Abstract and Introduction
In this pilot study, the hypothesis that absolute vacuum, defined as zero bit (energy) density [1], is opaque to electromagnetic (EM, light) transmission posed in 2011 [2] was confirmed using simulated volumes with bit densities ranging from zero to 0.30 expressed as proportion of maximum possible density. At zero bit density, light speed c was zero. The first detectable light transmission was seen at 0.10 bit density. Light speed c increased with increased bit densities through partial vacuum levels. An essentially constant light velocity c was obtained only at higher bit densities at and above approximately 0.15, thereby limiting the energy density range over which light speed invariance postulated in Special Relativity occurs. Thus, the Special Relativity postulate of "light speed invariance in a vacuum" was correct only for higher vacuum (bit) density ranges. The postulates of binary mechanics (BM) [3] generated the present hypothesis and explain the underlying mechanisms for the reported results.
Methods and Results
First, baseline data was collected. Using the BM simulator version 1.36.4 [4], 56x56x56 spot cubic volumes where created by random seeding of bits to achieve a close approximation of the bit densities shown and run for at least 100 Ticks, where each simulator Tick represents a cycle in which the four time-development bit operations [5] are applied, one in each of four ticks t, the BM fundamental time constant. Thus, each simulator Tick T equals 4t. All simulator runs were in BOX mode, where the 56x56 sides of the simulated volume were perfect reflectors. That is, bits exiting the simulated volume were counted (the "OutBits" variable) in each Tick, and returned to the volume after the exact delay and at the exact site that would occur if the space was not empty beyond the simulated volume. These OutBit counts served as "sensor" output for EM bit detection. Both the randomly seeded T = 0 matrices (*.mat files in the \ini sub-directory of the simulator program) and the Tick-by-Tick output data (*.csv files in the \dat sub-directory) were saved.
The experimental condition added an EM signal source and repeated the time-development simulator run to measure light velocity. The EM source was a 12x12x12 cube of higher bit density (0.40 or 0.50) in the center of the simulated volume, using X, Y, Z input parameters: -6,5,-6,5,-6,5. Starting at T = 0, these higher density cubes radiated energy (bits) into the lower density surrounding transmission media, which is most easily visualized when the simulator display is set to X-RAY mode.
Recall that the time-development bit operations are exact in BM, rather than statistical or subject to Heisenberg uncertainties as in antiquated quantum mechanic infinitesimal time-evolution operators which are mathematically inapplicable when space, time and energy are quantized [5]. Thus, if the T = 0 *.mat file is run again, the exact same output data over time would be obtained. For the experimental condition, a signal source was added so that any change in results could be detected. Hence, exact EM velocity measurements were obtained by simply subtracting the control or baseline OutBits values from OutBits observed in the experimental runs with signal source added to the initial T = 0 system state. Resulting positive values represent the exact arrival time, amplitude and shape of the transmitted wave front (Fig. 1). With this detection method, the highest possible resolution may be obtained -- a single 1-state bit.
The onset Tick values were expressed as proportion of maximum velocity v = d/t, based on (1) the distance of 44 d units from the surface of the centered signal source cubic volume to the "sensors" (OutBit counts) at the edges of the transmission volume and (2) the transit time in ticks t from the observed onset Tick values where T = 4t. Zero velocity was recorded when the onset criterion was not met in less than 100 simulator Ticks (400 t).
Light velocity c. A somewhat constant light velocity c in the 0.318v range appeared at transmission media densities over an approximately 0.18 to 0.25 range and 0.19 to 0.25 range for the SVUF and VSUF bit operation orders respectively. From 0.00 to about 0.19 media densities, light velocity c increased from zero.
Tests of the other four permutations of bit operations order were run with 0.21 transmission media density and 0.40 signal sources. The UVSF and VUSF orders produced slower onset velocities. The remaining two bit operations orders both showed much slower light velocity c values.
Finally, several tests using both 0.40 and 0.50 signal sources in smaller media volumes of size 32, 40 and 48 simulated cubes were conducted. The same size 12 centered signal cube was used. Hence, the transmission distance was less in these tests. The light velocity c results with these shorter distances were similar to those shown in Fig. 2.
