Curving light waves

page: 6
7
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 07:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by ubeenhad
Higgs is not THE boson.


That's not what I was saying.


Originally posted by ubeenhad
So how is mass any more "godly" than energy. Or light?


In this materialistic world we live in, people want to know how matter came into being.




posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 


And the materialistic world is as dependent on the other fundamental particles as the Higgs



posted on Sep, 29 2012 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by manofearth
If you want to understand physics that has basis in reality, read the works of Walter Russell....
The OP will definitely like all his books.
Unless I misinterpreted, the OP he said he thought it wasn't worth reading, which is an accurate assessment with the exception of reading it for the entertainment of how ridiculous it is, as I mentioned:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by primalfractal
As to Walter Russeli I thought the Mark McCutcheon comment interesting and just threw it in for dicussion. Not pushing his theory(didn't find it worth reading), liked some of his pictures though.



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 03:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by ubeenhad
Higgs is not THE boson.
That's not what I was saying.
Then what was the point of your line of questions? Reading between the lines, it did appear that was the answer you were looking for.



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 04:01 AM
link   
Thank you everyone for great ideas about the god particle.



Why would they crucify themselves by daring to use the word god. Heaven forbid.

Others have interpreted, accurately, what the thing is purported to do in nature, and coined the expression.


This sums it up for me
edit on 30-9-2012 by primalfractal because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-9-2012 by primalfractal because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 04:11 AM
link   
reply to post by manofearth
 


Thanks for posting the Walter Russel stuff. I think his mathematical explanation is a bit off but his ideas or "pictures" are quite good. He is onto something, just can't explain it all quite yet in terms modern science.




Not pushing his theory(didn't find it worth reading), liked some of his pictures though.



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 04:27 AM
link   


His thread will get closed in minutes.
They are nazi's about this kind of stuff. been a member there for years


Doesn't look good for you if you take out the the "about this kind of stuff".
But thanks for the warning.

This thread is already pg2 google for the search term
"curving light waves" so the meme is already out there.
Pysicsforum is not necessary, but will just reinforce the
idea no matter what the outcome.

edit on 30-9-2012 by primalfractal because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-9-2012 by primalfractal because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 04:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 



Originally posted by Arbitrageur
reply to post by primalfractal
 

Physicsforums members get tired of hearing too many crazy ideas all the time so they do tend to tune those out and close out those threads quickly (though there's nothing crazy about asking what happens to a wave packet half out of a device when the device emitting it is moved). If you are just describing an experiment and asking if it's been done before, that's just a matter of fact...it either has or it hasn't, so no open-mindedness is really required to answer such a question. I wouldn't claim it will lead to a new law of physics over there though, so I'd leave that part out!


And every once in a while I'm surprised by how open-minded some of those guys are. I think they are well aware of the existing holes in theories, and if someone has better data or a model that fits existing data better, they really do seem interested in that.


I hope you are right. I'll do my best to put together a good arguement.



Running coupling

One can probe a quantum field theory at short times or distances by changing the wavelength or momentum, k of the probe one uses. With a high frequency, i.e., short time probe, one sees virtual particles taking part in every process. The reason this can happen, seemingly violating the conservation of energy is the uncertainty relation

which allows such violations at short times. The previous remark only applies to some formulations of quantum field theory, in particular, canonical quantization in the interaction picture. In other formulations, the same event is described by "virtual" particles going off the mass shell. Such processes renormalize the coupling and make it dependent on the energy scale, at which one observes the coupling. The dependence of a coupling on the energy-scale is known as running of the coupling. The theory of the running of couplings is known as the renormalization group.



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 05:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by primalfractal


Running coupling

One can probe a quantum field theory at short times or distances by changing the wavelength or momentum, k of the probe one uses. With a high frequency, i.e., short time probe, one sees virtual particles taking part in every process. The reason this can happen, seemingly violating the conservation of energy is the uncertainty relation

which allows such violations at short times. The previous remark only applies to some formulations of quantum field theory, in particular, canonical quantization in the interaction picture. In other formulations, the same event is described by "virtual" particles going off the mass shell. Such processes renormalize the coupling and make it dependent on the energy scale, at which one observes the coupling. The dependence of a coupling on the energy-scale is known as running of the coupling. The theory of the running of couplings is known as the renormalization group.



Can you post a link for that outside text?



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 05:40 AM
link   
reply to post by john_bmth
 




Also, the left brain/right brain thing is a myth,


True, but it is also real, as are many "myths" .

I thought I linked something that proved,at least, that each hemisphere of the brain processes information differently and even recognises different parts of the same information, independantly.

There is heaps of proper research on left/right brain dichotomy as with the wave/particle one.

This is clearly not just a myth. This is research done by professionals in a lab.


Spectral and temporal processing in human auditory cortex.

Zatorre RJ, Belin P.


