Welcome to Fractal Forums

This topic is going to be hard.
Arago's and Fresnel set up the mathematical basis for light. It turned out that electric and magnetic phenomenon obeyed the same rules.

The theory of light is encapsulated in the Fresnel Equations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fresnel_equations

The theory of electromagnetism is supposedly encapsulated in the four Heaviside — Maxwell equations and the telegraph equation for transmission lines.
http://www.ivorcatt.com/2810.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telegrapher's_equations

Steinmetz is supposed to have reduced these to a set of quaternion equations called versors.
http://www.gestaltreality.com/energy-synthesis/eric-dollard/and-in-the-beginning-versors-by-e-p-dollard-2012/
http://www.terrapapers.com/?p=26673

http://www.tuks.nl/David/The%20Telegraph%20Equation,%20Finale'/The%20Telegraph%20Equation,%20Finale.doc
I hope to explore the fractal patterns encapsulated in this important field of research

There is no easy introduction to this topic, but I suggest you select articles from this list
http://jehovajah.wordpress.com/archive/
The Geometric origin f Reflection, Refraction and Diffraction is a good start.

The operator I ceased to be imaginary when Newton and De Moivre and Cotes fully incorporated it into polynomial Geometry . It has taken 400 years for that to become widely known.

 In that time Grassmann and Hamilton showed its fundamental role in Physics and in light and electromagnetic theory. Hamilton corrected a flaw in Mahlus theory and showed that a light cone was possible in a birefringent material

Since then electromagnetic theory was sidelined by commercial interests.

Huygens wrote a curious treatise.
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=X9PKaZlChggC&pg=PP5&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
The main thing scientists refer to was his idea of a cascade transmission or propagation of light. It was perhaps the first conception of the familiar chain reaction in nuclear physics and chemistry.

The wave is represented not by geometric lines but by geometric circles. It was a curious construction and deserves more study. But essentially it attempts to combine Gimaldis concept of diffraction with Descartes and Newtons concept of sound propagating as a pressure through a medium.

There are only 2 forms of material or immaterial propagation pressure and ballistic projectile. However there were for methods of propagation. Direct, reflected, refracted and finally Diffracted. Huygens proposes only on 3, perhaps leaving direct as the conclusion to his investigation. Diffraction is covered in the treatment of polarisation by Huygens and it is diffraction an polarisation that seems to have led him to his cascade structure.

I entered into the subject of electromagnetism naively. I felt that there was a mechanical explanation for these behaviours. At least I felt that magnetism was the key.

What I thought I knew I only half remembered . What I did not know turned out to be the tip of a yawning chasm of ignorance. Still I was eager to set out on my journey over a fathomless deep.

Along the course I realised that I must embrace the fluid in which I moved like a rudderless yacht  and shift to a fluid dynmic paradigm. This was what has saved me from many a shipwreck, until at last I caught the glint of the light house beam, the Fresnel lens and the Grimaldi diffracter. These lights will guide me safely home.

http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Grimaldi.html

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=3n6cBJHiMgUC&pg=PA107&lpg=PA107&dq=grimaldis+light+treatise&source=bl&ots=IukSN7j1Ss&sig=E52ErH6mJAAMa4PNQIOGIsFM8Qc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Z3eBUrr4LsbR0QXYwYHYDw&ved=0CD8Q6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=grimaldis%20light%20treatise&f=false

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffraction

Despite my known great admiration of Newton his contribution to the theory of light has served to mark out the limits of his ability. This I believe was not a bad thing, and characteristically was true to Newtons Philosophical perspective and testimony to the soundness of his principles.

In this case he drew the wrong conclusions on balance. However, he demonstrated thst he had seriously empirically tested the propositions, a thing almost unheard of in renaissance Europe!  The Jesuit priesthood made sure doctrine and dogma were strengthened in the minds of all believers and that non believers were rigorously " converted!"

So it was that Galileo came to be under house arrest after breaching his license to discourse on matters of the heavenly bodies under gods hand. He had to write two essays putting the pros in one and the cons in the other against the topics of the movements of the planets . This much he was allowed to do, as Job was allowed to rail against aged and also for god. The decision as to what was Gods mighty work was left for the Church to decide!

