The results obtained from GPS (GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM), a comprehensive satellite communication project developed by the United States, have clearly shown that light can travel at speeds of (c+v) and (c−v). It is incorrect to think that this experimental result from the GPS project undermines the validity of the two physical postulates put forward by Albert Einstein. These postulates are the foundation of modern physics and are extremely strong and binding in terms of physical laws. The Alice Law inherently incorporates these two postulates, easily expressing that light travels at (c+v) and (c−v) speeds, and strongly defends the postulates on which its existence is based. The Alice Law is a new physical law. In these web pages, the existence of this new physical law is demonstrated.

The existence proof of the Alice Law is entirely based on the two postulates proposed by Einstein. We present the development of the proof based on these postulates.

EXPERIMENT 1: There is a completely enclosed box with a man inside. While the man is asleep, the box begins to move. It travels in a straight line at a constant speed (without acceleration). The box is built in such a way that it does not produce any sound or vibration that would indicate movement. When the man wakes up, he cannot tell that the box is in motion. That is the purpose of the experiment. The man must not be able to tell whether the box is moving or stationary. He then begins his experiment.

He marks the center point of the box (point O). Then he emits two beams of light simultaneously from points A and B, which represent the front and back ends of the box, and measures the time it takes for the light to reach point O. Both beams arrive at point O SIMULTANEOUSLY.

Reference Figure

The man records the result of his experiment:

MEASUREMENT 1: In the experiment I conducted inside the box, I measured the speed of light as "c". The light beams emitted simultaneously from points "A" and "B" arrived at point "O", the center of the box, SIMULTANEOUSLY. The result I obtained inside the box is the same as the measurement I made outside.

The situation described above is a representation of the first of Einstein's two postulates. The first postulate is as follows:

Principle of Relativity: The laws of physics are valid in all inertial systems (those moving in a straight line at constant speed).

In other words, an experiment conducted in a stationary system will yield the same result when conducted in a system moving at a constant speed in the same direction. In the experiment above, the man obtains the same result. From this point forward, we will develop everything based on the scenario described above. Because the result obtained by the man in the box serves as a reference point for the PROOF OF THE ALICE LAW, it is referred to as "MEASUREMENT 1".

The man reports his findings to his friend outside via the phone inside the box and says: “In the stationary environment I am in, I found the speed of light to be ‘c’ in the experiments I conducted. This value is the same as the one I measured outside the box.” His friend replies: “The box you are in is not stationary. It is moving at a constant speed in a straight line.”

The man inside the box is surprised to learn that he is in motion. He is confident that he conducted the experiments correctly. However, there is a strange situation he cannot explain. If the box he is in is indeed moving, then the light beams emitted simultaneously from points A and B should have reached the midpoint of the box at different times. But in his experiments, this was not the case. Although he does not believe his friend due to the confidence he has in the results of his experiments, he is filled with doubt. Using a saw, he opens a large window on the side of the box. He sees that the box is indeed moving. Therefore, he decides to repeat his experiments. But this time, before starting the experiment, he uses the saw to open several windows on the sides of the box. Then, while the box is moving, he perfectly repeats his experiments. He gets the exact same results as in the first experiment.

The man writes down his result: “The propagation speed of light inside the box is independent of the speed of the box. Moreover, there is no distinction to be made between inside or outside of the box. Because opening several windows on the sides of the box did not change the outcome. As a result, I can say that the speed of light is independent of the speed of objects.” The second postulate introduced by Einstein:

Universal Speed of Light: The speed of light in a vacuum is the same for all inertial observers, regardless of the motion of the source or the observer, or any assumed medium.

It is impossible to refute the result presented by this theoretical experiment.

The theoretical experiment is designed using the midpoint of both boxes as the reference point. Therefore, suggesting that objects contract in length due to velocity does not change the result, since both boxes move at equal speeds.

The problem is structured as follows: There are two completely identical boxes, each containing a person. The front and back sides of the boxes have small holes through which light can pass.

1) Both boxes are approaching each other from opposite directions at EQUAL SPEEDS. From the rear of each box, a beam of light is following the box moving ahead of it. (Figure 1)

 
Figure 1

2) The moment when the light beams reach the boxes is adjusted in such a way that, as the boxes pass by each other and their CENTER POINTS (O and O') coincide, the light reaches the rear point of the box it is following. In other words, at the exact moment when beam B enters the rear of Box 1, beam A — coming from the opposite direction — enters the front of Box 1. This same condition applies to the other box as well. (Figure 2)

Figure 2

(In reality, the condition shown in Figure 2 can never be met due to General Relativity. However, the structure of the problem as it is presented is sufficient to guide us toward the conclusion. The reason that the condition in Figure 2 can never truly be met lies within the outcome of this theoretical experiment itself.)

