Special Theory of Relativity is Wrong, Light Speed is not a Constant : New Cosmic Theory of Relativity (CTOR) Suggests

Anchor : Welcome to Dialogue (name of the channel programme), a static thing is never science, an interactive dynamic thing can only be termed as scientific. A scientist with this conviction tries to challenge the existing scientific laws and takes the community forward. I have with me in dialogue today, Professor C. S. Sunikrishnan from Mumbai Tata Institute of Fundamental Research. Welcome sir. You are trying to replace existing law, Einstein's relativity theory and absolute theory of yours. It is not easy to get digest for a common person. Can you please explain what is your absolute theory and how it is going to make changes in the new scientific paradigm now?

CS Unnikrishnan : It is not that I am trying to change a theory just for the sake of changing it. Einstein's theory, the special theory of relativity, as you said it was formulated in 1905, it is a basis of all of dynamics and relativistic physics today. In fact, it is a basis of fundamental physics. Now, it has a very crucial hypothesis, it says the propagation of light, the velocity of light is independent of the velocity of the source or the observer or anything, it is an invariant constant. This is the light hypothesis and everything in the theory depends on this. Now, one crucial discovery I made about 15 years ago was if you do a direct experiment to test this light hypothesis, then I find that it is not a absolute constant. It depends on the velocity of the observer, just like the propagation of sound, very familiar wave which depends on the velocity of the observer, light behaves almost the same way. So, therefore, if that is so, the light hypothesis is not correct, it means a entire Einstein's theory is not also correct and it has to be replaced by a different theory and it so happens that I also knew what this new theory was. That required other lateral thinking, but I found that it is a gravity of all the matter in this universe which is enormous. It is that gravity which controls everything in dynamics in physics including the propagation of light. Therefore, the universe acts as an absolute unique reference frame for all physical phenomena including the propagation of light. So, it is a drastic change from the paradigm we follow in physics today, where we say that there is no such absolute reference frame, there is no absolute time, absolute space and so on which came with Einstein's theory. So, all this will go, an absolute frame is a universe as absolute frame is a reality. Then the Einstein's theory has to be totally replaced, it is not a correction, it has to be replaced with this theory which I am talking about which I am calling cosmic relativity aptly because the gravity of the cosmos controls all physical phenomena. So, that is a summary.

Anchor : So, as you said your attempt to change was not intentional. So, when was the first spark that you are getting that there are some several situations that you need to revisit the existing things?

CS Unnikrishnan :  See if you ask any serious student of physics, people who have studied physics with the intention of doing physics as a profession, as a career, as the main activity of life. Then he would say that some of the fundamental hypothesis we use routinely in physics including the light hypothesis, they are suspect, we accept it as a faith, accept it on faith as a belief because it is consistent with many other things. But this when we say there is a hypothesis or a postulate that means it is not experimentally proven as a fact, then it remains an object of doubt all throughout. Sometimes in a lifetime you do not get a chance to test it directly, but when you get such a chance you should do that. And when I did that kind of a test because I knew that I realized slowly, I realized slowly that the light hypothesis does not have a direct experimental confirmation. When I found a way of testing it, people did not find a way earlier, I found a way of testing it about 15 years ago and I tested it, then I found that it is not a born out. Now the theory is complete, I wrote a complete book about it, it is called New Relativity in the Gravitational Universe published this year.

Anchor : Topic is all about gravity and we have been hearing this from Newton and later came Einstein with space-time curvature concept and all. Now the absolute theory that you are proposing. So, when did you feel the former concepts are incompetent or it is not complete?

CS Unnikrishnan : Yeah, so there are two aspects, one see all our fundamental theories were completed before 1930, that means today's physics the fundamental theories are special theory of relativity, then the general theory of relativity which is a theory of gravity as well which these two are due to Einstein and then there is quantum mechanics. So, these are the fundamental theory which we use today and they were all completed or considered complete before 1930. However, our cosmology started only in 1930, before 1930 we did not know much about cosmos at all, we knew Milky Way, some few galaxies and lot of stars that is all. After 1930, after Hubble's discovery of extra galactic world which is resusing, which is going away from us, which is interpreted as expansion of the universe, then we realized that slowly that the universe is at least thousand times larger than what we thought earlier, that means there is lot of matter also in this universe, which means there is corresponding gravity. So, when you calculate this gravity, it is enormous and since gravity affects every physical phenomenon directly, including the propagation of light, behavior of clocks, whatever, then I realized that it is this gravity of the universe which controls all dynamics, all I have to do was to check whether the numbers match, whether this gravity is sufficient to control everything as we see them. And when I calculated all this, everything agreed amazingly accurately. Then I knew I was completely correct, this is going to be the new physics and the old physics has to change completely. So, Einstein's special theory of relativity which rejects absolute frame and so on is entirely wrong, it has to be completely replaced, whereas Einstein's general theory of relativity, it is just incomplete, it is not wrong, but it is incomplete, it has to be supplemented by what I am saying and it has to be made complete. So, that is what I did.