Of course Galileo favoured one side of the discourse and let it be known, which resulted in his house arrest when the established church found out he was in breach of his license.

We come to Grimaldi, who being a Jesuit and a priest used experimentation to demonstrate Galileo to be in error. Of course we know that the terms of Galileos assertion were not met, and so experimental design was flawed and produced a flawed conclusion. But Grimldi sincerely helped to pioneer the empirical basis of science within the license of the Jesuit remit.

Unusually gifted and a great philosopher, it seems he got to close to the reformed pagan philosophers for the Jesuits to allow him to continue teaching philosophy. He was therefore moved to the certainty of mathematics!

Mathematics at this time was not a subject as it is today. The proper ubject was Astrology , and he therefore taught and advanced that subject again within the Jesuit license. Many on lesions were erroneous use to the limited communication and the small number of institutes of higher learning in Jesuit controlled regions. Thus there were few competent colleagues who could judge or discourse on these matters of Astrology regarding the telescope nd in particular the quality of the lenses.

However it is Grimaldies treatise on physico mathesis on light that was his revealing contribution.

 Newton was so inspired by news of it that he began his own investigation into light after Grimakdi had died and before his manuscript could be widely published. It is unlikely Newton ever read it himself, relying on Chinese whispers as to it's content!

Newtons Principia Mathematica echoes the title Physico Mathesis .

Grimaldi wrote under license the usual pro and con of the discourse. One treatise giving the pros for light as a substance, the other giving the pros for light as a quality.
 Of course he fird before publication, shortly after completing it. It was to prove a seminal work in the history of Optics and eventually in the history of sound and electro magnetics!

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=FzYVAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA2&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffraction

It is clear that Grimaldi supported the religious concept of the Aether, a kind of substantive space Ousia that is emanating from god.. The philosophical concept of motion in this Ousia is that of a pressure that travels through it at infinite speed. Descartes enunciated this view clearly. However Newton on learning of the split nature of light took it to mean that light was split into corpuscles, the corpuscular theory derives from the Atomist conceptions of Leucippius  and the conceptions of Alchemists who dealt in ratios and grains of materials. Newton was fast becoming a notable Alchdmist and so he naturally combined the 2 insights to come up with a ballistic corpuscle which travelled in a locus which could be signified by a geometric ray.

Among other empirical data tht confirmed him in his view was the dispersion of the sinle ray into a cone of many colours. This was naturally and convincingly explained as the corpuscles sorting out into this cone by fraction and refraction at the boundary of the medium.

Thus diffraction gave Newton the idea of corpuscles and dispersion, but the actual diffraction Grimaldi referred to Newton called inflexion.. This impressive of dispersing and recombining white light and the facility of explanation meant that Newton won over the Royal Society to his view, much to the annoyance Hooke and others who had carefully prepared microscopic evidence of Diffraction as confirming a wave explanation.

The wave  theory of sound plus this careful observational data on light was building up a wave theory of the Aether. However this was not based on a rigorous skeptical empirical basis which Newton believed was the way forward in philosophical discourse. So using his own method he concluded light was ballistic corpuscles travelling so fast they moved in a straight line. In addition the corpuscles were coloured and they moved in a combined way in white light but could br refracted into their own path by a prism and recombined by a reversing prism again by refraction.

Newtons model was the de facto model for a century, because no one could produce convincing experimental evidence to the contrary.nthe reason, as Hooke well knew was because few had access to microscopes to view the very small. Thus the concept of very small waves was harder to accept than very small particles bouncing about the place.

Fresnel and Arago's next advanced the theory of light. In the 1800 the power of the Jesuits was on the wane. Skeptical scientific method was advancing along the lines of Newtons approach. Kant had brokered a peace between the religious rationalists and the other dissenting factions around the Newtonian approach to gravity. All assented to rely upon empirical data as a basis for concluding the facts of any matter. The scientific method of determining the veracity of an observation was hammered out, and that seemed to be the way forward for honest, noble seekers after truth, and improvement of the common good through technological advance.

