Download THE NATURE OF LIGHT

THE NATURE OF LIGHT
Prof. Dr. Rati Ram Sharma,
DSc, PhD (London), MD (MA), MSc, MAMS, FIAMP
Professor & Head (retired), Department of Biophysics c Nuclear Medicine, Postgraduate Institute of
Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh, India; Present mailing address: 615, Sector 10,
Panchkula-134113, Haryana, India; Phone: 0091-172-563949; e-mail: [email protected] ;
websites: http://sharma.newtheory.org and
http://www.geocities.com/drratiram_sharma/
(Posted December 5, 2002)
© Copyright 2002 by the author Prof. Dr. Rati Ram Sharma- all rights reserved.
1. The continuing confusion
On 12 December 1951, Albert Einstein wrote to M.Besso thus: "All these 50 years of conscious
brooding have brought me no nearer to the answer to the question: What are light quanta?"
This sums up the state of confusion and unclarity about 'the nature of light', which has existed
during the twentieth century and still continues.
In reality any and every wave exists only in its propagating medium. But the light wave is
postulated to have no physical medium [1] and to propagate 'mathematically' in the non-existent
spacetime continuum [2,3]. Its intrinsic wave-quantum unity is split into wave-or-quantum dualities
with the support of the makeshift Principle of Complementarity, and the Uncertainty Principle
validates violations of the inviolable conservation of energy & momentum [4].
Since these unrealistic concepts are basic to the theories, which dominated science in the twentieth
century and are still dominant, four generations including this author and the readers, have been
taught unrealistic science. This article is a continuation of the author's efforts [5-12] to rectify
conceptual foundations of Physics & Cosmology so as to reverse the trend towards realistic science.
2. Space, time & spacetime continuum re-appraised
A deep intuition reveals that the concept of space evolves from our direct percepts of spatial
successions "there, here, there" and that of time from those of temporal successions "then, now,
then" all arising from the motions and changes of surrounding objects. The percept of ‘onlyforward, never backward’, movement of the ‘time-arrow’ arises from the non-reversibility of the
natural processes. If a baby were to grow with no relative motions and changes around i.e. all
standing still in the surroundings, he/she would have no concepts of space and time, with otherwise
perfectly developed senses notwithstanding. The two concepts, being so intangible and abstract,
cannot fuse into any tangible "spacetime continuum", concrete enough to propagate light and
gravitation [2,3].
In the universe with complete ubiquity of granularity throughout right up to the micromost levels,
the existence of a non-granular continuous infrastructure is inconceivable. If existent, the continuum
would retard, nay prevent the motion of heavenly bodies through it, which is not actually observed.
So all the multidimensional spacetime continua, basic to relativity and/or other theories, are mere
mathematical constructs bereft of real existence. But the existence of a particulate space medium is
not in doubt, see below.
3. Wave-quantum unity of radiation & matter
The long wave electromagnetic (e.m.) radiation is predominantly wavelike and the short wave Xand gamma rays show corpuscularity. As the transition from one part of the electromagnetic
spectrum to the other is continuous its ‘wave-quantum unity’ is inescapable. So is also for the
energetic moving particles of matter as also they, particularly with small mass, produce diffraction
patterns. The Quantum Theory [4] could not satisfactorily explain why the radiation and moving
material particles behave some time as a wave and at other times as a particle. It (QT), as against
the above micromost wave-quantum Unity of radiation & matter, has mathematically split it into
wave-or-quantum dualities, declaring that a thing can be a wave or a quantum but not both at the
same time.
4. Existence of a space medium
According to the 17th century view, creation of an absolute vacuum was distinctly possible by
removing all solids, liquids, and gases. In the 19th century, removal of the radiation (by cooling)
was also required, but considered to be possible. This view could not hold in the 20th century. In
1948, Casimir theoretically showed that the electromagnetic radiation caused an attractive force to
act between two conducting plates placed in vacuum. On cooling the void to absolute zero the
thermal radiation, and with it the Casimir force, should disappear. But actual experiments in 1958
by Sparnaay revealed that instead a "residual" attractive force persisted even at absolute zero [13].
Therefore the "vacuum" even at absolute zero temperature is not completely empty but has some
real physical medium that cannot be removed by any means.