Anchor : Scientific community have heard about emergent gravity from Sri Tanu Padmanabhan eminent scientist, which is not contradicting Einstein's theory, but this is totally replacing it. So, how this is going to change quantum mechanics, relativity, the theories we have now and what is going to make the changes in the whole paradigm?

CS Unnikrishnan : Padmanabhan's theory, that was a reinterpretation of the nature of gravity and this is speculation, there is no empirical support to what Padmanabhan was saying, he was proposing an idea as a behaviour of gravity is somehow related to some thermodynamic concepts and so on. That does not change anything in the way we use these theories and of course, Padmanabhan's theory was based on special theory of relativity and so on. What I am saying is of a entirely different nature. I am saying the special theory of relativity with its light hypothesis and so on is entirely has to be, it is not a correct theory. It has to be entirely replaced by cosmic relativity, gravity theory based on the gravity of the cosmos, that is one aspect of it. Since I am saying all phenomena, all physical phenomena involved in dynamics, movement and so on is controlled by this gravity. Even the dynamics of atomic entities, which is a theory of quantum mechanics has to now depend on this interaction, the interaction of all the matter with entities in the laboratory as a basis of quantum mechanics also. When I do that, I also see a change, a definite change in quantum mechanics. I have not talked about that very much so far, though I have written some papers on that. That is for future activity, but not only in relativity, but also in quantum mechanics. I know now what is the correct way of doing things, what is the correct physics and so both will change. So, we say I am promoting, I am advocating a change in the whole paradigm of fundamental physics, dynamics, relativity and quantum mechanics.

Anchor : 

Concepts like tachyons from ECG Sudarshan, the Einstein law was telling, no other matter can travel faster than light, but according to your new concept, what is the displacement of light and details regarding that?

CS Unnikrishnan : See, in Einstein's theory, nothing can travel faster than light because of the structure of that theory, the mathematical structure of that theory, but in my theory, cosmic relativity, the gravity of the universe, all the matter of the universe controls all dynamics including the propagation of light. Therefore, the amount of gravity is related to the maximum speed which is possible, which happens to be the speed of light or the speed of gravitational waves and things like that. Nothing can go faster than this in this theory because it is all controlled by limited by this gravity, which means particles like tachyons also cannot exist in this theory. In Sudarshan's conception, the Einstein's restriction that nothing can travel faster than light is sidelined by tachyons because they are generated with a velocity larger than the velocity of light. So, they do not cross the velocity of light to become faster than light, they are created with velocity larger than the velocity of light, that was his conception. In this theory, nothing can be propagate faster than light because it is controlled limited by this absolute gravity. So, tachyons are not part of this theory.

Anchor : We are expecting that we are going to get the ultimate secret about the universe, the earth from LIGO project. You are one among the scientists who are associating with that and what are the details that soon we are going to expect and how is it happening in India also?

CS Unnikrishnan : LIGO detection of gravitational waves opens a new window to see objects in this universe, seeing things which we cannot see with light, now can be seen by detecting the gravitational waves from those sources like a black hole, binary black holes, far away neutron stars and things like that. So, it reveals certain secrets of what we could not see earlier, we can see now in that sense it is new astronomy.

Anchor : But there are certain challenges too.

CS Unnikrishnan : Yes, so in fact detecting it was itself was a very great challenge, it took 30 or 40 years of development. It would have been a good thing to have a third LIGO detector in India, that is why we proposed it about 10 years ago and the government was very supportive and the project is on. But in the last 6 years we have not had much progress in that project, which I am very much pained about and disappointed about though I am part of it. In fact, I am so disappointed about it that I recently wrote a paper re-evaluating the relevance of the LIGO India project with a slightly negative conclusion that the relevance has gone down, but it is still worth doing it. It may face the danger of being just a supportive instrument, which is not very nice for India when the country is willing to spend the thousands of crores for a fundamental physics project. It has to be discussed in public again is what I feel.

Anchor : 

How do you evaluate the Indian education system in developing the scientific temper in a child from school days onwards to developing a researcher or scholar or scientist?

