Extraordinary Light

Has science taken a wrong turn? If so, what corrections are needed? Chronicles of scientific misbehavior. The role of heretic-pioneers and forbidden questions in the sciences. Is peer review working? The perverse "consensus of leading scientists." Good public relations versus good science.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: Extraordinary Light

Unread postby seasmith » Fri Jan 27, 2017 2:22 pm

You're right about the "theoretical' bit for sure.
Did you look at the Figures, shown at the Nature Mag link ? You have to zoom in quite a bit, but they give a feel for what the kids are up to there.

When they start talking in the abstract about "chiral coupling", "single photon emitters", "quantum superposition" and the like, the field of optics has been vacated for the realm of electro-photonics. At that subatomic scale (wrongly called here "Quantum") their experimental setups will have more to do with waveguide and photo-detection devices, than with actual radiant emissions.

But even BS theory can be instructive, and can occasionally produce working devices.

The big-funding keyword is in bold below:

... the research field of chiral quantum optics. The latter offers fundamentally new functionalities and applications: it enables the assembly of non-reciprocal single-photon devices that can be operated in a quantum superposition of two or more of their operational states and the realization of deterministic spin–photon interfaces. Moreover, engineered directional photonic reservoirs could lead to the development of complex quantum networks that, for example, could simulate novel classes of quantum many-body systems.
seasmith
 
Posts: 2619
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: Extraordinary Light

Unread postby webolife » Sat Jan 28, 2017 9:06 pm

Actually I believe that light is fundamentally an act of detection... since for me it is not waves or particles propagating or traveling through space, the only way I know there is light is when it is there at my retina! It can never be seen "along the way", only at the photodetector, despite the illusion of that given by femto-processing magic. That outcome [of femto-photography] is solved subtly yet quickly by the realization that the light we see is there at our eye, not in the "traveling" pulse segment [30 cm/nanosecond]. From what I can determine, the setup is a high-tech strobe, processed to create the illusion of expected movement.
What "light" [like voltage] detects [for me] is the collapse or compression of a field modulated by the "quantum level" dropping of electrons to a lower energy level at the centroid [surface]. Rather than conservatively "emitting" something at that moment, the field collapse detection at the peripheral point is "light". Since [for me] the light pressure is directed toward the centroid [centropic], that centropic pressure acts at the centroid and peripheral detector at the same time. IAAAD, better than FTL, is the acronym most fit.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Extraordinary Light

Unread postby seasmith » Tue Feb 14, 2017 6:07 pm

laser

Optical Tweezers explanation:
( Radiation Pressure and Angular Momentum of Light )

http://spie.org/newsroom/mansuripur-vid ... ight=x2422


LiDAR to follow
seasmith
 
Posts: 2619
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: Extraordinary Light

Unread postby webolife » Thu Feb 16, 2017 7:55 am

I've read some of Masud Mansuripur's stuff. I'd love to engage in a long conversation with him.
Who am I to argue with a Stanford physicist, but I think his optical pressure model would be greatly simplified by the recognition that: the optical pressure is centropic vectors rather than photon momentum, and that the direction of the pressure is toward the source lamp/laser rather than an emission from it. This would clarify his model for the oscillation of cavity photons, and be a more direct explanation for optical cooling measurements. The tweezing effect of light would be in line then with the simple action/application of two radiometer plates. But it would be [is] very difficult for anyone so studied in the standard model for light to break away from the paradigm of light emission and momentum, in which the effects of light are confused [imo] with the mechanism of light.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Extraordinary Light

Unread postby sketch1946 » Mon Feb 27, 2017 6:57 am

Haha, i'm very interested in this thread...

What do you guys think of this?

"Lines of force originated with Michael Faraday, whose theory holds that all of reality is made up of force ***itself."

"Lines of force originated with Michael Faraday, whose theory holds that all of reality is made up of force ***itself."

(had to paste that one twice... ) :-)
[Faraday]
"His theory predicts that electricity, light, and gravity have finite propagation delays. The theories and experimental data of later scientific figures such as Maxwell, Hertz, Einstein, and others are in agreement with the ramifications of Faraday's theory.