Moreover, a medium is needed for the electric, magnetic and gravitational fields to exist in space
and for these forces to act at a distance. The electromagnetic and gravitational waves in vacuum do
need a medium to undulate. Maxwell’s displacement charge and current, like Casimir force, call for
a physical carrier. The zero point energy and frequency at the absolute zero temperature need
physical oscillators in space. Explanations of the experimentally observed superluminality [14] and
sub-luminality [15] on old classical wave theory of light also call in the light medium. See also para
18.1 below.
5. Space medium as the basic substance
The inter-conversions of the radiant and other forms of energy among themselves are well
documented. So are the inter-conversions of photonic energy and electron-positron pair of material
particles. Compositionally the radiation-wave and its propagating medium are one. The equation
E=mc2 for the inter-conversion of energy and mass points to the existence in real Nature of some
entity/ies subtler than and composing all forms of both mass m and energy E. This is analogous to
the possible inter-conversions of solid ice, liquid water and gaseous steam because all the three are
made of the same water molecules. These suggest the basic composition-unity of all forms of mass,
energy, radiation and the space medium.
The last, as the subtlest entity in Nature, emerges as the micromost ‘basic substance’ composed by
the new particle sharmon, named after this author to indicate that 'sharmon medium' is not the old
ether. The sharmon is made of the new micromost ‘basic elements’, positrino & negatrino, which in
turn compose all forms of energy E and mass m.
This leads to a simple yet deep UNIFIED PHYSICAL THEORY (UPT) [5-12] as the first and the
only theory to faithfully describe the grandest composition-unity of mass, energy, radiation and
space medium in micromost physical reality as brought out above.
6. Micromost basic elements
Absence of free electric charge in free space demands sharmon to be neutral. Propagation of
transverse electromagnetic waves in the sharmon medium points to sharmon’s polarizability and
composition by the two micromost basic elements, one electrically positive (positrino) and the other
negative (negatrino), with common name ‘cosmino’, for composing ‘all’ in the Cosmos. So our
theory, with the highest economy of concept, has only two elements against over hundred in the
modern Standard Model [16] of quarks and leptons and twice that number in Super Symmetry.
7. The basic charges
It has been shown [6,8,11] that a cosmino has the diameter lp = 1.6x10-33 cm, electric charge
=1.3729x10-30 esu, mass = 2.596116x10-48 gm, spin = ½ and a colour (R, B, G) or
anticolour (R^, B^, G^) charge.
A cosmino being an element has to be non-composite and hence singly charged because multiple
charges imply as many constituents. So cosmino’s basic charges [gravitational (mass), electric,
colour] are different manifestations or properties of a single entity, the cosmino itself, into which
they inseparably unite and unify. These manifestations are mediated via the corresponding field and
force feeling and felt by the charge. The concept of separate Higgs boson(s) imparting mass to
'massless' elements is flawed [6,8,11].
8. The sharmon
Its mass is 5.192232x10-48 gm [6,11]. It can be coloured, anticoloured or colourless. In its 0-spin
state, the opposing ½ -spins are attractive to give a positrino-negatrino contact pair 1.616x10-33 cm
across and 3.23x10-33 cm long. Repulsive co-directional ½ -spins in the 1-spin sharmon keep the
cosmino surfaces lp apart. Both the scalar 0-spin sharmon and the vector 1-spin sharmon are stable
and dynamic structures and can inter-convert. Their constituent cosminos not only spin but also can
vibrate along the common axis, imparting an electric as also a magnetic field and dipole moment to
the sharmon. The electromagnetic properties of the cosminos and sharmon generate those of the
material particles, photons and the sharmon medium, which they compose. Bosonic condensation of
sharmons is supported by close distance attractions among constituent cosminos and imparts
gregarious properties to sharmons, which can aggregate to compose energy and neutral mass of
material particles. Electrically positive or negative charged mass of the charged particles is
composed by the positive or negative cosminos. No particle or energy quantum is therefore
massless, dimensionless or "virtual"(i.e. unreal). The neutrinos, photon, gluon, graviton &c have
more than zero definite mass, size and spin.
