Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

What Is Light?

page: 3
12
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 22 2011 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by CasiusIgnoranze
 


Yes, unfortunately, most people don't research things they just jump to conclusions.




posted on May, 22 2011 @ 07:24 PM
link   
Mr. Gaede presented his theory at the International Conference on Physics Science & Technology (ICPST) in 2010 in Hong Kong and has now been published in the Proceedings. Here is a video of the
Q & A session:




posted on May, 22 2011 @ 08:51 PM
link   
What is light? Victor M. Urbina is correct in my counting with his "black" and "white" particles. I say they orgit a particle I call "clear" that always moves at light speed either linear or angular (spinning) motion. Since "clear" moves at C, we cannot see it for lack of a iime to observe it as time equals zero and it's effect on spacetime is spatially maxed. Time slows and space is compressed relative to absence of mass in free space. All gravity is caused by this distortion due to particles moving at or near light speed. Our universe is composed of light that was flatted in the previous "big crunch" and has come to this by combining at different quantum levels. The levels are compression of spacetime that are still opening up apart the orbits of the "black" and the "white" particles orbiting "clear". Whose insights? James Joseph Matyska, www.myspace.com... is who. this is Victor M Urbina's site lighttheory.com...
edit on 22-5-2011 by whitestar72 because: needed to sign and ask, "What is light?"



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 09:06 PM
link   
Light is not a flat wave as we see it. We see light as we see time--a slice at a time. It is a vortex in the form of a double helix and represents streaming information form other dimensions. DNA is an expression of light in the material form of encoded information. The information enfolded in the acorn unfolds the light into an oak tree. You are the same. Light is the energy of creation. The wave is the Word (Logos) that moves the light into form. LOGOS is streaming data. We will discover this soon. The Higgs Boson, associated particle and wave, is the stream and emanation to form. Matter and anti-mater clash to create 'now'.

In the beginning (TIME), God created the heavens (SPACE) and the earth (Matter). Let there be light (Energy). John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word (WAVE) was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

Light is a duality of particle and wave. All particles have an associated wave. These are the two primary animators that construct matter and allow it to gain mass. God is light and His Son is the Wave (Word/Logos). Jesus was the Living Word among men. He conquered the material reality in perfection. We are now, through the Word, able to transpose our information (enfolded in DNA) in the incarnation process. We escape this reality to enter the tree of life above. We are the roots below that feeds the tree above by our actions. Our information is saved or lost according to the tree above bearing our fruit.

This is merely the parable that we know. It is vastly more complex than this. Reality is the image of God that we are in. We are 'in' the image of God. Nature is the reflection, like light in a mirror. We see God in reflection only.

1 Corinthians 13:12 For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

Read the Bible according to this paradigm of insight. The kingdom we inherit is the universe. We must live by God's law for our information to be saved. Finding love for God and our neighbor is the key. The flaming sword of bias and hatred protects the tree of life spoken of in Genesis 3. Remove the sword to live and transpose the mortal coil.

Ephesians 12
6 Remember your Creator before the silver cord is loosed,[a]
Or the golden bowl is broken,
Or the pitcher shattered at the fountain,
Or the wheel broken at the well.
7 Then the dust will return to the earth as it was,
And the spirit will return to God who gave it.

Hebrews 11:3 (New King James Version)

3 By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.


reply to post by Mary Rose
 


edit on 22-5-2011 by SuperiorEd because: It was lonely and needed more attention.
edit on 22-5-2011 by SuperiorEd because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 05:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by whitestar72
What is light? Victor M. Urbina is correct in my counting with his "black" and "white" particles.


Gaede says this about Newton's corpuscle in Chapter Three of his book, page 151:


Michelson demonstrated that the speed of light through air is slower than through the vacuum and that there is no aether. These and similar experiments with increasingly better interferometers killed two birds with one stone. It killed Newton’s corpuscle because particles were supposed to travel faster in opaque media. It also killed the wave because wave theory was predicated on the existence of the aether. Contemporary wave theorists vehemently protest this verdict because it summarily liquidates their beloved hypothesis. Relativists believe that they resolved the situation by renaming the aether and calling it
space-time. What the aether and space-time have in common is that they are both alleged to be physical mediums. Space-time must necessarily be a physical object in order for the mathematicians to conceive of photons and planets rolling on its curved surface.


So I guess Urbina doesn't see Michelson's experiment as eliminating the corpuscle/particle.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 09:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by nii900
and in somewhat longer version www.youtube.com...


I looked up the description of that one and it referenced the Live Science website. Here is the article about it, dated 24 February 2008:


Electron Filmed for First Time

Scientists have filmed an electron in motion for the first time, using a new technique that will allow researchers to study the tiny particle's movements directly.

Previously it was impossible to photograph electrons because of their extreme speediness, so scientists had to rely on more indirect methods. These methods could only measure the effect of an electron's movement, whereas the new technique can capture the entire event.

Extremely short flashes of light are necessary to capture an electron in motion. A technology developed within the last few years can generate short pulses of intense laser light, called attosecond pulses, to get the job done.