Nevertheless, Faraday's theory remains distinct.

"Unlike Faraday, Maxwell and others (e.g., J.J. Thomson) thought that light and electricity must propagate through an ether. In Einstein's relativity, there is no ether, yet the physical reality of force is much weaker than in the theories of Faraday."

"Historian Nancy J. Nersessian in her paper "Faraday's Field Concept" distinguishes between the ideas of Maxwell and Faraday:"

" The specific features of Faraday's field concept, in its 'favourite' and most complete form, are that force is a ***substance, that it is the ***only substance and that ***all forces are interconvertible through various motions of the lines of force."

"These features of Faraday's 'favourite notion' were not carried on. Maxwell, in his approach to the problem of finding a mathematical representation for the continuous transmission of electric and magnetic forces, considered these to be states of stress and strain in a mechanical aether."

Tesla: :-)
"He later railed against the limited and erroneous theories of Maxwell, Hertz, Lorentz, and Einstein."

"Tesla's ether was neither the "solid" ether with the "tenuity of steel" of Maxwell and Hertz, nor the half-hearted, entrained, gaseous ether of Lorentz. Tesla's ether consisted of "carriers immersed in an insulating fluid", which filled all space. Its properties varied according to relative movement, the presence of mass, and the electric and magnetic environment."

"Tesla's ether was rigidified by rapidly varying electrostatic forces, and was thereby involved in gravitational effects, inertia, and momentum, especially in the space near earth, since, as explained by Tesla, the earth is "...like a charged metal ball moving through space", which creates the enormous, rapidly varying electrostatic forces which diminish in intensity with the square of the distance from earth, just like gravity. Since the direction of propagation radiates from the earth, the so-called force of gravity is toward earth."

"Tesla commenced to complete his Dynamic Theory of Gravity at the same approximate period of time that his experimental results and theories had been revealed in the three lectures, often illustrated with demonstrations using Tesla-invented equipment, as revealed in the following eight excerpts, in pertinent part (emphasis mine):"

"1. "The most probable medium filling the space is one consisting of independent carriers immersed in an insulating fluid".

2. "In his experiments he dwells first on some phenomena produced by electrostatic force, which he considers in the light of modern theories to be the most important force in nature for us to investigate."

3. "He illustrates how mechanical motions are produced by a varying electrostatic force acting through a gaseous medium."

4. "One of the most interesting results arrived at in pursuing these experiments, is the demonstration of the fact that a gaseous medium upon which vibration is impressed by rapid changes of electrostatic potential, is rigid".

5. "If through this medium enormous electrostatic stresses are assumed to act, which vary rapidly in intensity, it would allow the motion of a body through it, yet it would be rigid and elastic, although the fluid itself might be devoid of these properties".

(Important! I don't agree with everything on this link! but there's food for thought) :-)
http://www.netowne.com/technology/important/

Just recently, I read that the magnetic field of the sun rotates with the sun, extends to at least the heliosphere, has folds and wrinkles in it near the heliosphere, has the capacity to accelerate charged particles at increasing speed, with ***increasing energy, the further they travel from the surface of the sun so that the surface of the sun has a temp of 6000K and yet the outer surface of the corona has temps of millions of degrees... I think Tesla's concept is that matter ***receives energy, and has no charge of its own....

"These eruptions are known as coronal mass ejections, or CMEs. A large CME can contain 10.0E16 grams (a ***billion tons) of matter that can be accelerated to ***several million miles per hour in a spectacular explosion. Solar material streaks out through the interplanetary medium...