EXPERIMENT RESULTS

Regarding the final positions of the light beams inside the boxes, we can logically reason as follows:

When the beam of light entering the front of Box 1 reaches its back, the beam entering the front of Box 2 will simultaneously reach the back of Box 2. Since the boxes are moving in opposite directions, the beams that entered from the rear openings of each box have not yet reached the front. (Figure 3)

Figure 3

But is this line of reasoning correct? From the perspective of an external observer, as in the current situation, we might think this reasoning is valid. However, the laws of physics suggest that this thinking does not fully reflect reality in nature. Because we are confronted with Postulate 1 and Postulate 2. Due to MEASUREMENT 1, the observers inside the boxes will determine that two light beams entered through the front and rear holes of their boxes at the SAME TIME, and that both beams reached the opposite sides of the boxes at the SAME TIME. What appears true to us as external observers is not true for the people inside the boxes.

Let’s now represent the sequence of events after the light beams reach the boxes using figures. 

In this theoretical experiment, it is not possible to claim that the result is invalid based on current General Relativity. Readers without a background in physics will understand the reasoning below as they continue reading the upcoming sections.

1) For a single box, the condition in Figure 2 can always be satisfied.

2) Let us define the front and back ends of both boxes as A', A'' and B', B''. Even if we assume that both boxes undergo length contraction, the contractions are equal in the direction of motion. When A' and A'' coincide, B' and B'' will also coincide. (Figure 5)

Figure 5

3) If, under the condition "Figure 2 = Figure 5", one of the observers inside the boxes perceives the light at positions A and B in space, then due to General Relativity, the observer in the other box cannot detect the same light. Therefore, for that observer, the light is not located at positions A and B in space.

4) If both observers inside the boxes detect the light, then according to General Relativity, the boxes cannot occupy the same position in space along the direction of motion. We thus arrive at the same conclusion: the light is located at different positions in space for each observer.

5) If it is claimed that the length contractions of the boxes relative to each other are not equal (in other words, if one of the boxes is considered a stationary reference frame even though both are in motion), then — since the condition in Figure 2 holds for a single box — we end up with a situation as shown in Figure 6. The question then becomes: which observer inside which box detected the light? In this case, whether it is one observer or both, the light still exists in different spatial positions for each observer.

Figure 6

As seen, it is not possible to refute the result presented by Experiment 2 based on General Relativity. Thus, we have proven that light can exist simultaneously at different positions in space. This proof forms the foundation for explaining (c+v) and (c−v).

Experiment setup: Two boxes that are identical in every aspect move toward each other at a constant speed. There are small holes on the front and rear sides of the boxes through which light can pass, and each box contains an observer. The fact that the boxes have different speeds is of no importance. At the moment when the midpoints of the boxes align (point O), light sources A and B, which are equidistant from point O, are triggered. (Figure 7)

Figure 7

For both boxes, the sequence of events unfolds as shown in the diagram below: The graph is a space-time graph and represents the only condition that satisfies both postulates. (Figure 8)

Figure 8

Sequence of events:

t1 – At the moment when the midpoints of both boxes align, light sources A and B are triggered simultaneously.

t2 – The light beams traveling from both directions reach the front and back of the boxes simultaneously. At this moment, the positions of the boxes in space are different. The observers inside detect that the light enters simultaneously from the front and back.

t3 – The light that has entered reaches the midpoint of the boxes simultaneously.

t4 – The light reaches the opposite sides of the boxes simultaneously.

"Experiment 2", which serves as the existence proof of the Alice Law, is essentially a confirmation of Postulates 1 and 2. Each observer measures the speed of light as c inside their own box. Furthermore, in order for both observers to see that the lights were turned on simultaneously, there is only one condition for triggering: the moment when the midpoints of the boxes align (point O), the light sources must be equidistant from that point. The result is (c+v)(c−v).

Experiment 2 is the existence proof of the Alice Law.

(c+v)(c−v) exists in nature.

The speed of light is relative.

STUDIES I HAVE FOUND THROUGH MY RESEARCH
AND BELIEVE MAY BE RELEVANT TO THE SUBJECT