Why my absolute speed of light is still a goer!
Frank Russo -January 17, 2013.
There is a basic difference between the speed of light that is usually measured, and my aberration derived one. The former are all an average of both the away and return leg... in other words they test two opposite directions... this is of course not good enough because indications are that the universe has a preferred direction. My aberration derived speed is a one way speed only, and as a result could yield much more information than the usual rendition! Roemer's calculated speed which was the first attempt at it, was of course a one way speed worked out on the variation of light to travel from Jupiter to the earth, according to the latter's position in relation to our Earth.
Now the variation in the two methods that I've picked up is only 4,683,415.2 m/sec, and this correlates well with the advancing microwave background radiation front. One would of course not expect this increase to show up in the aberration, because in my analysis for calculating it I amended both the numerator and denominator of the fraction involved! I did this by showing that you had to add the rotational component because the constant had been defined for mid-night on the ecliptic plane! The denominator on the other hand was "c" and had to make the expression equal the observed aberration angle of 20.47 arc seconds. (see www.frankrusso.net/stellar.html )
It's been 17 years since the publication of my aberration paper in "Speculations in Science and Technology", and I'd almost forgotten the intricate details... I am sure my aberration value for the speed of light is correct! As for the absolute speed of the earth, that is another matter... I couldn't swear on it being 100% correct... the triangulation rendition that I did using the averaged speed of light and my aberration derived one, was my best approximation... (see www.frankrusso.net/reqmods.html ). Of course it depends on subjective "deflation" to give us the observed averaged experimental speed of light... I am currently happy enough with that.
In conclusion then, yesterday's paper was not properly conceptualized... I had to re-digest the concepts involved overnight. I hope that science as a whole can likewise admit its mistakes and grow forwards towards more scientific truths!