9. The sharmon medium
The sharmon medium, consistent with 20th century view of vacuum, is irremovable by any means
since the tiny 10-33 cm sharmon can pass through spaces not only between molecules and atoms of
even the densest solid but also between orbital electrons. Due to its nature as a kinetic gas, the
sharmon medium fills all space and rules out the existence of absolute vacuum for any significant
period of time. Its time-averaged inter-sharmon distance ~ 10-5 cm [6,11] compares well with the
Mean Free Path for real gasses (e.g. for Hydrogen 1.12x 10-5 cm, Oxygen 0.64x10-5 cm, Nitrogen
0.595x10-5 cm).
The sharmon medium contains ~ 1015 1-spin sharmons per cm3. And its average mass density is
0.519 x 10-33 gm.cm-3, vis-a-vis 3x10-31 gm.cm-3 for the Steady State Cosmology. These 1-spin
sharmons energized with small 0-spin sharmon packet carry the zero-point energy in vacuum at
absolute zero of temperature.
We [6,11] can roughly take the rigidity or shear elasticity of the sharmon medium as 4.6875x10-12
dyne/cm2 and the viscosity as 6.5x10-23 dyne.sec/cm2.
10. The emission & absorption of light as a quantum
The emitting atom or a molecule falls from its higher energy state E2 to the lower energy state E1
when its excited electron emits the energy quantum  E = E2-E1 = h = hc/ . The energy quantum
comprises 0-spin sharmons as an aggregate and is transferred to the nearest sharmon, in the
medium, which on being thus energized shifts to the 1-spin state, if not already a 1-spin sharmon, to
originate an e.m. wave of frequency and wavelength . The energy quantum is therefore
proportional directly to the frequency and inversely to the wavelength. This explains and is
consistent with actual observations on the wavelength of 'tangled photons', vide website
http://www.aip.org/enews/physnews/2002/split/613-1.html
The emission of light from the source is consistent with the differential equation for a harmonic
function of time t:
 2  / t2 = - 4  2  2  = - 4  2  E2/h2 .
Reversibly, on absorbing the energy quantum E the absorbing atom or molecule rises in its energy
state from E1 to E2.
Since the spin of the emitter or absorber remains unchanged, what is emitted or absorbed is not the
1-spin photon but only the photonic energy quantum composed by 0-spin sharmons.
11. The propagation of wave-quantum unity in light
The electromagnetic wave energy quantum comprising 0-spin sharmons, after emission from an
excited electron in an atom of the source, is initially received by the nearest sharmon in the medium
which thus energized rises to the 1-spin state to mark the effective ‘origin’ of the e.m. wave.
Similarly, the last 1-spin sharmon of the medium, which finally transfers the photonic wave energy
quantum of the 1-spin photon to the target, marks the ‘terminus’ of the wave. From origin to the
terminus, the 0-spin sharmon-packet energy quantum per unit frequency cycle is propagated, as
corpuscular "energized 1-spin sharmon-packet", along a transverse e.m. wave in sharmon medium
contiguously via 1-spin sharmons, which do not physically move but only provide a physical
carrier. The 1-spin sharmons, participating in the process of propagation, return to their 0-spin state
on transferring the wave energy quantum to the contiguous neighbour in the medium. The quantum
of photon energy E (= h) is the energy per unit frequency interval of the wave. It is set by the
source ( E = E2-E1 = hand is related to the wave frequency . The wave velocity c (=  ) =
(eo. o)-1/2 is determined by the electric permittivity eo and magnetic permeability  o of the sharmon
medium. The two then fix the wavelength  (=c/) of the wave and the momentum p (= h/) of
photon. Thus it is NOT the 1-spin photon but the photonic energy quantum composed by 0-spin
sharmon, which is emitted, absorbed and also propagated along the transverse e.m. wave as an
inseparable wave-quantum unity.
Using the relations c =   = E/p and c2 = c  =  2  2 = E2/p2 in the general wave equation  2 
- 1/c2  2  / t2 = 0 with  2 =  2/ x2 +  2/ y2 +  2/ z2, we get the new time-dependent wave
equations. The time-free equations then can be obtained with the help of differential equation for a
harmonic function of time t:
 2  / t2 = - 4  2  2  = - 4  2  E2/h2 .