Bit velocity calibration. The presently observed light speeds were consistent with the previous suggestion that bit velocity v = πc. Ten higher velocities with the 0.50 signal source in the 0.19 to 0.25 transmission media range (5 values of SVUF and 5 values from VSUF) were not statistically significantly different from the predicted velocity of 1 / π with mean and standard deviation 0.3161 ± 0.00390 and σ = (0.3161 - 0.3183) / 0.00390 = 0.558.
Discussion
Absolute vacuum is opaque. This pilot study confirmed the hypothesis that absolute vacuum is opaque [2] with a high level of confidence statistically. As described previously, volumes with absolute vacuum are rare in nature because any incoming energy (1-state bits) must first "fill the vacuum" before it can serve as an efficient media to transmit energy. Hence, incoming bits are trapped in electron and baryon bit cycles [6] until bit density is sufficient to transmit incoming bits through the vacuum. Hence, even the partial vacuum of outer space is quite transparent to light since bit density is sufficient. All motion of energy in whatever form from location A to location B relies on a mechanism in which incoming 1-state bits are absorbed by bit cycles and subsequently emitted to be absorbed again by a neighboring bit cycle, and so on (see, e.g., [7] [8]).
Why does light velocity c increase as bit density increases over the range from absolute vacuum to partial vacuum? First, as described previously [9] [5], a spot unit state named inertia, where both bit loci are in the 1-state, blocks the strong bit operation. Second, the strong bit operation is the basis for quark confinement in bit cycles, which is equivalent to preventing bit motion among cycle locations. Third, as bit density increases, the probability of inertia evaluating to one or true also increases, blocking strong force scattering which captures 1-state bits in cycles. In other words, increased bit density increases the odds that 1-state bits will be emitted from bit cycles enabling motion to neighboring bit cycles.
A change in perspective may be due regarding the familiar constant -- "speed of light in vacuum" c, which may suggest a picture that c is constant in "empty space". In contrast, the present results suggest an almost opposite picture, namely a constant light speed was observed only at rather high bit densities far from being "empty space". Clearly, the "perfect vacuum" is not as perfect as it has been said to be. Indeed, the slower velocities reported at lower bit densities were interpreted as time delay required for incoming 1-state bits to raise bit density to levels sufficient to achieve some transparency in the transmission medium. In short, partial vacuum is a very busy place compared to absolute vacuum.
Special Relativity postulates. This report showed that Einstein's postulate of the invariance in light speed is not fully correct. Namely, at lower bit densities, light velocity c decreases (Fig. 2). However, as described above, this may be more a theoretical than practical issue, since large volumes of near absolute vacuum are probably very rare or even non-existent at present, all having been previously "filled" with 1-state bits sufficient to allow light transmission.
However, BM does change the status of light speed invariance from a postulate in Special Relativity to a known underlying mechanism. Specifically, light speed invariance was postulated to be independent of the motion of the object emitting light energy. At present, the known mechanisms in BM fully account for this postulate. Consider a 1-state bit in its first Tick outside the signal source used in the present experiments. At this point, the velocity of the object which emitted that 1-state bit is irrelevant. Of the multitude of paths this bit of energy might take to move from this location to the sensors in the sides of the simulated volume, each and every step is exactly known based on the system state at the moment (Tick) of its emission from the signal source until it finally arrives, if it ever does, at distant sensors based on the four fundamental bit operations that determine exact time-development of all physical systems. In brief, this energy transmission process and the degree of constancy of its velocity are postulates only in the historical sense of Einstein's Special Relativity, but rather, at present, are simple consequences of known time-development operations.
Bit operations order. In addition to updating the status of light speed invariance from postulate in Special Relativity to known physical mechanism, the present study may help establish the physically correct order of BM fundamental bit operations [10]. Only one order can be completely correct, since the alteration of system state by one bit operation can affect the results of each of the others. The criteria for the correct bit operations order is easy to state, namely that all well-established physical phenomena are fully accounted for. But it is perhaps more difficult to definitively establish which order is the only fully correct one. For example, the VUSF order may have been excluded by its failure to show gravity effects in preliminary tests (Keene, unpublished data).
