Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Did you know this, about the Theory of Light ?

page: 13
51
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 11:05 PM
link   
reply to post by kingkong0193
 


Very good Point..... No... but in fact an exilent Point...

But it is Not the Colour that is interesting, or even the definition of any given colour but instead the searching for the mechanics behind it all, that is the adventure ???




posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by kingkong0193
 


Sorry double post...

[edit on 25-7-2010 by The Matrix Traveller]



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by LeeRain
 


Thank you for your Post....


What you have to realize is that the key underlying theory here is this 'exposure'. Where, worms in holes bend the G Well to the point distance is irrelevant.


But what produces these Rules (or Laws) and and how ?


The human species interprets the end result and Not the cause.

What we experience and how that is produced are two entirelly different things.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by kingkong0193
 


Soft Light Crimson perhaps to describe red ? eg: The soft light crimson coloured blood flowed eagerly from his neck wound?.



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by mazzroth
 



I know You are aware of this ???

But I have put this Link for others...

For a list of Colours…

en.wikipedia.org...


I use the word "Red" in relating to the end of the colour band, at the Blackest (Not Black but toward the Black.) end of the range where...
Yellow to Red is seen





rather than its opposite band Blue to Violet.





If the Prism is in this orientation to the Edges of the Slit…






If we Invert the "Edge" only, these Colours seen in the above Drawing of the Prism Change from Yellow & Red to Blue & Violet ???
Yellow to Blue (its Complimentry Colour) and Red to Violet (Its Complimentry Colour)

Why ???



Here is a Little test for you to prove that Colour has "Opposites"...

Take a piece of White paper and colour in a spot of say Blue (about 2 cm in Diam).
Stare at this spot for a few seconds.... the longer time the better the result.

Slide another piece of White paper rapidly over the top of the first peice of paper with the Blue Spot to hide the Blue spot.

And Yellow appears where the Blue Spot was in your Vision.

Yellow is the Complementary Colour of Blue....



Now take another piece of White Paper and Colour in the Blackest Spot you can.

When we perform the same test by Rapidly covering the Black Spot with a piece of white Paper a White Spot replaces the Black Spot.

Not this Spot (White) Appears a Brighter White than the White Paper ???

So White is The Complimentary Colour to Black ???

The Same Applies if a White Spot is on a Black Back Ground... A Blacker Spot appears than the Black Back Ground ???


The above test which I have described as you are most likely to be aware of is the test used to find a colours “Complimentary Colour”….

But My Question is to you ....

Why is the White Spot Brighter than the surrounding Paper ???

This has to do with thresholds of our Vision concerning the Interpretation of Colour and The Mind.
The Colour Range we Interpret is well within the Thresholds of Black and white the Mind Sees.

It is Not the Eyes or Brain that sees, as thy are only Part of the “Interface” the Mind uses to See this experience i.e. this little Universe.

Black and White are Colours, Contrary to the belief that Black and White are Not Colours Conveniently by many.

Black involves Light…. or we would Not be able to see Black that is if Black absorbs all Light.

We (The Mind) need LIGHT to See…

So if Black absorbs all light as many are taught, how can we see Black ???

If No LIGHT was to be reflected from a Black object, we would Not be able to see it but rather a Hole in the same shape and size would appear instead???

But this does Not happen and we still see the Black Component ???

[edit on 1-8-2010 by The Matrix Traveller]



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Matrix Traveller

If No LIGHT was to be reflected from a Black object, we would Not be able to see it but rather a Hole in the same shape and size would appear instead???

We perceive black as the lack of optic nerve stimulus. Black objects we're familiar with do not uniformly absorb 100% of light which is why we can see them.



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by john_bmth
 


Can you please Give us more detail on this ???



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 05:43 PM
link   
reply to post by john_bmth
 


Do you know if a mini-cam has ever been placed looking forward, in the eye of any Species to see what is taking place on the "inner" face of the "iris" ???

This should be done, as I think the medical profession may be surprised with what they find, raising a billion and one more questions regarding Sight.



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 05:56 PM
link   
I find this thread of yours very interesting, but somehow i get the feeling that you make a lot of assumptions, claims about 50k images, yet have only presented simple logical experiments, and act like you cannot talk because you are not allowed to


I am not trying to discredit you, am just puzzled over how certain you seem to be with these inners and outers, partition maps and whatnot.

