As another classical physicist using a theoretical approach to the same problem succinctly put it:"... there emerges the outline of an alternative "relativistic" physics, quite distinct from that of Maxwell-Einstein, fully as well confirmed by the limited observations available to date, and differing from it notonly in innumerable testable ways but also in basic physical concepts and even in definitional or ethnical (sic) premises as to the nature of physics. Thus a death struggle is joined that must result in thedestruction of one world-system or the other: Either light is complicated and matter simple, as I think,or matter is complicated and light simple, as Einstein thought. I have shown here that some elegantmathematics can be put behind my view. It has long been known that inordinate amounts of elegantmathematics can be put behind Einstein's. Surely the time fast approaches to stop listening tomathematical amplifications of our own internal voices and to go into the laboratory and listen to whatnature has to say."Modifications of Maxwell's Equations, T E Phipps, The Classical Journal of Physics, Vol 2, 1, Jan1983, p. 21.Ralph Sansbury has now done precisely that!In simple terms,
Sansbury gives the electron a structure by proposing a number of chargedparticles (he calls subtrons) orbiting within the classical radius of an electron.A simple calculation gives the surprising result that these subtrons are moving at a speed of 2.5million light years per second!That is, they could theoretically cover the distance from Earth to the far side of the Andromedagalaxy in one second. This gives some meaning to the term 'instantaneous action at a distance'.(Note that this is a requirement for any new theory of gravity).
Also I have always considered it evidence of peculiar naivety or arrogance on the part of scientists, suchas Sagan, who search for extra-terrestrial intelligence (SETI) by using radio signals. What superior intelligence would use such a slow, and therefore useless, interstellar signaling system?) Such near infinite speed requires that there can be no mass increase with velocity.
The speed of light is not aspeed barrier.
All of the experiments which seem to support Einstein's notion are interpreted by Sansbury in a morecommon-sense fashion.
When an electron or other charged particle is accelerated in an electromagnetic field, it isdistorted from a sphere into an ellipsoid. The more electromagnetic energy applied to acceleratingthe particle, the more energy is absorbed by distortion of the particle until, ultimately, at thespeed of light, there is an expulsion of the subtrons. Under such conditions, the particle onlyAPPEARS to be gaining mass.
Notably, in the past few months, scientists in Hamburg using the most powerful electron microscopehave found on about a dozen occasions out of 10 million trials, relativistic electrons recoiled moreviolently off protons than had ever been seen before. This may turn out to be direct experimental proof of Sansbury's model of the electron having structure.To return to the experiment involving a "chopped" light beam: One of the major requirements of thenew theory is instantaneous electrostatic forces between subtrons. This forms the basis of a radical newview of the basis of electromagnetic radiation which is now the subject of stunning experimentalconfirmation.