Re: Relativistic aberration

Le 16/07/2024 à 01:21, hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) a écrit :

On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 22:30:10 +0000, Richard Hachel wrote:

Thank you for your response, to which I would add two clarifications:
During the Gran Sasso group experiment and the fantastic revelations of supramumin neutrinos, I immediately warned that the examiners must have been wrong. Proof that I hold my theoretical positions very firmly, where others were ready to abandon one of the essential pillars of the SR.
I repeat: “There will therefore be an OBSERVABLE speed limit which will extend to all particles and all the laws of physics”.
In a thousand years, or in a hundred thousand years, we will still say the same thing, like we will say that it is impossible to find a natural number between five and six.
Secondly, I would like to come back to the supernovae of 1987, which posed a small problem of understanding, and it was said: "The neutrinos arrived six hours before the photons, and therefore they were faster than the light."
Another proposition was made, in my opinion completely false, "it is because the neutrinos left the heart of the star, and the light took longer to leave the surface".
I think a third explanation could be valid, and since I like to play, I won't tell you, but I'll give you some biscuits.
What if it was the neutrinos that moved at the speed of light and not the light?
What if, sometimes, like in air, the speed of light was slowed down in space? Are there not, in the immense space existing between the earth and the supernovae, a few gas molecules capable of slowing down light, while neutrinos have an instantaneous transfer, that is to say an observable speed? What does the light not have in this case?
Do you understand my argument?
R.H.