Light Theory

Special relativity says light always travels at the speed of light regardless of relativity.

If I am standing still, and a train passes me going 100km/h I perceive the train as moving at 100km/h.
But if I am in a train going 100km/h with another train running along side also going 100km/h the other train appears to me to be standing still with me. If a third train pulls up on the other side of my train going 110km/h it appears to me that this third train is moving at 10 km/h because relative to me the difference in speed is 10km/h.

Now imagine I am in a train going 5 km/h and the through some mix up there is a train on the same track going to opposite direction at 5km/h. We are going to collide and to me it looks like the other train is moving towards me at 10km/h. 10km/h because the net of our two speeds in opposite directions means we are coming together at 10km/h.

This does not hold true for light though.

If I were moving at 95% the speed of light towards a bright lamp post and I measured the speed of light coming at me from the lamp post, I would find it was still moving at the speed of light, not 195% the speed of light like the net of our two speeds would suggest. Light cannot move any faster or slower than the speed of light.

Here is my theory:
Because light is incapable of changing speed, to conserve energy light must change its frequency relative to the objects velocity.

In other words if I was again moving at 95% the speed of light towards a lamp post, our net speed would be 195% the speed of light. But because light can only go 100% the speed of light it would have to dump this extra 95% of my forward progress into its frequency.  Thus the light from the lamp post wouldn't be visible anymore it would be converted into gamma rays which would melt my face off. Since all light is on the electromagnetic spectrum the light would blueshift into gamma rays

Thus I would only be able to see the lamp post in visible light if it were also emitting radio waves which would shift up to visible light.

What does this say for the objects behind me though? Based on this reasoning if I were heading to the lamp post at 95% the speed of light, away from a large gamma ray gun behind me, looking back I would suddenly perceive the gamma rays as visible light.

The Universe is a beautiful place.

Magnetism and Dark Matter

So here is the idea I have been thinking of lately which will no doubt revolutionize the thinking in the field of physics. By which I mean this is a crakpot idea that I can't even begin to prove or back up.

So Dynamo theory says that a magnetic field is generated by circulating electric charges. Now to my knowledge the specifics of dynamo theory are still being worked out but less us assume that it is true. That brings us to the question of planetary magnetics.

There are three possibilities I will then consider here. The first being that various atoms within the earth's mantle have a charge and flow in circulating patterns of some sort and thus create earth's magnetic field. This circulation could be caused by earth's rotation or by convection, I don't know but it isn't important here.

The other possibility I will consider is to view even the mantle as essentially unmoving, a stationary object though still full of atoms with charges. In this view it is earth's rotation that makes the charges act as if they were circulating to generate a magnetic field.

This raises an important question in my mind. So a charge circulates and generates a field. Relative to what does it have to circulate? I know if you run a current through a coil of wire it generates a field, but what if you take something with a charge, tie it to the end of a rope and spin it around really quickly? Will this also generate a field? As essentially this is what I am proposing it does in the second scenario I contemplated.

I am going to skip to the end because I am rather tired now.

So here is the revolutionary bit. What if magnetic fields were generated by the circulation of charges yes. But what if the actual mechanism producing the field is the charges interaction with dark matter? I know I called it antimatter in a recent and rather lengthy post but I meant dark matter. I still mean to go back and correct that.

What if magnetism is the interaction between matter and dark matter? I'll tell you what if: it means that I am a genius. A sleepy, sleepy genius.