, from an observer 90 degrees ahead of the ray, in equal relationship, the shift would be to a higher wavelength. The identical explanation is known to today's physicists (much thanks though to Einstein's theory) when an object passes into a black hole, it appears to fade out and slow down from the POV of an outside observer, as the object accelerates toward the singularity away from the observer. However, 90 degrees away from that distance, an observer would be seeing light refracted to the higher spectrum--up to the wavelength in the gamma range.

No problem really so far, but Mr. Cook would be watching carefully Einstein's interpretations further to see what other aspects arise from the fact that Einstein left out the Imaginary value in the first place.

2) "The theorem of the addition of velocities derived in Section VI becomes invalid." - Einstein

This comment would be what Cook's equations would catch.

Cook equations' response to the validity of added velocities: the addition of velocities from Classical Mechanics is not invalid if one remembers to always include Imaginary values in his or her studies.

Einstein then uses the Lorentz Transformation, which is right up the alley of the NET.

3) "For the relative orientation in space of the co-ordinate systems indicated in the diagram (Fig.2), this problem is solved by means of the equations:

[Where t is time.]" - Einstein

Cook equations' response to the above solution : In accordance with the NET, x - vt = x + v / i, but the equation means the same thing, interpretational results that would follow, however, may differ.

4) "The Galilei transformation can be obtained from the Lorentz transformation by substituting an infinitely large value for the velocity of light c in the latter transformation." - Einstein

Cook equations' response to the two transformations: the Galilei transformation would actually converge quite nicely upon the Imaginary phase velocity, taking into account Complex values, and not become infinite the least bit; one cannot at all substitute c for an infinite value. In other words, by using Complex arithmetic, the Lorentz and Galilei transformation lead to the same result.

Moving along now to the behavior of measuring-rods and clocks in motion...