"...Flares can accelerate protons and electrons that travel to Earth directly from the Sun along the ****interplanetary magnetic field (which "channels" the charged particles)"
https://pwg.gsfc.nasa.gov/istp/nicky/cme-chase.html

"...Firstly, the convection zone consists of a plasma, i.e. a gas that contains electrically charged particles. Secondly, the plasma in the convection zone is continuously moving around. Since the plasma is moving, the charged particles are moving and we obtain electrical currents. However, electrical currents generate magnetic fields (Ampere's law), as we mentioned above. These magnetic fields in turn generate electric currents (Faraday's law) and therefore we obtain the following loop: electric current - magnetic field - electric current - magnetic field - electric current - magnetic field etc, etc. As long as this loop is not interrupted the Sun will always produce magnetic fields.
However, this is a very simplified picture of the solar dynamo. This picture does not tell you anything about the properties of the motions of the plasma. The flow of the plasma has to fulfill certain properties for the dynamo to work. These properties are:

The flow has to be turbulent. A laminar flow does not work. Thus the motions of the plasma have to look more like the motions of water in a boiling kettle, than the water emerging from your kitchen tap.
The flow has to be fully three-dimensional. The stream of water that emerges from you kitchen tap is only 1-dimensional, i.e. it flows in only one direction. Can you think of a 2-dimensional flow?
The flow has to be helical. By this we mean that the flow has to follow the path of a helix.
https://www.cora.nwra.com/~werne/eos/text/dynamo.html
sketch1946
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 7:56 pm

Re: Extraordinary Light

Unread postby webolife » Mon Feb 27, 2017 7:56 am

Faraday's force fields have much in common with my centropic pressure field. I see the pressure field as primal, quite contrarily to the usual mechanistic view that forces are the the result of collisions [transfer of momentum]. In other words for me Impulse gives rise to Momentum, whereas in more standard thinking Momentum gives rise to Impulse.
It is difficult to conceptualize moving lines of force, however, so I understand why his concept did not gain momentum in physics. I think it is easier to visualize a "static" force field in the framework of which momenta of coalesced objects are being described. That is not to say however that a field does not/cannot rotate with its centroid. Additionally, how is a field affected as objects revolve through it, eg. the illusion of "attraction"? And what effects are noted as two local fields interact, eg. repulsion?
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Extraordinary Light

Unread postby sketch1946 » Mon Feb 27, 2017 8:21 am

G'day webolife,
webolife wrote:And what effects are noted as two local fields interact, eg. repulsion?

I'm trying to build some sort of structure in my mind to visualise this stuff... it appears that there's a sort of toroid around jupiter through which the moon Io moves, the possible interaction is a sort of Alfven plasma gun... maybe...

All over the place seems to be this counter intuitive right hand rule... the reaction is at right angles to the force...

Tesla also had a thing for ultra-high frequencies...

There's also this pinch effect of plasma, I remember Tesla had a statement somewhere about he boasted he could do atom smashing in a light bulb...

and his notion of receiving energy from space... ie radioactivity was visible sign of receiving cosmic energy.. pretty far out stuff, but still interesting :-)

Another oddity is apparently buried in Maxwell's equations? or one of those very capable, (not like me) mathematicians... the term something like 'an unreal number' or such, I forget the name for it right now.. it was buried in the equations because it represents a value something like 1.4 x C.... ie the 'particle' is supposed to be spinning faster than light.... so it's represented by a term... and forgotten about.. I'll have to find where I saw it...

I've only just started to read a bit about Alfven and Birkeland, seems very sensible so far...

Another interesting thing I saw recently was a theory of analog to digital light... ie the light-as-wave does things in harmonics, so only discrete values are permitted for the harmonics.. like when light interacts with your retina, there is a totally unbelievable network of cells and veins and structures, which convert the energetic 'waves' into codes, only a certain amount of energy will cause a cell to fire off a chemical, which effectively transduces analog light to a brain code, different wavelengths of light.. different chemical reaction, different code... this in theory could be analysed digitally and pumped directly into the brain, bypassing the retina, fantastic hope for blind people

In this concept, light is a wave with harmonic interactions with other 'matter' which is really only made of harmonics... Dirac had his 'Dirac soup' from which he cooked up antimatter theoretically before it was supposed to be proved... I remember someone's term the 'nothing' that spins....
sketch1946
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 7:56 pm