For details see sec. 15 of http://sharma.newtheory.org/PhysicsCosmologyReappraisal.htm or
http://www.geocities.com/drratiram_sharma/PhysicsCosmologyReappraisal.htm [11]
12. The wave and particle nature of light in one experiment
A. Tonomura et al. [17] set up experiments with beams of low intensity light or of electrons to
observe both wave and particle aspects at the same time. For interference, explainable from the
wave properties, the beams have two paths from the source to the detector (e.g. a screen). When the
beam intensity is sufficiently low and the detector suitable, the impact of particles (photon or
electron) one by one, can be observed. The energy quanta are then localized as if particles in space
and time. The detector output is displayed on a TV-monitor in a set of frames. The first frame is
early on and the last after a long time of impact collection. The interference pattern is slowly built
up by impacts of individual particles. These experiments support and are supported by the UPT’s
wave-quantum unity for radiation and moving particles of matter.
13. Non-existence of the conventional photon
Sec. 5 of http://sharma.newtheory.org/PhysicsCosmologyReappraisal.htm and
http://www.geocities.com/drratiram_sharma/QuantumTheoriesReappraisal.html [10] discusses the
non-existence of the Planck-Einstein-Lewis non-composite particulate "photon", whereas sec. 6
shows that the 'energized 1-spin sharmon' replaces the photon.
14. The quantum or particle properties of light
The sec. 10 above shows that light is emitted or absorbed as a quantum. Sec. 7 of
http://www.geocities.com/drratiram_sharma/QuantumTheoriesReappraisal.html and
http://sharma.newtheory.org/QuantumTheoriesReappraisal.html[10] explains the Compton
scattering [19] and Photoelectric effect [18] using the energized sharmon in place of the photon [6].
.
15. The wave properties of light
The wave equations for electromagnetic radiation given above, lead to the cosine equation
A = Ao cos (2  t -2 r/ +  ).
Herein A stands for the electric or magnetic field intensity at the varying point (t, r), and hence Ao2
= ½ h for the electric or magnetic energy per half unit frequency interval of the e.m. wave,  being
the phase angle. Since the wave energy is transmitted at the same velocity c in all directions, this
equation describes a single ray as well as a spherical wave front in the isotropic and homogeneous
sharmon medium.
The interference and diffraction of light cannot be explained by the corpuscular theories of Newton
or Einstein [18] or by the Quantum Theory. Huygens-Fresnel Wave theory does account for them
but the existence of its ‘extremely more rigid than air’ ether to propagate light creates a conceptual
impasse.
Sec. 8 of http://sharma.newtheory.org/QuantumTheoriesReappraisal.html and
http://www.geocities.com/drratiram_sharma/QuantumTheoriesReappraisal.html [10] explains the
phenomenon of interference from the realistic sharmon medium. Its generalization also covers the
phenomenon of diffraction.
16. Maxwell's theory of electromagnetic radiation
This entirely mathematical theory [1] was the culmination of the 19th century view of vacuum,
which could be created by possible removal of all solids, liquids and gases as also the thermal
radiation by cooling the void. The light from the sun was believed to travel to the earth largely
through absolutely empty space. This gave rise to the concept of a "wave without its propagating
medium" which our UPT rejects but Einstein incorporated in his theories of Special & General
Relativity [2,3] to discard the light medium. But herein we deduce Maxwell's mathematical
equations from the sharmon medium to propagate light.
16.1 Displacement charge & current in sharmon medium
The composition and polarizability of the sharmon renders the sharmon medium polarizable under
an electric field E to induce a charge  q and an electric dipole moment pe = ql of arm l. The
deforming force F1 = Eq and the restitution force F2 = q2/eol2, eo being the electric permittivity of
the sharmon medium. Since F1 = F2, q =eoEl2 and pe =eoEl3. Invoking spatial symmetry in the
sharmon medium, the 2-dimensional Displacement Charge Density D = q/l2 = eoE and the
Displacement Current Density Id = dD/dt = eodE/dt.
This provides the much needed physical bases to Maxwell's displacement charge and displacement
current in free space which he used only as mathematical exigencies without any physical carrier.
16.2 Maxwell equations for electromagnetic radiation
The above realistic deductions justify Maxwell's assumption that the displacement current is
solenoidal and gives rise to a magnetic field H like a conduction current. Therefore
div Id = 0 = div dD/dt
and curl H = dD/dt = eodE/dt.