I'd like to take this image you posted, and ponder over it a bit:

files.abovetopsecret.com...

notice how the slit just limits the passage of light, and thus it starts to fade before the prism. When it bends in the prism, the angle is slightly different at the top then at the bottom 'spectral part' due to the varying incoming "stream". This would suggest the wave nature of light, as described here: www.glafreniere.com...



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 06:45 PM
link   
First of all S+F for such an interesting thread.

Secondly i've just started painting and have wondered just how light and colour 'works' and then i find this thread.

Amazing.


Allow me to drop one of my own quotes here:

My guess on the issue is that WE are the universe experiencing itself, the unconscious act of experience alters the universe and those alterations are the experience.... Thus the experiencer and the experience are one and the same?

--

My field of study is sound, and sound is created by molecular vibration. I'm fascinated by the ideas of Cymantics and also spiritual ideas such as Tibetan chanting, meditative tones and brain states, the original ideas of sound creating the universe and such thoughts. But to explore this angle, is a refreshing concept.

I also believe that we are both receivers and transmitters, although our field of consciousness (or unconsciousness) exists outside your body, in maybe an electro-magnetic field (or maybe the aura).

I'm also interested in the theories of aether and how to the aether is the invisible 'plate' upon which everything can be placed and mixed together.

Very deep rabbit hole this one, and i'll be staying tuned




[edit on 1-8-2010 by mr-lizard]



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by above
 


Thank you for the Post and Links.


yet have only presented simple logical experiments, and act like you cannot talk because you are not allowed to


LOL.

Or is it because we don't have all the answers ???

I try to keep this subject as simple as possible so anyone can understand it...


The reason why we interpret LIGHT as being both in the nature of Particle and Wave theory is Not surprising as All in our Experience (i.e. This little Universe) is of a dual nature because of its base Processing.

Much seems to also be based on a Paradox nature… Perhaps this is what leads to having the power of choice ???

We assume that the 3D experience is produced in the same manner as what we observe after the information has been “Decoded” involving an elaborate System through the Brain.

But this does Not dictate that the Cause of this experience is also of a 3D Source.

It could very well be generated from a Non Dimensional Source via Instruction sets based on Conceptual principals involving Geometry.

Do you realise that what Consciousness actually is, and where its Origin is within the Brain, is only assumed based on theory.

Much is being done to date and some very, very strange phenomena is being discovered.

Recently I saw and English program on TV regarding this..

A Subject was given a simple task of making choices based on Yes & No, through a couple of button switches, while is brain was being scanned.

The Very odd thing that was discovered was that the technician observing the Scan (in real Time) noticed he could see the decision made via the Scan, about 6 seconds before the subject themselves Consciously made their decision ???

This was done by comparing the action of enabling one of the button switches against the Scan which was also recorded.

The Odd thing was, there was Activity in the Brain 6 Seconds before the Choice was made by the subject to activate the Switch, not the accepted >< 0.6 of a second for the so called physical reaction time ???

[edit on 1-8-2010 by The Matrix Traveller]



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 07:47 PM
link   
reply to post by mr-lizard
 


Thank you for the S&F I yes I would have to agree with your statement...


I also believe that we are both receivers and transmitters, although our field of consciousness (or unconsciousness) exists outside your body


This is what we found and led us into many other Questions.



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 07:59 PM
link   
My whole theory of light is this. Light is simply a form of energy that is not any color at all. The reason we see light at all is because when that energy comes into contact with mass there is a slight change in that energy and we perceive this as color. Take the vast blackness of space. If light was as everyone always claims it is, then the universe should be literally filled with light everywhere. Yet it is not. But when the radiation (energy) comes into contact, you have perceived light. Your eye can react to the slight changes in this change in the energy and sends it to the brain as what we think is an image. But in reality, you never seen light, only the interpretation of what it is, which is energy.

So light has no color at all.



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Matrix Traveller
reply to post by above
 


Thank you for the Post and Links.

The reason why we interpret LIGHT as being both in the nature of Particle and Wave theory is Not surprising as All in our Experience (i.e. This little Universe) is of a dual nature because of its base Processing.

Much seems to also be based on a Paradox nature… Perhaps this is what leads to having the power of choice ???

We assume that the 3D experience is produced in the same manner as what we observe after the information has been “Decoded” involving an elaborate System through the Brain.

But this does Not dictate that the Cause of this experience is also of a 3D Source.

It could very well be generated from a Non Dimensional Source via Instruction sets based on Conceptual principals involving Geometry.

Do you realise that what Consciousness actually is, and where its Origin is within the Brain, is only assumed based on theory.

Much is being done to date and some very, very strange phenomena is being discovered.

Recently I saw and English program on TV regarding this..

A Subject was given a simple task of making choices based on Yes & No, through a couple of button switches, while is brain was being scanned.

The Very odd thing that was discovered was that the technician observing the Scan (in real Time) noticed he could see the decision made via the Scan, about 6 seconds before the subject themselves Consciously made their decision ???

This was done by comparing the action of enabling one of the button switches against the Scan which was also recorded.

The Odd thing was, there was Activity in the Brain 6 Seconds before the Choice was made by the subject to activate the Switch, not the accepted >< 0.6 of a second for the so called physical reaction time ???



Then this kind of backs up my own theory that 'thought' can be received by those somehow tuned into the medium of whatever carries the information.

Somehow bridging the gap between awareness and unwareness. It all depends on your brain state, which depends on (i believe) a frequency state of your 'essence' or electro-magnetic pulse (or for lack of a better word 'aura') - we can change our brain states (thus changing moods and ability to consciously or unconsciously think / dream / daydream / meditate / concentrate etc).

I believe this (besides body language) is how we can detect 'moods'. I also think animals are more tuned into mood detection (which is on the end result a discharge of pheremones (?) - which reveal fear or sadness or lust, which is apparent in smell, due to the biological processes involved (release of adrenaline etc) BUT before this bodily change, there is a change in our signal or thought waves.

BUT what triggers the change? Beyond the obvious - it's a reaction to external stimulus, but i believe we can unconsciously detect things BEFORE we become consciously aware. As though our electro-magnetic field is reacting to another electro-mgnetic field or aura state or however you wish to imagine it.

So going back to being 'tuned' - we respond and react to frequency states of sound in our range of hearing and perception 22hz to 22khz , but then imagine all those low frequencies that we don't necessarily hear but feel and then all those frequencies such at higher pitches that are beyond our detection. Just because we can't hear them doesn't mean they don't affect us.

Ok - going back to the point in hand. Sound waves are a result of displacing or vibrating air right?

Air is a combination of different gases made from varying molecules. As we know molecules can be affected by light.

Surely then sound waves are dependant on whatever information is stored in the essence of air. BEFORE the experiencer 'hears' it, the molecular structure of the air has changed.

Our very hearing is based on transduction. Or the conversion of one type of energy into another.


Vibrations are then decoded into finer and finer vibrations through our ear drum and tiny bones in our ear and then the vibrations are changed into electrical (?) energy right?

What if sight or our decoding experience of light - changes the very nature of the ORIGINAL nature of light waves / molecules to another energy. Thus the observation changing the light.... as in that video.

I'm sorry if i'm going off topic, but i'm writing as i'm thinking....



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 08:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
Any one familiar with light reflection and refraction.
I recall there is a dependence solely on the electric field.


I'm sorry, Sire, but this sounds utterly idiotic.

EM radiation is really an oscillating field of both E and M components.



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 08:15 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Thank you for posting on this thread...


EM radiation is really an oscillating field of both E and M components.


100 % correct....

What Produces these ???

And where do the Laws we have discovered, regarding EM come from and what, Not who, has produced these Laws and How ??

[edit on 1-8-2010 by The Matrix Traveller]



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 08:21 PM
link   
and what if our unconscious energy as i discussed is also affecting the 'raw energy' around us.

Thus mass media marketing techniques and subliminal advertising and a consumer controlled society is a victim to those who firgured this out before us.

Symbology in media, corporate logos etc?

What is a symbol?

A symbol is a VISUAL, PHYSICAL THOUGHT.


You see the 'M' logo of Mcdonalds - you unconsciously think of food , your body unconsciously decides if its hungry or not, chemical changes take place and maybe a desire for a Big mac creeps in.

This is social coding. This stuff is then projected a million million times a day on posters, radio, TV etc....