There is much in newtons Optiks that is truly revolutionary, but it does represent a theory based on a wrong conclusion as a premise.

Newtons reputation still holds sway today, and the wave corpuscular dualism discourse owes much to this respect for his genius. However I do not use the word wrong conclusion lightly. Fundamentally I conclude that Newton applied his method correctly to inadequate data. His conclusion is therefore inevitable. His mistaken interpretation of fringere in the reports of Grialdis work started a train of thought and experimentation not easily dismissed. His commitment to Alchemical ideals further confirmed his opinion, and the efficacy and simplicity of his exposition makes it the more readily acceptable.

However, the empirical data now widely throws doubt on his certainty. There is no reason to be certain about any natural phenomenon, where a simple or accurate model is adequate for the task in hand. However the more detailed observations may require a more detailed model, and this is what fresnel and Arago's provide
https://ia600508.us.archive.org/15/items/wavetheoryofligh00crewrich/wavetheoryofligh00crewrich.pdf

They perhaps mark the difference between scientists of faith, such as Huygens and Newton were, and theoreticians of empiricism.

The one explores the natural phenomenon from a faith world view, the other constructs a fith wold view from empirical examination nd model building. Both are faiths ultimately, and consequently become set and difficult to respond to new data,mthat is the human psychology of faith makes it difficult to thoroughly redesign a model if needed. That has to be the work of newer fresher minds, especially those uneducated in the Lores of one school or another.

The wave particle debate is a distraction from the past. We use models appropriate to the task. The undulatory model provides the most general concordance with data at present, but it does need revising thoroughly.

A work of theory is not like a work of art, which being done, stands in the senses of all animates until time erodes its form. The theory is firs obscured within the subjective processes of the mind that conceives it. It is then obscured between the covers of some publication or the format of some medium of record. It only lives in the breath and actions of animates as they acknowledge it.
This may suffice, because the author may never be known or attested to, due to the vicissitudes of life or the proclivities of men!
 It is perhaps more effective to write some menial sound bite or a engaging tile than to labour over a theory that will most likely be lost in the libraries and the byways of history.

The nature of life is to evolve, to iterate to some more amanable adaptation to the environment. The information gained through this evolution is therefore not all useful at any given time. But what we suspect to be true is that it is recorded ion the genetic material in virus form.

Our long evolutionary chain of DNA contains much unused code, we think. But we cannot know if that is the case or if that will always remain the case. We do know that the environment forces expression of genetic material, or at least that is the theory. Successful genetic adaptations survive in this record, and so a successful theory will mimic this behaviour, and may very well be an expression of genetic records of appropriate behaviours in the past likely to reoccur in the future.

 The problem with an undulatory theory is that one necessarily expects undulations! But we know that rotations and periodic or closed behaviours produce the same results. It is time to move beyond waves to rotations or closed loop behaviours.

The behaviour of light is divorced unnecessarily from other objects it comes into contact with in common thought, even though we know it burns and heats things. The luminiferous aether was considered to be a fluid , even compared to a liquid. Because the wave theory was downgraded no one had time to rethink about light " wetting" surfaces.

The diffraction of light had a very good correlation with the idea of an active surface. Active surfaces are usually considered in terms of electric and magnetic currents, but there is now a strong reason to drop the current in the wire model and think about the current of light flowing around the wire. In this case the active or wet surface provides conditions for polarisation and diffraction . It may also account for faction and refraction .

In this concept I have voided both charge and current in the wire. At the actual surface of the conductor or transparent material, the light on terraces with the surface geometry which is likely to be disjoint. The thin film of scattered light energy is sufficient to form a layer that diffracts incident and transmitted light .

Imagine now, that a cloth is ubbed over this surface. The disjoint structure is altered uffiidntly as to change the light pattern.mthe result is not onl polarised light but also energy effects we call electrostatic! Within the core of the material, light which is not reflected is absorbed or partially transmitted, and the effect is heat and magnetism.

