Speed of Energy – Charge Admittance

The Speed of ElectroMagnetic Energy—Reinterpreted via Charge Admittance

Abstract

This work reexamines the speed of light, c, through the framework of Charge Admittance (CA), challenging the prevailing notion of cc as an immutable universal constant. Drawing on the implications of Maxwell’s formulation c=1/ε₀μ₀, this paper argues that the permittivity (ε₀) and permeability (μ₀) of space are not fixed, and thus, neither is cc. By contextualizing cc as a derivative property of the electromagnetic vacuum, we propose that it varies spatially and temporally, shaped by local field properties. The CA model addresses three principal misconceptions about the speed of light—its constancy, its role as a universal speed limit, and its universality in vacuum. These are confronted with historical evidence, modern field theory, and implications from zero-point energy (ZPE), Planck-scale limits, and gravitational phenomena.

Introduction

The speed of light in vacuum, c, is a cornerstone of modern physics, embedded in Einstein’s theory of relativity and fixed by the SI system at 299,792,458 m/s. Yet, this assignment is based on a theoretical assumption rather than universal verification. The Charge Admittance model questions the invariability of c, positioning it instead as a function of the local electromagnetic field properties, encapsulated by vacuum permittivity ε₀ and permeability μ⁰. The historical and experimental foundations of cc reveal it as a context-dependent quantity rather than a fundamental constant.

Historical Evolution: Early Attempts and Observations

Galileo Galilei: In the early 17th century, Galileo made early efforts to measure the speed of light, introducing the concept that light did not propagate instantaneously.

Ole Rømer: In 1676, Rømer’s observation of the moons of Jupiter provided the first evidence that light had a finite speed, marking a critical shift in the scientific understanding of energy transmission.

James Clerk Maxwell: In the 19th century, Maxwell unified electricity and magnetism through his equations, establishing a relationship between c, permittivity (ε₀), and permeability (μ0). Maxwell’s equations describe how electromagnetic waves propagate through space, with the speed of light c given by: c² = 1/ε₀μ₀ where, ε₀ is the permittivity of free space, and μ₀ is the permeability of free space. This was a major advance in the unification of electricity, magnetism, and light as manifestations of the same electromagnetic field.

Einstein’s Theory of Relativity: In 1905, Einstein’s theory of special relativity posited c as a constant in all inertial frames of reference, deeply entwined with space-time structure. While special relativity treated c as a constant, general relativity acknowledged that gravitational fields could alter energy propagation, a nuance confirmed by experiments like Pound-Rebka.

Common Misconceptions About the Speed of Light

Constancy of c

Claim: Relativity asserts c is universally constant.

Rebuttal: Maxwell’s relation c=1/ε₀μ₀

Implies that variations in ε₀ and μ₀ directly impact c. Gravitational redshift observations (e.g., the Pound-Rebka experiment) suggest a dependency of electromagnetic wave behavior on gravitational potential, implying changes in ε₀μ₀ and, therefore, in c.

c as a Speed Limit

Claim: c is the ultimate speed limit for any causal interaction.

Rebuttal: The CA perspective permits locality-driven variation in cc due to field gradients. In sparse or low-energy-density regions, effective cc could be greater than in denser environments. The assumption of an absolute limit is a theoretical boundary, not an empirically universal law.

Universality in Vacuum

Claim: c in a vacuum is invariant and observer-independent.

Rebuttal: The “vacuum” is not empty but filled with ZPE and electromagnetic field fluctuations. Thus, ε₀μ₀ are subject to variation, implying that “vacuum” c is not a universal constant but a locally emergent property.

Historical Context and Interpretive Shift

From Galileo’s rudimentary speed-of-light experiments to Maxwell’s unification of electromagnetism, historical progress shows increasing reliance on theory over empirical variability. Einstein’s adoption of a constant cc was more philosophical than observational. CA reframes this lineage, restoring the empirical dynamism that early observers glimpsed but could not quantify.

Historical Context and Interpretive Shift

Fundamental Equation

From Maxwell:

$c &= \frac{1}{\sqrt{\varepsilon_0 \mu_0}} \\$

If ε₀ and μ₀ vary with space or gravitational influence, so must c.

Experimental Corroboration

Pound-Rebka:

$\Delta f &\propto g \quad \text{(Pound-Rebka effect)}$

Impedance and Admittance View

Electromagnetic impedance of free space:

$Z_0 &= \sqrt{\frac{\mu_0}{\varepsilon_0}} \approx 376.73 \, \Omega \\$

Admittance:

$Y_0 &= \frac{1}{Z_0} \\$

This quantity governs energy propagation, linking local field properties to the effective speed of light.

Gravitational Implications

Charge Admittance proposes a gravitational gradient in field properties:

$G_v &= -\frac{d(\varepsilon_0 \mu_0)}{dx} \\$

Altitude-related changes in g correlate with variations in c, through modulated field density.

Role of Zero-Point Energy and Planck’s Limit

ZPE defines a minimum energy state of space, ensuring nonzero field values even in “vacuum.” The presence of energy implies a real medium with nonzero ε₀μ₀. At Planck densities (e.g., near black holes), local values of ε₀ and μ₀ become extreme, potentially reducing c to near-zero and precluding event horizons in the CA model.

Implications and Future Directions

Variable c: Tied to field properties, not fundamental constants.
No Absolute Vacuum: ZPE establishes a minimum electromagnetic field density.
Technological Applications: Circuit design, antenna theory already leverage variable ε₀μ₀; CA extends this to cosmology.
Standard Earth Electromagnetic Parameter (SEEP): Proposed reference for defining Earth-local ε₀μ₀.

Conclusion

The Charge Admittance framework challenges the canonization of cc as a universal constant. Instead, it recasts the speed of light as a derived quantity contingent on local electromagnetic properties. This reconceptualization affects not only the interpretation of relativity but also our understanding of gravitation, cosmology, and field dynamics. In doing so, it invites a reformation of physics free from ideological constraints and rooted once more in observable field behavior.