"It takes about 150 attoseconds for an electron to circle the nucleus of an atom. An attosecond is 10^-18 seconds long, or, expressed in another way: an attosecond is related to a second as a second is related to the age of the universe," said Johan Mauritsson of Lund University in Sweden.

Using another laser, scientists can guide the motion of the electron to capture a collision between an electron and an atom on film.

The length of the film Mauritsson and his colleagues made corresponds to a single oscillation of a wave of light . The speed of the event has been slowed down for human eyes. The results are detailed in the latest issue of the journal Physical Review Letters.

Mauritsson says the technique could also be used to study what happens in an atom when an electron leaves its shell.


Originally posted by IntegratedInstigator
When your understanding is flawed from square one, it inevitably leads to all sorts of extreme cases that require round about explanations.


Amen.







"Previously it was impossible to photograph electrons because of their extreme speediness, so scientists had to rely on more indirect methods.

perspective on in
as of off the soul

"An exa"


mple

Consider the real line with its ordinary topology. This space is not compact; in a sense, points can go off to infinity to the left or to the right. It is possible to turn the real line into a compact space by adding a single "point at infinity" which we will denote by ∞.
"


en.wikipedia.org...(mathematics)
see to read the light as it holds the information you need another light-as-information so you build the yet another info
so whats light - it is a simple info-line-ora point in as compactificated picture of a life multidimensional or 2d or a whole life lived and compacted so - or it may may be also a base for it - symbolically or not - like this


The Pearl Carpet of Baroda, Gujarat, India, circa 1865
* here is a pic showing the points of.... 3
storage.canalblog.com...

: :" In mathematics, compactification is the process or result of making a topological space compact.[1] The methods of compactification are various, but each is a way of controlling points from "going off to infinity" by in some way adding "points at infinity" or preventing such an "escape". "

and to add to the known question - what was first chicjen or an ehgg - the bible saus the kught came after the.. gen1:1 ..in fibbonacci way 2 and mine 2 xents as deead in here to give you on info ..as ..
also europa = aura IP-a -
edit on 23-5-2011 by nii900 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2011 @ 04:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Also, to clarify, the entire EM spectrum is what we call “light” in this context, and it consists of:

  1. radio wave
  2. microwave
  3. infrared
  4. visible region
  5. ultraviolet
  6. x-ray
  7. gamma ray


How do "electricity" and "magnetism" fit in to the entire spectrum?



posted on May, 24 2011 @ 06:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mactire
Have you ever seen the theory about Perceptive Energy? (I'm not sure if that's the actual name of the Theory, but it fits the description
)
Anywho; years ago it was proposed that light and sound both behaved in their respective ways because of the human perspection of how these things were "supposed" to act. That the world was literally different per species on the planet, and beings from other dimensions would have a completely different view on life and how they perceived light and sound. One of the experiments was; they aimed sound waves at a wall and then placed a sheet of glass between the wall and the sound source with holes in it. In a nutshell: While filming and viewing the experiment, the soundwaves did as expected and went through all the holes, bounced around, and some of them made it back through to the sound source. When the experiment wasn't being filmed or watched, the sound patterns and their returns behaved in a completely different way.
They made a kid-friendly documentary that touched on this years ago you might find interesting;

'What the Bleep do We know?' and its sequel:
'What the Bleep do We know? Further Down the Rabbit Hole.'

They are really weird docs, and seem like something you'd of watched in Middle School or just before getting in the Rail Cars at Jurassic Park, but at the same time, everything is broken down into layman's terms for the average guy/gal. They've got that woman in them.... I forget her name... the deaf woman that everybody hates. Anywho; an interesting watch.

"If a tree falls in the forest and there's no one there to hear it, does it make a sound? No. Because if there's no one there to see it....there is no tree."
edit on 22-5-2011 by Mactire because: (no reason given)


If it wasn't being recorded, nor watched... then how do they know the results differed.... that is the question I want answered and never will be, because there is no answer.

It's phony, jabronie.

Oh and I have the second WTBDWK, and I don't remember it covering this subject at all, they talked about light a bit though.. can't remember anything about sound.
edit on 24-5-2011 by Laokin because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2011 @ 07:54 AM
link   
This video compares the proposed EM rope to the EM wave.

It

  1. Permanently connects every atom in the Universe to all other atoms. The signal goes two ways simultaneously. The EM wave is one-way.
  2. Has an electric thread and a magnetic thread as opposed to a field.
  3. Has link length instead of wave length.
  4. Both have amplitude.


This and more is presented:




posted on May, 24 2011 @ 08:28 AM
link   

Permanently connects every atom in the Universe to all other atoms. The signal goes two ways simultaneously.


Intuitively, this makes sense to me. Something is holding everything together.



posted on May, 24 2011 @ 08:34 AM
link   
Excellent thread, this is huge if proven -

Light is a rope that permanently binds any two atoms in the Universe



Blows my mind a little bit.



posted on May, 24 2011 @ 10:54 AM
link   
Here is a screen shot from the video "22 Is light curved?" showing just the proposed permanent EM ropes between the Earth and the Moon:




posted on May, 25 2011 @ 07:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose
This video compares the proposed EM rope to the EM wave.