In the present report, the relative failure to achieve fast light transmission with the USVF, UVSF, SUVF and VUSF bit operations orders may indicate that the final correct order might be either VSUF or SVUF.
"Kung Fu Fighting" (Carl Douglas). The usual story for a pilot study is to explore the feasibility of examining a hypothesis with minimal expenditure of effort. In the present paper, a sufficient number of data points were collected to convincingly evaluate the main hypothesis that light velocity depends on media bit density. However, much larger samples are required to address remaining questions. For example, for each combination of media and signal source densities (Fig. 2), only one baseline T = 0 matrix (*.mat file) was used generated with a random bit pattern. A sample of each of these independent variable combinations is required to decrease random variation seen in the dependent variable (light speed). Another issue in the present data is that continuing presence of the signal source would tend to increase vacuum density in the transmission media. A further study will avoid some of these issues by "firing" a "pulse" of 1-state bits from a simulator gun feature on one side of the simulated volume and detecting pulse arrival on the other side, also allowing observation of the inverse square law on signal strength versus distance (Keene, in preparation).
On the other hand, the present pilot work appears to indicate that the methodology is quite promising, providing tools to obtain exact measurement of key variables such as onset time Tick, wave front amplitude and frequency, etc. Or as Carl Douglas might say, the simulation methods captured events as "fast as lighting" with a precision indicating "expert timing". Compared to the magical thinking in quantum electrodynamics and chromodynamics discussed previously [11], the present methodology permits study of the vacuum without the numerous miracles in conventional physical theories such as "vacuum condensates", miraculous appearance or disappearance of particles, vague references to "vacuum energy", dark matter or energy and the like.
Consider the mathematical models in the Standard Model (SM) which claim to define fields at all points in space, or as Carl Douglas said, "Here comes the big boss. Let's get it on." Apparently expecting an awesome miracle, SM models by-pass a more prudent approach of defining fields for some selected spatial points (as in BM) and instead go "all-in" with fields at all points, thereby creating infinities even before a single field equation is written. That is, welcome an infinite number of field encoding devices, each of which is presumably infinitely small in any arbitrary volume [8]. This nonsense is what the field equations are saying, if they have any relevance at all to the physical world. No wonder so many investigators are looking for something that makes more sense than math models that rely on magic and miracles. This sort of logical incoherence is clearly very close to triggering the "when all else fails" rule when the SM will be upgraded to quantized space, time and energy.
In contrast, BM precisely defines the vacuum [1] and facilitates its study without need for magic or miracles. In effect, BM separates physics from its marriage in the Standard Model with entertainment (the magic) and with religion (the miracles). The reader is invited to judge how much of the Standard Model might be salvaged as pure physics, once the entertainment and religious features are abandoned.
Editor's note: The reader is invited to post comments in agreement or disagreement with this or other Journal of Binary Mechanics articles at the Binary Mechanics Forum. The Journal also welcomes on-topic articles from other investigators and persons considering serving on the Journal's editorial board.
References
[1] Keene, J. J. "Vacuum thresholds" J. Bin. Mech. March, 2011.
[2] Keene, J. J. "Physics glossary" J. Bin. Mech. May, 2011.
[3] Keene, J. J. "Binary mechanics" J. Bin. Mech. July, 2010.
[4] Keene, J. J. "Binary mechanics simulator updated" J. Bin. Mech. March, 2011.
[5] Keene, J. J. "Fundamental forces in physics" J. Bin. Mech. October, 2014.
[6] Keene, J. J. "The central baryon bit cycle" J. Bin. Mech. March, 2011.
[7] Keene, J. J. "Electron acceleration and quantized velocity" J. Bin. Mech. April, 2011.
[8] Keene, J. J. "Higgs boson buries standard model?" J. Bin. Mech. March, 2015.
[9] Keene, J. J. "Strong operation disabled by inertia" J. Bin. Mech. March, 2011.
[10] Keene, J. J. "Bit operations order" J. Bin. Mech. May, 2011.
[11] Keene, J. J. "Non-spherical proton shape" J. Bin. Mech. February, 2015.
© 2015 James J Keene