Likewise the other two equations are
div H = 0
curl H = -  odH/dt .
Here  o is the magnetic permeability of the sharmon medium. Thus, Maxwell's original equations
for the free empty space or vacuum are the same as now for UPT's real physical sharmon medium.
On curling eqn. curl H = dD/dt = eodE/dt we get
curl curl H = ( grad.div -  2 ) H = eo curl dE/dt
where  2 = ( 2/ x2+  2/ y2+  2/ z2) is the Laplace operator.
This with time differential of eqn. curl H = -  odH/dt gives
grad div H -  2 H = -eo  2H/ t2 ,
which with eqn. div H = 0 leads to
( 2 - eo. o  2/ t2 ) H = 0.
So the propagation velocity for magnetic field H is
c = (eo. o) -1/2.
Similar relations follow for E, D and pe which all are propagated with the same velocity c = (eo. o)1/2
of light, where eo is the electric permittivity and  o the magnetic permeability of sharmon
medium.
16.3 Conduction of electromagnetic waves in sharmon medium
The electric field E, magnetic field H and the dipole moment pe induced in the sharmon medium,
have the same frequency  of Simple Harmonic Variation decided and impressed by the source. The
direction of energy flow is given by the Pointing radiant vector R = ExH, normal to the plane
containing E and H oscillating at right angles to each other.
A plane electromagnetic wave of wavelength  may therefore be described by
E = Eo cos 2 (  t - x/ )
H = Ho cos 2 (  t - x/ )
pe = peo cos 2 (  t - x/ )
The propagation velocity c = ( eo. o)-1/2 is determined by eo and  o of the sharmon medium.
17. Creation and annihilation of electron-positron (e-e+) pair
A ½ -spin negatrino and a ½ -spin positrino produce a sharmon of 0 or 1 spin when the ½ -spins are
anti- or co-directional respectively. The electron e- is composed by n1 = 3.50x1020 negatrinos plus
n2 = 3.944x1017 sharmons, the positron e+ by n1 positrinos plus n2 sharmons, and 1-spin 1.022 MeV
photon by (n1 + 2n2) sharmons, of which one has spin 1 and the rest spin 0. The creation of e+e- pair
from 1.022 MeV photon and its conversion into two 0.511 MeV photons is described by the
following:
sharmon Ö positrino + negatrino
1.022 MeV photon = [(n1 positrinos + n2 sharmons) + ( n1 negatrinos + n2 sharmons)] Ö e+eå two 0.511 MeV photons.
18. Constancy & invariance to source & observer motion of the light -velocity
The special relativity (SR) [2] is based on these two axiomatic postulates. The constancy of light
velocity in free space, devoid of the light propagating medium, was borrowed from Maxwell's
theory of electromagnetic radiation [1] without explanation. Michelson & Morley experiments [20]
proved the invariance of c to source observer motion. These results were adopted in the second
postulate, again without any physical explanation, since Einstein’s own Nobel Prize winning
corpuscular theory [18] lacked this invariance and instead raised the expectation that the particulate
photon, like a material particle, will have its velocity affected by those of the source and observer.
In our theory, as outlined above, light wave begins creatively at the ‘origin’ and ends vanishingly at
the ‘terminus’, both in the sharmon medium. The photonic energy quantum comprising 0-spin
sharmon aggregate per unit frequency cycle is bodily carried along the transverse e.m. wave
through 1-spin sharmons from origin to terminus via contiguous mechanisms. Due to creative origin
in the medium the light velocity c is independent of the source motion and destructive termination
makes c independent of the observer motion. In UPT the constancy of c (= (eo. o)-1/2) follows from
that of the eo &  o of the sharmon medium.
Lorentz [21], to explain Michelson-Morley [20] observation that c is invariant to source-observer
motion and yet to save the ether theory, hypothesized that the ‘actual length’ of a body shortens by
 = (1-v2/c2)1/2 parallel to its velocity v relative to ether. Einstein in SR [2] assumed without
explanation the invariance of c to source-observer motion, dismissed the light medium and deduced
the same ‘shortening’ formula for the ‘observed length’. Our theory’s general invariance of c to the
motions of the source and observer separately makes the concept of ‘contraction of length’ of both
[21,2] these approaches redundant.
The velocity v of a material particle or of the primed frame X’Y’Z’ [2] is caused by an externally
impressed force in accord with Newton’s laws of motion but the light velocity c is that of the self
propagated photon along an e.m. wave. The light velocity c is constant and invariant to source-
observer motion but that of the material particle v is not so. The Lorentz transformations in effect
relate to a factitious motion of a hypothetical particle with too exclusively different dual kinematics
of v and c. Since such a particle does not exist, the Lorentz transformations do NOT describe any
motion in the real Nature. Their leading conclusions are the unrealistic demands on Nature to
change to fit the mathematical SR theory. Even otherwise, the actual lengths and objective time
intervals in an object or a physical phenomenon, viewed by say, 100 differently moving observers
cannot undergo 100 different objective distortions at the same time, making the ‘contraction of
length’ and ‘dilatation of time’ as unreal concepts.
18.1 The ether drift & sharmon medium
Michelson-Morley [20] experiments did not detect any ether drift, which was taken as the evidence
[2,3] for the absence of ether or the light medium. James DeMeo [22], however presents
experimental results of Dayton Miller showing a positive non-zero ether drift, and hence the
presence of a light propagating medium. This supports and is supported by UPT's sharmon medium
to propagate light. The effect of ether drift on c (= (eo. o)-1/2) can be understood via that on the eo &
 o of the sharmon medium.
19. The variability of light velocity c
The constancy of light velocity c is a pillar postulate of the Special & General Relativity [2,3].
Therefore the actual observations on the variability of c [23], superluminality [14] and subluminality [15] strike a fatal blow to the validity of relativity theories but can be explained by UPT,
as below.
The light velocity in free space c (= (eo. o)-1/2) depends on the eo &  o of the free sharmon
medium. In a transparent refractive medium the light velocity w (= (e. )-1/2) is set by its electric
permittivity e and magnetic permeability , that is e & of the propagating sharmon medium
within the refractive medium. The refractive index of the refractive medium is  = c/w = c (e.)1/2 =
(e. / eo. o)1/2. The observed variability of c [23], superluminality [14] and sub-luminality [15] can
now be explained in terms of the effect on the electric permittivity, magnetic permeability and the
refractive index of the propagating sharmon medium within the refractive medium locally.
The light does not use or need an atomic or molecular material medium because it is propagated in
the sharmon medium, whether it is in the free space or within a transparent refractive medium. The
experimental conditions to achieve superluminality [14] and sub-luminality [15] therefore
ultimately affect and manipulate the electric permittivity e & magnetic permeability and refractive
index  of the propagating sharmon medium within the experimentally created material medium.
20. Bending of light in gravitational, electric & magnetic fields
The light ray should bend in all these three fields as they all affect the sharmons of the light
propagating medium and also the photon which itself is composed by sharmons.
20.1 In a gravitational field
A photon comprising sharmons of non-zero mass, experiences the acceleration due to gravity g =
GM/R2 of the heavenly body of mass M and radius R. Light from a distant star goes past the body
in time t = 2R/c, to fall by the distance s = ½ gt2 = ½ (GM/R2).(2R/c)2 = 2GM/c2. For a distance D
the light bends by the angle
 = s/D = 2GM/Dc2 radian.
This is exactly the Einstein formula [24] for the bending of light in a gravitational field verified
during total solar eclipse on 29 May 1919, providing support to UPT.
40.2 In an electric field
The angle of deviation  for traversing a distance D in an electric field of intensity E and normal
gradient b = dE/dx is
 = ½ eoDbrq/mc2 ~ Dbx10-37 radian.
Here r is the radius, m the mass of sharmon and q its dipole charge.
20.3 In a magnetic field
In a magnetic field H with normal gradient b' = dH/dx, the deviation angle  for the light of
wavelength  (Ao) is given by
 = ½  oDHb' r3/hc ~ DHb' x10-92 radian.
Here a dispersion of wavelengths  is also present.
The bending of light in the electric and magnetic fields, though too small for experimental
verification, are important conceptually because no other theory has them.
