Ignored factors on speed of light

It is an excepted fact that speed of light is constant in vacuum. It's it correct? I find following factors are ignored. In physics the word speed is rarely mentioned accept in special relativity. The usual word is velocity. Velocity is speed with direction. Speed of a car is mentioned when the car travels in an irregular route, dividing the distance traveled from the time taken. Speed is a loose concept, most physics equations have velocity.

It is an accepted fact that speed of light varies with the medium. It is slower in air than in vacuum, then much slower in water. According to quantum theory vacuum is not wholly void. Dark matter and dark energy can also be present. To use in an universal theory like special relativity, it should be more constant.

So far all accurate measurement of speed of light was done by measuring light from a fixed source and a fixed observer, with no displacement between the source and observer. Michelson interferometer is used to prove nonexistence of a medium to transport electromagnetic waves. It also proves that light had a fixed velocity when the source and observer are fixed, but both moves in unison.

It is a fundamental mistake to jump into the conclusion that speed of light is  constant everywhere. For instance light coming from the sun when it moves towards us may be faster than when it moves out. These need to be checked before coming to a conclusion.

Red shift of stars may be explained by time dilation and length contraction, but a simpler explanation may be variance of velocity of light. (It may not be exotic, it may be mundane, and it may be correct)

In explanations of special relativity observer and source of light are very loosely defined. For instance in the explanation of lightning striking at two ends of the train, the source can be fixed to the platform or may be moving with the train. These two factors are irrelevant to the outcome of the thought experiment.
Further the observer on the platform sees the two lighting strikes are simultaneous, but for the observer on the train the lightning in front occurs before the lightning the rear. This can be explained by light from front travels faster than the light from rear. Special relativity uses time dilation and length contraction to explain this. But is it necessary? There can't be a correlation between the two observers because each observer sees different set of photons in there respective observations.

Velocity of light may be constant with respect of the source, irrespective of it's movement. But in special relativity it is loosely defined, that it is constant both to source and observer irrespective to the movement between the observer and source. The reason that it will give contradictions is, it is possible to have multiple observers that move relative to each other and observing the same source(say different persons who move about each other looking at the sun ). Then how can it be speed of light is constant between each pair?

It may be difficult but not impossible to measure velocity of light that come from moving stars. This measurement should be pure. In this measurement you cannot use mirrors, because the source can shift to the mirror. A photon is emitted when electron changes it's obit. This photon is related to the atom that emits it. We need to see velocity of this photon by a moving observer. If the photon is disturbed in any way the source might shift, therefore we need to be careful in this measurement. I feel most of the measurements done up to now has ignored this factor.

Special Relativity Flawed

It can be proved that Special Relativity Flawed.
Take the basic example of a photon emitted in a frame:
Frame example

Moving Observer
a frame AB moves at a velocity v, emits a photon -- photon is more accurate than a light signal. After time t the photon arrives at D since the frame has now moved to CD. All this activity is relative to an observer standing on the frame AB/CD, that moves at velocity v with the frame.

With respect to the observer on the frame
We can safely state r = c * t where c is the velocity of light (r - size of the frame). Since light travels at velocity c for any observer -- Michelson Morly Experiment.

With respect of the stationary observer standing outside the frame
Here again velocity of light is the constant c. Light photon will be moving from point at Aο and reach point Bο after time tο. Though at the same time, point B will start moving to D, this needs to be disregarded, since point B or D has no bearing or relevance to the stationary observer. This important phenomena, is missed by Special Relativity activists, they assume that, light coming from point Aο, is going to point D, moving at velocity c with respect of the stationary observer.

The mistake
This is wrong. Light travels at constant velocity c to the stationary observer, but not in respect to moving point B--as said earlier, point B is irrelevant to stationary observer. The Special Relativists argue that according to the stationary observer light will travel from A with velocity c, while point B of the frame  will move to point D, independent of the in coming light photon. Therefore the light photon will have to travel additionally a distance s to reach D. This is an unnecessary assumption. While traveling observer can consider light travel from A to D the stationary observer sees the same photon -- or with quantum theory different photon emitted almost at same time-- traveling from point A to B.

This mistaken argument results, either velocity of light should be c+v or frame AB need to contract or time need to dilate. But since velocity of light is constant the frame should contract and time need to dilate. Therefore moving frames contract. And time tο for stationary observer will be different from time t of the moving observer.

