My proposition stands on the assumption that (1) Time and Space are physically created by an electromagnetic process of expansion and/or extension to be identified with the existing electromagnetic spectrum, (2) the electromagnetic field is quantized at each and every pointlike point-source where the distance in-between point-sources is Planck’s distance, and (3) each point-source marks the origin and it is a harmonic oscillator to be mentally placed at the very short-wavelength end of the electromagnetic spectrum (vertex of the cone).

With reference to the speed of light used as a term in linear and nonlinear equations, I would now like to submit for further evaluation what I have here rightly or wrongly titled <How does the speed of light work in a nonlinear field?>.

Let us then see first what happens in the radiative field of the Scottish mathematician James Clerk Maxwell. In the linear field, all electromagnetic radiations are characterized by the linearity of the field which does not posses a binding energy and which runs transverse to the nonlinear field; that is, to the process for the physical creation of time and/or space. This is clearly shown in the description of the photon, viz.:

and in general in all equations describing telecommunications and in those that handle linear optics, for example:

where “t” is the transit time of a light ray through a given substance “x”, and “n” is the refraction index of that substance.

In the nonlinear field we see nothing of the kind; that is, it does not exist the so-called “ray of light”, what we do have instead is the gravitational field or, to put it the other way around, the field where the electromagnetic process expands itself in Time and extends itself in Space. Moreover, in this field or else in the nonlinear field, the adoption of the speed of light “c” with its implicit meaning of

*distance runner* it does not express what is actually happening in the physical action described by a nonlinear equation and it is, one might say, altogether theoretically misleading and otiose. To come to the aid of my discourse, I shall now recall the mathematical relations:

and

putting thus in relief the difference that exists between the radial speed we see in the most famous equation and in the Schwarzschild radius on the one hand and the linear speed of light of (1a) and (1b) on the other, and point out their different physical meaning, and underline as well that their physical function does not explain the fact that they are today, and always were, mathematically treated on the same footing.

As for the physical function of that “c” symbol, I would like to make clear that a ray of light may be stopped, bent, or bounced back by a common mirror for domestic use. As we all know, and as experience tells, an ordinary sheet of lead can stop, in the linear field, X-ray radiations; radiations which are much more energetic of those characterizing a ray of light.

For example, the relevant scientific literature has often represented and represents, for the benefit of the specialists and non, the sketch of a ray of light, in a candle-like re-entry towards a black hole, or if you prefer, becoming bent by the gravitational force exercised by a black hole. This sort of exercise, as I have just said, may be done by a plain mirror. There is no need, I say, we necessitate not a black hole to do it. The spectacle that a black hole would offer it would be to compress and therefore to shorten, up to invalidate the nonlinear field or, what comes to the same thing, the process of temporal expansion and/or spatial extension. This would simply mean to render null and void the physical creation at the point (celestial coordinates) where it is supposed to exist a black hole.

In order to define equation (2a), I shall say that usually the total nuclear mass is always less of its own constituent particles. If, for example, we bombard with gamma radiation and split a deuterium called also deuteron or heavy hydrogen

_{1}^{2}H whose molar mass is 2.01355 g mol

^{−1} into a proton and a neutron, the sum of their respective masses (proton and neutron), that is: 1.00728 and 1.00867 is 0.00240 g mol

^{−1} less than the nuclear mass as a whole. As a matter of fact, the noted difference in energies may be conveniently ascribed to the left-hand side of equation (2a) which for convenience I shall now put in a clear quantitative form, viz.;

where ΔE

_{b} known as the binding energy, can be thought of as the change in internal energy needed to split the nucleus. In defining equation 2a, I wanted to put in relief how the speed of light, which can go from here to the Moon in less than a second, has been incongruently employed within the radial energy of the nucleus of an atom. What is, I may ask, its physical function with respect to the force of attraction of two or more protons inside the nucleus of an atom? How can we explain that to know the force required to separate two protons we must multiply their binding energy by the speed of light squared (c

^{2})? How could the almighty maker of this equation think to split a nucleus with the linear speed of light which has constant energy, and a very weak one at that? The linear speed of light in the nucleus of an atom, inside this <invisible niche> makes no sense, no sense at all. It would make a lot of sense though if, and only if, we can change the deceiving semblance of that c

^{2} and clothe it with its rightful physical nature, with its radial nonlinear function which in the case under consideration is rightly operating inside of a nucleus whose energy becomes weaker and weaker as we move out and away from its core.

It is my view that the speed of light in the form we have inherited it from the days of Maxwell, and with its linearity tag acquired and promoted by relativity, it does not belong in equations operating in the nonlinear field. Actually, it is not hard to see that the speed of light as a “distance runner” is not the same speed of light used since the beginning of last century as the gravitational potential. While the former is an expression of electromagnetic radiation whose constant energy is frequency-dependent and which runs transverse to the physical process for the creation of time and space; the latter is the process itself covering the full range of frequencies and the physical make-up of which is characterized by bonded energy which can never be shielded by one or a hundred sheets of lead. A binding energy alien to any electromagnetic signal the way it came down to us, as a mathematical construct, from Maxwell.

The speed of light, or what may be rightly called the radial speed of the physical process of creation is another thing altogether. Here, we see strength, we feel a push, we perceive a display of might, we sense an energy progressively bonded for the physical creation of each and every wavelength. This is not just an amorphous ray of light, we are talking about. This is a mechanism of creation for the expansion of time and the extension of space. This is a physical electromagnetic process with a reality of its own; it exists in free (optical) space (universal expansion), it coexists in matter (E=mc

^{2}) and it is therefore the prime constituent of all there is in the universe.