Source

Montreal Neurological Institute, McGill University, 3801 University St., Montreal, QC H3A 2B4, Canada. robert.zatorre@mcgill.ca


Abstract

We used positron emission tomography to examine the response of human auditory cortex to spectral and temporal variation. Volunteers listened to sequences derived from a standard stimulus, consisting of two pure tones separated by one octave alternating with a random duty cycle. In one series of five scans, spectral information (tone spacing) remained constant while speed of alternation was doubled at each level. In another five scans, speed was kept constant while the number of tones sampled within the octave was doubled at each level, resulting in increasingly fine frequency differences. Results indicated that (i) the core auditory cortex in both hemispheres responded to temporal variation, while the anterior superior temporal areas bilaterally responded to the spectral variation; and (ii) responses to the temporal features were weighted towards the left, while responses to the spectral features were weighted towards the right. These findings confirm the specialization of the left-hemisphere auditory cortex for rapid temporal processing, and indicate that core areas are especially involved in these processes. The results also indicate a complementary hemispheric specialization in right-hemisphere belt cortical areas for spectral processing. The data provide a unifying framework to explain hemispheric asymmetries in processing speech and tonal patterns. We propose that differences exist in the temporal and spectral resolution of corresponding fields in the two hemispheres, and that they may be related to anatomical hemispheric asymmetries in myelination and spacing of cortical columns.
edit on 30-9-2012 by primalfractal because: Spella



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 05:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 


Sure,

I am bit incoherrant due to lack of sleep last night



Coupling Constant - Link



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 06:11 AM
link   


a fractional spin, maybe? it occurs to me now that the type of behavior the op is looking for is the fractional quantum hall effect in anyons. but a photon is not an anyon.



Quantum Hall effect


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The quantum Hall effect (or integer quantum Hall effect) is a quantum-mechanical version of the Hall effect, observed in two-dimensional electron systems subjected to low temperatures and strong magnetic fields, in which the Hall conductivity σ takes on the quantized values

Link

Note low temp and fields, if this theory proves right it might be a new, slightly different effect or another occurunce of above in different circumstances.



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 06:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Could you please describe the experiment in laymans terms for everyone including the uses of the equipment you described?



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 06:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Then what was the point of your line of questions? Reading between the lines, it did appear that was the answer you were looking for.


I entered the conversation by making the point that yes it's accurate to call the Higgs Boson the God Particle. Any questions I asked were only for the purpose of answering the argument I got in response to my post.



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by manofearth
 


I looked at the videos you posted and that pic at the start is one I had seen before and couldn't find.
It is really good and I think the best representation of waveform I have seen. Thanks again, I was looking for this picture.




posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 08:31 AM
link   
I think the God particle is a great name.
It rightly marks the boundry where particles
become quanta. It presupposes exitance of
said quanta.

A quantum field in which everything is connected.

Which means all is one, is this not God? It's definately not a cat.

Religious people have been saying this forever. Most believe it. I pity those who don't and understand the viewpoint, but is it really needed now?

edit on 30-9-2012 by primalfractal because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 08:54 AM
link   
I think light is bendable, however it require such strong electromagnetic force that we cant provide.

Lightwave is one form of electromagnetic wave, thus will be effected by it. I look at wikipedia and its at the lowest it mention about a Faraday experiment.



n 1845, Michael Faraday discovered that the plane of polarisation of linearly polarised light is rotated when the light rays travel along the magnetic field direction in the presence of a transparent dielectric, an effect now known as Faraday rotation.[19] This was the first evidence that light was related to electromagnetism. In 1846 he speculated that light might be some form of disturbance propagating along magnetic field lines.[20] Faraday proposed in 1847 that light was a high-frequency electromagnetic vibration, which could propagate even in the absence of a medium such as the ether.


Thus explains why light sucked into black hole. I'm not a scientist, just a layman interpretation.
Anyway, where are you going with this ?
Mass system broadcast using lightwave ? Imagine broadcasting LOTR movie using lightwave to earth from some robot on moon, half of the earth can watch it for free (need special parabolas though)

Can do!



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 09:38 AM
link   
reply to post by manofearth
 


From the Pure Energy Systems page on Walter Russell:


In 1941, the American Academy of Sciences conferred a doctorate on him, after several laboratories had isolated the elements which he had foreseen: Deuterium, Tritium, Neptunium and Plutonium. We are basically dealing with a person who had advanced understanding, but was pooh-poohed away because he was not a learned man according to mainstream science/academics. That Russell's Periodic Table of Elements was musical, spiral/vortical in nature, leads to obvious connections with Viktor Schauberger. However, many books on Viktor Schauberger have not made the connection between them, because Walter Russell is not very well known in alternative energy circles.



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Mary Rose
 

Apparently the source for that claim is the Biography of Walter Russell from walter-russell.de which provides no source.

I went to the website for the AAS and don't even see any program of conferring doctorates mentioned.

Tom Bearden also claimed to have a doctorate, and we know that he doesn't unless you count a piece of paper from a diploma mill: freeenergynews.com...

But if you find a reliable source for that claim about Russell, I'd be interested in seeing it. walter-russell.de is obviously not a reliable source given its obvious bias in being named after the man.

Also, the scientific community has rejected Russell's periodic table which provides additional reason for skepticism about this claim related to the periodic table of elements. But if Russell had a bogus doctorate similar to what Bearden has, I could believe that.



posted on Sep, 30 2012 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by primalfractal
I think the God particle is a great name.
It rightly marks the boundry where particles
become quanta. It presupposes exitance of
said quanta.

A quantum field in which everything is connected.

Which means all is one, is this not God? It's definately not a cat.

edit on 30-9-2012 by primalfractal because: (no reason given)


No.

Almost everything you said is false, and under wrong pretense. PLEASE read atleast one textbook level book on quantum mechanics before you start throwing around words like fields and quanta.
edit on 30-9-2012 by ubeenhad because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
7
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join