Re: Extraordinary Light

Unread postby webolife » Mon Feb 27, 2017 8:43 am

Acoustically, harmonics are a function of wave action, but I believe it is possible that only modulated frequency considerations may be the operant principle for light. No "waves" required to get light "from there to here". The only light that is observable is "here" already. A "resonant" detector is required to detect a particular frequency of light signal.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Extraordinary Light

Unread postby seasmith » Mon Oct 30, 2017 8:11 pm

Contact ><
webolife » Mon Oct 30, 2017 10:52 am
SoSeasmith...
Would you describe the peripheral system to system contact zone as amorphous? Nebulous? Conductive?
Inductive? Am I correct in inferring that your nuclear surfaces are scaleably similar to the solar surface? Are you perhaps visualizing a double layer structure? If so, what "exists" between the layers?
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16838&start=30

Electric ‘double-layers’, as EE’s use the term, I think of as macro-electric zones that form through cleavage of the aetheric matrix between discreetly charged bodies; eg plasmoids, capacitor plates, transmission lines and possibly also atomic nuclii. In other words, before “contact”. Sort of like bow waves between boats approaching each other. When they do indeed meet, it’s a much messier scene,
Actual “contact zones” will look different depending on the meeting surfaces.

Google for example: “SEM image unbonded interfaces”,
and scroll down through the pages. Science’s wonderful array of microscopy techniques there provide images of all manner of surface and material matrix structures- grainy, flakey, crystalline, polished, etc; and on down the page it will also show interfaces that Are bonded by welding, compression, cementing, baking and chemical bonding/deposition, adadada…
When they get down to the resolution of electro-chemical and redox bonds, the mysterious “covalent” term is used profligately, but all the above images share a common aspect: ‘space’ between the bits. If an individual atom is apparently photographed, then I think it is actually an interference pattern between nucleus and the probing radiation, with ‘spaces’ between the rings. That implies that the atomic nucleus is also radiating, or ringing.
Here’s a blub from one of the linked sites mentioning a few of the imaging technologies:
“”Abstract
Self-assembled monolayer of dithiol molecules, deposited on polycrystalline Au (111), prepared at room atmosphere, was studied using scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS). Dithiols were used as interface, which chemically bonds to the deposited gold nanoparticles through strong covalent bonds. The size and size distribution of the deposited nanoparticles were measured using dynamic light scattering (DLS), scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and atomic force microscopy (AFM).
The AFM results showed that nanoparticles are immobilized and stable during scanning procedure and do not contaminate the AFM tip. The size of monodisperse nanoparticles obtained from the DLS measurements is slightly higher than that obtained from the AFM and SEM measurements. This is due to the fact that the DLS measures the hydrodynamic radius, dependent on the protective chemical layer on nanoparticles.””

One has to wonder, looking at all those spaces separating the grains, particles, domains and even large molecules; what keeps them apart. What keeps them stuck together where they are apparently bonded?
Or was that your question :)
My guess is, for atomic nuclei it would be similar to the forces between impinging suns. For organized molecular structures, I would look to the dynamics of crystal formation, a whole science in itself. For ponderable material objects from the scale of dust motes on up, maybe the average of charge inflows and outflows at meeting surfaces; and we know Surfaces (pointy/edgey/platey, etc) are critical to +- charge behavior.

Charge dynamics I reckon are the consistent common ground, at all the above mentioned scales.
Of course that could change tomorrow …


I used to test this kind of stuff, in a previous career:
https://www.archdaily.com/875212/scientists-uncover-the-chemical-secret-behind-roman-self-healing-underwater-concrete/595d2b48b22e38d88b000060-scientists-uncover-the-chemical-secret-behind-roman-self-healing-underwater-concrete-image
seasmith
 
Posts: 2619
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: Extraordinary Light

Unread postby webolife » Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:05 am

seasmith wrote: but all the above images share a common aspect: ‘space’ between the bits.