It

  1. Permanently connects every atom in the Universe to all other atoms. The signal goes two ways simultaneously. The EM wave is one-way.
  2. Has an electric thread and a magnetic thread as opposed to a field.
  3. Has link length instead of wave length.
  4. Both have amplitude.


This and more is presented:


Its all -
www.photographersdirect.com...
Real -ly
www.superstock.com...
Hypothesis
en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 25-5-2011 by nii900 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 07:29 AM
link   
reply to post by nii900
 


Yes, it is a hypothesis. A hypothesis to interpret previous experimentation.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 07:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 


How should this hypothesis be determined to be right or wrong?



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 10:00 AM
link   
In Chapter Four, LIGHT: The Grand Unified Theory, on page 197, Fig. 4.21 represents the cross-section of the hydrogen atom:




Ropes arriving from every atom in the Universe end at the electron shell. It is here that the threads comprising the rope fork out.

The proton: The electric thread continues straight to the center of the atom where all electric threads from the Universe converge. The proton has the shape of a sea urchin because it is a convergence of electric threads coming from every atom in the Universe. Thread density increases as we approach the center of the atom. This explains why at some small region near the atom, it becomes impenetrable.

The electron: The magnetic thread loops around and, together with the magnetic threads coming from every atom in the Universe, knits the wavy ball-of-yarn surface that De Broglie talked about.

The H-atom is a knot in the fabric of the matter floating in space. This model incorporates all the relevant features that the mechanics have identified. We have Rutherford’s impenetrable ‘proton’ at the very center (conver-gence of electric threads), DeBroglie’s integral wave, and Born’s cloud (or Lewis’s shell).



edit on 05/25/11 by Mary Rose because: Spelling



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 


The politically correct view, nowadays, is that space-time has no substance, and e/m waves propagate with no medium. Æther models have been in disrepute for nearly a century, since Einstein reluctantly accepted the notion that the æther, if it exists, lacks the property which he called "immovability". If there is no preferred reference frame which, alone, may be considered to be at absolute rest, then the concept of æther is irrelevant.

Recent work with quantum entanglement may have proven that there IS such a preferred reference frame. The Chinese experimenters claim that, by Earth clocks, their signal was received before it was sent. They claim that quanta of data were sent and received simultaneously in the reference frame which they call the "quantum æther". Detractors insist that no information may be communicated faster than light. However, that may not be necessary; it is only necessary to prove, after the fact, that the cause and effect were simultaneous at separate locations. Relativity does not prove that cause and effect may not be simultaneous; it does prove that events separated by space can not be simultaneous in all reference frames.

If the æther is stationary relative to the CMB, then Earth is moving toward Virgo at about 627 km/s. Special relativity tells us that, in that reference frame, Earth clocks closer to Virgo should indicated earlier times at a rate of about 9 ns/km.

I have my own æther model, in which e/m waves propagate in the manner of acoustical shear waves in a solid medium. The particles (sub-universe galaxies) which comprise the æther move from side to side (probably by a tiny fraction of a Planck lenght) as the e/m wave passes. They are restored to their equilibrium position by shear forces. If we knew the density and shear modulus (stiffness) of the æther, we could derive the speed of light by the formula, c=√(G/ρ), where G is shear modulus and ρ is inertial density. I suspect that each cubic meter of our æther may have googols of times as much inertia as our whole galaxy; that makes the shear modulus many googols of times greater than that of a diamond.

We move thru the æther as easily as do e/m waves because we are made of e/m waves. The Higgs force causes pairs of e/m waves to orbit one another, converting their zero point energy to rest mass. So the waves that comprise a particle are racing around in tiny circles at the speed of light. Accelerating the particle involves translating those waves into a different reference frame in accordance with the principle of relativity, which accounts for the concepts of mass and force.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phractal Phil
The politically correct view, nowadays, is that space-time has no substance, and e/m waves propagate with no medium.


So, do you disagree with:


Originally posted by Mary Rose

Relativists believe that they resolved the situation by renaming the aether and calling it space-time. What the aether and space-time have in common is that they are both alleged to be physical mediums.



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 


I don't believe that statement accurately describes today's mainstream view. Space-time is widely considered to be a non-medium—a mathematical entity with no physical substance. I vehemently disagree with that popular view. However, unlike Gaede, I don't consider æther and space-time to be the same thing. Minkowski space-time is one mathematical analog of reality; æther IS reality.

EDIT: I seem to have contradicted myself, above. I disagree with the idea that there is no æther, and that space-time is the only reality. That, I believe, is the popular belief.
edit on 2011/5/25 by Phractal Phil because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2011 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phractal Phil
I don't believe that statement accurately describes today's mainstream view. Space-time is widely considered to be a non-medium—a mathematical entity with no physical substance.

That thought gives me considerable cognitive dissonance. How can a math entity exist totally divorced from anything physical?


Also, my understanding is that Einstein is blamed for getting rid of the aether in error - that he called space "aether" in 1920 in his Leyden address.





new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join