21. The cosmological red shift
(See chapter 11 of the book Realistic Foundations of Physics & Cosmology [6] and the web page
http://sharma.newtheory.org/NonexpandingUniverse.html or
http://www.geocities.com/drratiram_sharma/NonexpandingUniverse.html [12])
In the non-expanding universe of our Unified Physical Theory (UPT), the cosmological red shift
does NOT arise as a Doppler effect from the receding motion of galaxies [25,26] and the total massenergy of the universe is eternally conserved. And there is NO "creation of matter from nothing", in
a single mega event (Big Bang theory [25]) nor as a continuous process (Steady State theory [26]).
The combined non-Doppler effects of gravitational, electromagnetic and viscous losses deplete the
energy E=h of the sharmon-composed spectral light photon by  E = h.  , thereby shifting the
wavelength  = c/ by   towards red end of the spectrum. Red shift Z = +  / = -  / =
.E/hc. The gravitational and e.m. losses are negligible. But the viscous effect is significant.
According to Stoke's law the sharmon aggregate of energy quantum h of spherical radius r, in
traveling a distance D through sharmon medium of viscosity  suffers a viscous loss  E = 6 r
Dc. It produces a viscous red shift Zv = 6 r  D  / h = Kv D.
For sodium yellow light  =5890x10-8 cm, the h quantum has ns=3.6146x1014 sharmons or nc = 2ns
cosminos each of a radius rc = 0.8078x10-33 cm. To simplify calculations we take the photon as a
sphere of closely packed cosminos and its radius r = rc.nc1/3 =7.24x10-29 cm. Somewhat arbitrarily, 
 6.5x10-23 dyne.sec/cm2, and therefore Kv = 0.8344672x10-27 cgs units. In the theories of
expanding universe, Doppler red shift Z=V/c and Hubble's law V=HD. It gives the constant cKv
(=H)=1.84782x 10-17 cgs units or 60.13 Km/s/Mps. This, in view of  ‘s variability and remnant
arbitrariness, compares well with earlier [25] value H=62.3 Km/s/Mps and the recent [27] values
58-73 Km/s/Mps.
Observations on Ia type supernovae [28] have caused "amazement and horror" among the
expanding universe theorists as high Hubble constants H = V/D (expansion rates) imply an
antigravity force permeating space and revive the Einstein’s cosmological constant [25]. But in our
theory an exploding supernova showers a burst of sharmons into its ambient environment that raises
the viscosity  and the constant Kv of the light medium. The resultant rise in the observed redshift Z
leads to overestimation of the source-distance D ( Z) and of the expansion rate of the universe
V/D=H ( Z). But the resultant rise in the c Kv = H is a local effect [28] and does not signify any
generalized property of the whole universe so as to permeate space. Similarly, relativity disallows
recession velocity v  c and the redshift Z= v/c  1. So the observed [29] Z=4.92 is inexplicable by
theories of expanding universe [25,26]. But in our theory it is caused by local rise of the constant K,
in Z=KD, due to viscous, e.m. and gravitational effects.
The non-expanding universe has no ‘cosmological horizon’ beyond which the galaxies disappear.
22. The crucial test: To test whether the universe is actually expanding, redshifts of individual
galaxies need to be monitored. In the theories of expanding universe the redshift Z=V/c and
Hubble’s law HD=V = dD/dt, giving Z/Zo = exp(Ht), Zo being the starting value. So the redshift Z
increases exponentially with time. But for a non-expanding universe Z= KD, D being constant,
redshift Z does not change with time. Published observations do not show exponential increase with
time and hence support UPT.
Rerences
[1] J.C. Maxwell, Treatise on Electricity & Magnetism, Vol.2, Chap.9, 1873.
[2]. A. Einstein, Ann.der Physik. 17 (1905) 891; in The Principle of Relativity, Dover (1923) 35.
[3]. A. Einstein, Ann.der Physik 49 (1916); in The Principle of Relativity, Dover (1923) 109.
[4]. W.Heisenberg, Physical Principles of Quantum Theory, C.Eickort & F.C.Hoyt (Trans), Dover
(1930).
[5] R.R. Sharma, Unified Physical Theory, COSMO, New Delhi, 1990; Neoclassical Unified
Physical Theory of Every Thing, Author, Panchkula, 1st ed. June 1987, 2nd ed. Aug.’98; Inter.