- Speaking of radio, are you aware of just how many radiowaves pass through our bodies on a daily basis. As i was saying, just because we can't physically decode it - DOESN'T mean it isn't affecting us somehow.

What is a symbol?

A thought - A VISUAL THOUGHT.

Symbols are the not only the quickest way to learn something (picture books for kids?) but are a way of creating a change inside you both mentally and physically. YET besides the physical billboard or napkin and some pigments, that inanimate symbol doesn't do anything - yet it does EVERYTHING. One symbol can change thoughts.... minds... lives....

The peace symbol, the white flag, the Asda logo, Hoover logo, the ban the bomb symbol , the white dove, our flags....

How many people have died for a flag? A collection of pre-arranged colours , representing a belief. A social code.

Going back to the aura / electric field thing i was thinking about. The thought stream idea i was thinking about, can also work on other levels - this is what i believe genuine psychics pick up on, these subtle changes either from body language or maybe the 'hunch', the invisible clue.

Just as much as the following letter 'F' makes your brain think of the phonetics of 'Effff' - What about words? Do words have a sound? Despite them existing just on paper / or pixels - your mind transalates them, from a visual image to an audible thought and then we create multiple unconscious calculations depending on the text, and grammar and sentence and LANGUAGE. But in our head, we just read and hear the words....

But we also CREATE a scene: The ginger haired princess lived alone in her ivory tower, he hair blowing in the autumn breeze.

YOU JUST DECODED MORE THAN FIFTY SYMBOLS (letters > Words > Sounds > Mind image of a ginger princess in a tower) - yet you probably were not aware.

Derren Brown speaks a lot about cold-reading and symbolism in media marketing etc.

What is a symbol.

A symbol is nothing more than arranged pigments , completely useless, harmless and 2 dimensional. Yet together we create galaxies and unseen realities and desires and thoughts - Just through the power of LIGHT and vision.




posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by mr-lizard
 


Visual Communication (of the Mind) comes down to 3 things...

a. Shape. (includes Size)
b. Position.
c. Colour.



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Matrix Traveller
reply to post by mr-lizard
 


Visual Communication (of the Mind) comes down to 3 things...

a. Shape. (includes Size)
b. Position.
c. Colour.


Symbology then


Then you'll understand just how powerful a symbol can be.

Symbols are also a means of 'translating' sounds. And we know sound and audio frequencies can affect brain states.

We also know sounds can MAKE symbols dependant on their frequency:

www.youtube.com...

The above video is an example of Cymatics:

This proves that all form is created by frequency, it also proves that the higher the frequency, the higher the complexity of form.

I think it's beautiful. Now if this is the power of sound, what's the power of light?

and even if slightly off topic:

Note that ancient cultures tended to associate symbols with a sound. The tibetan chanting, and then mantras and prayer symbols.... each tuned to a state of thought, translation and being....

Also note the fibonnaci sequence: NATURES FREQUENCY.

The golden ratio , this was also used in architecture. Many ancient chambers were fashioned to be acoustically treated for certain tones and frequencies.... But what if certain buildings were built to convert light????





[edit on 1-8-2010 by mr-lizard]



posted on Aug, 1 2010 @ 09:38 PM
link   
www.carnaval.com...

some cool info in the link ^^


Lightning discharges are considered as the primary natural source of Schumann resonances. Lightning channels behave like a huge antenna which radiates electromagnetic energy as impulsive signals at frequencies below about 100 kHz [15]. These signals are very weak, but the earth-ionosphere waveguide behaves like a resonator at ELF frequencies and amplifies the spectral signals from lightning at the resonance frequencies [15].

In an ideal cavity, the resonant frequency of the n-th mode fn is determined by the Earth radius a and the speed of light c [6].

f_{n} =\frac{c}{2 \pi a}\sqrt{n(n+1)}

In physics, resonance is the tendency of a system to oscillate at maximum amplitude at a certain frequency. This frequency is known as the system's resonance frequency (or resonant frequency). When damping is small, the resonance frequency is approximately equal to the natural frequency of the system, which is the frequency of free vibrations.

Acoustic resonance is the tendency of an acoustic system to absorb more energy when the frequency of its oscillations matches the system's natural frequency of vibration (its resonance frequency) than it does at other frequencies.





new topics

top topics



 
51
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join