Yup. Space between the bits. Fields of force/pressure.
seasmith wrote: If an individual atom is apparently photographed, then I think it is actually an interference pattern between nucleus and the probing radiation, with ‘spaces’ between the rings. That implies that the atomic nucleus is also radiating, or ringing.

"Newton's Rings" are a common phenomenon in all imaging media, not just at small scales. However, the effect is optical, not "material" per se. The so-called [Youngian] diffraction pattern is the result of focally imaging the light centroid. As in any lensing, pinhole, slit or beamsplitter setup, the rays of the pressure field are arrayed about a focal point, and appear to the detection device as a redundant spectrum. Other such phenomena in the macro world appear as atmospheric halos and rainbows of various sorts. The spectroscope works on the same principle except that the imaging grating excludes the extra-angular redundant spectra that are easily seen in slit and double slit apparati. Interference can be fairly simply demonstrated to be not happening in the way described by Thomas Young and classical physicists since. The redundant spectra are easily shown to image in the manner described by optical rays, and not at all in the manner supposed by Young's acoustical interfering waves. The reason we don't see them around objects all the time is frankly, we aren't looking! Or, our optical brain "airbrushes" them out for easier identification of objects. Once you begin to see this, you never see light the same way again! Well, actually it took years for me to fully un-train my brain from this practice. Interestingly, Young had astigmatism, and if he'd thought [or understood] a little more about how his imperfect eyes were "distorting" [actually displaying!] details of light imaging, he might have arrived at a different conclusion than the classical wave interference model he produced.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Extraordinary Light

Unread postby GaryN » Thu Nov 09, 2017 9:14 pm

Photons are caught behaving like superconducting electrons
Light is a fan of the buddy system. Photons, or particles of light, have been spotted swapping energy with partners. This chummy behavior resembles how electrons pair up in materials that conduct current without resistance, known as superconductors, researchers report in a paper accepted in Physical Review Letters.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/pho ... ons?tgt=nr
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2535
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: Extraordinary Light

Unread postby webolife » Tue Nov 14, 2017 11:35 am

Standard Newtonian 3rd Law stuff. Absorption/Reflection. Vector arithmetic and geometry. Optics.

"Photons" behaving like "electrons" is for me the natural consequence of both being manifestations of the same unified centropic pressure field, along with gravitation and nuclear force. Electrostatics and optics provide the needed fundamentals to understand the universe. Maybe, bold prediction.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Extraordinary Light

Unread postby Webbman » Thu Nov 16, 2017 3:58 pm

makes sense to me since I think they are both the same thing with a different shape.
The secret to the universe is a rubber band.
Webbman
 
Posts: 366
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2014 10:49 am

Re: Extraordinary Light

Unread postby webolife » Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:26 pm

Once this unification is made, the proper centropic vectoring of light toward the source [as a sink], rather than away from it as an emission, leads to the somewhat startling conclusion that light action is a pressure effect that is instantaneous across a distance, ie. the relative radius of the given field. See the IAAD thread for more...
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.
User avatar
webolife
 
Posts: 2398
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Extraordinary Light

Unread postby seasmith » Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:58 am

webolife wrote:Once this unification is made, the proper centropic vectoring of light toward the source [as a sink], rather than away from it as an emission, leads to the somewhat startling conclusion that light action is a pressure effect that is instantaneous across a distance, ie. the relative radius of the given field. See the IAAD thread for more...

Been cogitating for a while on your centropic light model, and still not getting the mono-directional centropism part. (I’ve discussed reciprocal models with you previously, but don’t remember where now) .

Your assertion that a unification is established between source and detector seems contraverse to the final centripetal vector and inevitable entropy that I think I’ve heard you espouse.

If the light connection is unified (via a “geometric [aetheric?] matrix”, as you’ve stated; then the connection should allow AC oscillation and the possibility of simultaneous, bi-directional conveyance of signal and thus ektropy.
Unless your matrix is like a diode, which would then prohibit reflection ?
seasmith
 
Posts: 2619
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Previous

Return to The Future of Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest