Iam not a mathematician and I doubt that Iam the first to have wondered this but I haven't seen any discussions covering so I will post my question here.

I have the greatest respect for Albert Einstein and don't for a moment consider myself to be his equal but every time I come across his postulate on the theory of light I get this niggling feeling a possibility has been completely missed.

Okay so in every test (in a vaccuum) the speed of light is a constant. Regardless of the speed at which the object emitting the light is moving or vise versa. Well as I see it one possbility that could explain this phenomenon is that what we perceive as light (this includes the entire spectrum) is only perceived by us when it is travelling relative to us; or an object we are viewing at the speed of light. Okay so yes if an object was moving and it emitted light we wouldn't see anything; unless. Light might in fact be a huge mass of energy waves, some travelling much faster than light, some travelling much slower and many travelling in all the ranges in between. This would also go towards explaining the red and blue shift of stars moving relative to our planet in that there are less energy waves travelling from them at relativistic speeds to us and that they are of a particular frequency and therefore colour.

Therefore with this barrage of energy all we ever perceive of it is that which is travelling at a relativistic speed of light to us. Naturally this would have to include all known objects in the matter does not interact with light energy that is not travelling at the speed of light relative to it, either faster or slower.

Just an idea and I welcome any debate.

It may help you to look at the theory and exactly what einstien said regarding relativity. He was very succinct and you need to come to your own understanding, it should remove those niggling feelings.