CS Unnikrishnan : Many of us, not only me, many of my friends came through the Indian educational system. In fact, the vernacular system of education then along with that English education and so on and we had good teachers and I do not think we suffered in any way in developing a scientific temper and so on because this country always talked about this. Of course, we stay, we are among an environment where there are lot of superstitions and ritualistic beliefs. So, we have to surpass all that which is an individual's effort. We can fall into that or we can be out of it and when we learn and so the education system is at least in the beginning says it is good, but in the university the teaching is as if this is science came from the west. You learn all these techniques, these methods and then you can be part of this as a accessory. You go abroad, you can make a name for yourself, but this is science from the west and that attitude has to change. It is science, it is science global. We have contributed it maybe at some stage. Definitely you have heard about the Kerala School of Mathematics and Astronomy and the 15th century and so on and if you look at those books, it is very clear that the level of contributions. So, it is a common wealth. The real common wealth is this knowledge and if we fall into this impression of we are doing western science, then we will never be able to question the fundamental concepts given to us. We will be scared about questioning these things. If that happens, we will never be able to rewrite a theory. We will never be able to change a paradigm even when we know that what we are thinking is right. So, that has to change and that has to change by exposure and by self-thinking.

Anchor : How western communities are receptive about new changes happening in the so-called outer world other than them? So, is that any tendency that to nullify nothing other than western science?

CS Unnikrishnan : 

It is a fact that the western scientists abroad think that it is their science. They made it. They are just doing it. That is true. That is a fact also in some sense. That is because we are not assertive enough. For example, I can state this from the context of what I have done. What I have done is absolutely impeccable in its logic and its empirical evidence. It is right. There is no choice for the physics community, global physics community, but to accept what I am saying eventually. That I am completely sure. I am more confident than Copernicus or Galileo in this aspect. However, the Indian science community should have looked at what I have done, scrutinized, debated it and either rejected it based on this debate or supported, accepted and supported me have kept absolutely quiet with no response, which has greatly delayed the acceptance of what I am saying. But eventually it has to be accepted because the universe with all its galaxies and matter, after all it exists. We know that it exists. We can see through a telescope. So, the gravity also exists. If the gravity exists, then it controls all dynamics. So, what I am saying is logically correct, it is empirically correct. There is no choice, but the question is whether the Indian scientific community will ever take courage in saying that we can say something new. We can also advance a new paradigm and contribute to science. And until that happens, it will stagnate. But I am determined to.

Anchor : 

make people look at it. Having a very desperate response from your fellow community.

CS Unnikrishnan : So, how do you take things forward? Yeah. See, it requires enormous integrity, confidence in one's results and a belief in what one has done properly to sustain because one can be easily discouraged in this kind of a situation. But I am not discouraged at all. I am not deterred by this kind of petty response because I know that this has happened many, many times in the history of science. It has happened. So, I am repeatedly warning the scientific community in India that listen to me. Just listen to me what I am trying to say. Debate. And if you have an objection, let's debate it. But if you cannot object to what I am saying, support me. And I will more vigorously do this. I recently joined the Defense Institute of Advanced Technology in Pune. And they are very supportive. And I am going to advance these theories, its applications in the next four or five years, very vigorously.

Anchor : 

So, I think it is important to talk about different governments' sensitivity towards science and developments happening all around. We have experiences of 30-40 years.

CS Unnikrishnan : See, there is a government policy for science. And this policy has been very generous in this country all the time. Of course, this was expected from Nehru's time because Nehru had a personal friendship with many scientists at that time. People like Homi Baba or Saha, who built up the institutions, there is a personal relationship with that. After that, Indira Gandhi and various prime ministers like that, this policy has continued. And it is also, there is a realization that the support of fundamental science was very crucial in the development of two absolutely crucial departments, the Department of Space and the Department of Atomic Energy in the country. And of course, associated with that, all other science departments. So, generally both the public perception as well as a politician's perception, a politician means people in power of various governments, they were all very supportive of science in India because they want a visible scientific activity of the country, certainly at a level which is high enough to be noticed by the global physics community, global science community. And that is being continued even by government today, though it is not very clear whether all support for science is measured, well judged things that we cannot say. But even today, the support for science is good, but at the same time, the support for primary education has remained low. There are lot more institutions, but the effectiveness of education has not, it has only reduced I would say. I mean, we cannot build a competent, educated society by doing by use application just like that. It has to be happening in the school, in the proper school and not like just some coaching classes and so on, where that kind of a focus is probably slowly.

Anchor : going away is what I feel. So, all the very best, sir. Let your struggle have a result, let your community ready to hear you and have a debate with you.

CS Unnikrishnan :  

All the very best. I don't know whether the community will be ready to debate, but I have to force them to debate, that I will force them to debate. And that is what I want to do in the next few years.