(It may look strange but putting the arguments to language is really difficult)

Mirror Example
A frame consisting with two parallel mirrors that has a light source directed up--this is a light clock, will be moving forward at velocity v

Scenario 1  c & d - invariant and t -variant (The normal accepted principal of Special Relativity)

2d = c tο ---------------(1)

         __________

d = √c²t²/4 – v²t²/4

            ______

= tc/2 √1-v²/c² ---------- (2)

                     _____

c tο/2 = tc/2√1-v²/c²

          ______

tο = t √1-v²/c²      ------ (accepted time dilation formula in Special Relativity)

 Scenario 2  t & d - invariant and c -variant (velocities greater than c exist Principal )

2d = cο t ---------------(1)

         __________

d = √c²t²/4 – v²t²/4

            ______

= tc/2 √1-v²/c² ---------- (2)

                     _____

cο t/2 = tc/2√1-v²/c²

            ____

  cο =  √c²-v²
  cο² =  c²-v²
        _______
c = √ cο²  + v²       -----------(velocities greater than c exist Principal )

 Scenario 3  t & c - invariant and d -variant (Space Contraction Principal)

2dο = c t ---------------(1)

         __________

d = √c²t²/4 – v²t²/4

            ______

= tc/2 √1-v²/c² ---------- (2)

                        _____

d = (2dο/c)c/2√1-v²/c²

             ______

 d = dο √1-v²/c²    ------ (Space Contraction Principal)
 

Scenario 1 accepts Special Relativity time dilation formula. It assumes that velocity of light is the same to all observers and goes beyond by assuming the stationary observer will not calculate c - v as the photon approach velocity towards mirror(photon moving in at c  mirror moving out at v)  but just as c. The stationary observer thinking  that, the photon moves towards the mirror at c. This is how the formula             

         __________

d = √c²t²/4 – v²t²/4   is derived. 

There is a problem with Scenario 1 because it leads to multiple paradoxes like twin paradox, grandfather paradox, ladder paradox, train on a bridge or tunnel paradox etc. Though some of these are said to be avoided by stating the shift from initial to non-initial frames looks like callous disregard to these paradoxes.
You get paradoxes because something is wrong or you cannot explain something. Then you need to give careful considerations to the assumption you have made and try to find the lapses. Another major defect of this theory is melding with time. The concept of time is one of the least understood. However, special relativity has made drastic changes to the concept of time. For instance we use phrases like "trillionth of a second after big bang" commonly. These phrases brings out pure absurdity because where was such a clock to measure time at that epoch. This shows how flimsy our understanding of time is.

Scenario 2  accepts that though light will have constant velocity with respect to any observer, velocities higher than light exist. Take for example the Frame Example above, a stationary observer will see that photon emitted at point A moves towards point D at c. But the stationary observer will also see that point D is moving at v. Therefore the stationary observer should say that photon moves towards D at c-v. And if the frame moves the other way c+v. Therefore velocities greater than c exist.

However, the two speed theory may run to problems if we consider a hole in the mirror allows light to fall on a screen of the stationary observer and how it is possible to have the same light photon or very near two photons to have two velocities of light. The observer moving with mirrors will see velocity c while the stationary observer will see velocity √ c²  + v²

Still, higher than c velocities may explain, quasars with z > 4 traveling at velocity greater than 4c.

Scenario 3  may give us very interesting explanations for hitherto unexplained phenomena.Here the distance between the mirrors will contract. This contraction will compensate the longer distance that the light beam need to travel when the mirror moves. The practical implication will be when the photon moves the space around it will contract.

We may be able to construct a new transformation (space contraction transformation) by the following formulas:                                                ______                                           _____
               x = xο                             y = yο √1-v²/c²                               z  = zο √1-v²/c²

These formulas will give out further interesting explanations to other phenomena. For instance say v > c then the space will become negative space. Whatever inside this space will be invisible like black holes. But this whatever inside can interact in other ways other than electromagnetic waves. For instance gravitation

When we observe a galaxy in the sky we know it's velocity by the red shift. Then we should know that the size will appear smaller depending on the red shift. Dark Mater and Dark Energy may be the result that these entities are inside a negative space created by it moving faster than light towards us.

These concepts will create a host of new hypothesis that can be tested by scientists in future to give us better explanation of what is around us.

see also twin paradox  and Observer in Einstein's Train thought experiment