Symp. "Frontiers of Fundamental Physics", Hyderabad, 30 Dec.’98 to 1 Jan.’99 (Poster
presentation).
[6]. R.R. Sharma, Realistic Foundations of Physics & Cosmology/ (The Beginning of Realistic
Science), Abhishek Publications, SCO 57-59, Sector 17 C, Chandigarh, June 2002.
Also see http://sharma.newtheory.org/NewBookonUTP.html and
http://www.geocities.com/drratiram_sharma/NewBookOnUPT.html
[7]. R.R. Sharma, http://sharma.newtheory.org/ErrorsOfModernPhysics.html and
http://www.geocities.com/drratiram_sharma/ErrorsOfModernPhysics.html
[8]. R.R. Sharma, http://sharma.newtheory.org/UnifiedPhysicalTheory.html and
http://www.geocities.com/drratiram_sharma/UnifiedPhysicalTheory.html
[9]. R.R. Sharma, http://sharma.newtheory.org/RelativityReappraisal.html and
http://www.geocities.com/drratiram_sharma/RelativityReappraisal.html
[10]. R.R. Sharma, http://sharma.newtheory.org/QuantumTheoriesReappraisal.html and
http://www.geocities.com/drratiram_sharma/QuantumTheoriesReappraisal.html
[11]. R.R. Sharma, http://sharma.newtheory.org/PhysicsCosmologyReappraisal.htm and
http://www.geocities.com/drratiram_sharma/PhysicsCosmologyReappraisal.htm
[12]. R.R. Sharma, http://sharma.newtheory.org/NonexpandingUniverse.html and
http://www.geocities.com/drratiram_sharma/NonexpandingUniverse.html
[13]. T.H. Boyer, Sci. Amer. 253 (Aug. 1985) 56.
[14]. L.J. Wang, A. Kuzmich & A. Dogariu, Nature 406 (2000) 277; J. Marangos, Nature 406
(2000) 243.
[15]. L.V.S. Hau et al., Nature, 397 (18 Feb 1999) 594-598.
[16]. M. Gell-Mann, Phys.Lett.B 8 (1964) 214; G. Zweig, CERN 8182/TH 401 and Th 412 (1964);
S.L. Glashow, Nucl.Phys. 22 (1961) 579; S. Weinberg, Phys.Rev.Lett. 19 (1967) 1264; A. Salam, in
Elementary Particle Physics, Nobel Symp. no. 8,ed. N. Svartholm, Almquist & Wicksell,
Stockholm (1968) 367.
[17]. A. Tonomura et al., Amer. J. Phys. 57 (1989) 117.
[18]. A. Einstein, Ann. d. Physik 17 (1905) 132; 20 (1906) 199.
[19]. A.H.Compton, Phys. Rev. 21(1923) 483; 22(1923) 409.
[20]. A.A. Michelson, Amer.J.Sci. 22 (1881) 120; A.A. Michelson & E.W. Morley, Amer.J.Sci. 34
(1887) 333; Phil.Mag .24 (1887) 449.
[21]. H.A. Lorentz, in The Principle of Relativity, Dover, (1923) 1, 9.
[22]. James DeMeo, http://www.orgonelab.org/miller.htm
[23].
K. Scharnhorst, Phys.Lett.B 286 (1990) 354; G. Barton, Phys.Lett.B 237 (1990) 552.
[24]. A. Einstein, in The Principle of Relativity, Dover (1923) 97.
[25]. G. Gamow, The Creation of Universe, Viking, New York, (1952); A. Einstein, Preuss. Akad
.Wiss. Berlin Sitzber 142 (1917); W. De Sitter, Proc. Kon. Ned. Akad. Wet.19 (1917) 1217, 20
(1917) 229; A.Friedmann, Z.Phys. 10 (1922) 377.
[26]. F. Hoyle, The Nature of the Universe, Harper & Bros, New York, 1950; Mon. Not. R. Astr.
Sci. 108 (1948) 372.
[27]. A. Watson, Science 279 (1998 ) 981.
[28]. J. Glanz, Science 278 (1997) 799, 279 (1998) 651, 1298; S. Perlmutter et al., Nature 391
(1998) 51.
[29]. K Lanzetta, Nature 390, 115 (1997).