The how and why I have to find empirical data to demonstrate, but the motive is the rapidly expanding spherically rotating energy ball we call a light flash! The expansion of the ball is associated with electric behaviours including surface reflection and capacitance in a capacitor, while the rotating behaviour which is within the spheroidal surface is associated with magnetic behaviours including polarisation , inductive heating and inductance in an transformer..

The rotation is enhanced by twisting the conductor into a coil, thus isolating what we associate with magnetic behaviours, while the spreading of the conductor  minimises the rotation but enhances the expansion of the light flash, and this we associate with electric behaviour. The reflection at the boundaries builds what we associate with capacitance.

These effects occur outside the conductor or in a thin layer near the surface of the conductor or dielectric. The space between these conducting guides is a store of light energy. String in a dielectric leads to dielectric stress and explosion, storing in a metal core leads to metallic heating and melting from the outside in.

Whichever way it is stored the eventual result is fire!

Fire is the most common electromagnetic phenomenon that we discount!

Fire is usually classed as a chemical reaction, but it is known that without the ignition the reaction will not occur. Thst spark is the electromagnetic fire that burns through the materials. As that electromagnetic energ is radiated the chemicals rearrange bonds to achieve a new stability in this light powered eldctromagnetic environment.

Of course light is only the visible part of the electromagnetic spectrum. Thus a lot more electromagnetic shenanigans occur in a chemical reaction hn we currently know or admit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MstJEAlNFs&feature=youtube_gdata_player

These will be the fundamental equations for light. Others will be derived from them.

Huygens cascade propagation of light will be modified to include damping terms for the spheroidal rotation, or magnetic behaviours. Thus light will expand out indefinitely but the total power per square metre of surface will diminish by the surface area of a sphere and a rotational damping constant.

Huygens propagation model will be thoroughly reviewed, but no sine wave motion is implied only rotation in the spherical surface as it advances.

Does light implode? That is a question to be investigated empirically..

The frequency of a light bubble represents the rotational frequency of the polarised light as it passes through a polarised filter. This frequency generates a wave length hrough polarisation. Thus the rotational frequency of light is the measure of its magnetic intensity. Thebgreayerbthe magnetic intensity the greater the penetrative ability of light.

Intensity as in sound is a function of sources, more sources greater intensity.

The rate of rotation is a function of how many coils light has to rotate round.  Clearly some structures have more "screws" or "coils" in them than others. These structures will tend to behave more like magnets. Crystals with smooth but long flat surfaces or plate like patterns will tend to behave like capacitors.

The same equations hold for sound. While sound is portrayed as a longitudinal wave due to Newtons experiments. There is in fact a transverse or spherical rotation mode to sound .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RC16MwzFq8A&feature=youtube_gdata_player

This simple capacitor inductor /circuit where the joule thief stores magnetic or rotating energy  and the capacitor stores reflected  expanding energy  illustrates how the materials polarise the light passing around the the circuit through the 3rd dielectric/ diamagnetic material the air  and aether.

In these explanations the electron model is not used but implied, unnecessarily. The capacitor collects light energy and the lower rotational Infra red light energy and dynamically it's expanding nature reflectively oscillates on one plate, that is around one plate. The other plate does the same but a much slower rotational infrared is harvested. The dielectric is now under electromagnetic stress both by heat and light. It eventually relaxes that stress by emitting a burst of energy with a higher rotational component in the mix , which is partly guided round the wires and enters into the joule thief diamagnetic material and the space in and around it.. Here the energy builds up the magnetic or rotational energy to a level so that the guided energy entering the LED can fire the material of the LED at its surface emitting light

Some of the stress in the dielectric and diamagnetic materials is due to accommodating the variation in the speed of light through that material.

An electric current nor a charge in the wire or on its surface is not required to explain the behaviour of the "electromagnetic" expanding  rotating bubbles of energy in the aether.

Eric dollard does a similar much larger experiment using a similar circuit..
http://youtu.be/6BnCUBKgnnc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5mA4l6xmGs&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Professor Laithwaite explains Arago's disc motor . Faraday took Arago's experimental result and generated what was thought to be electricity. The spark was what was first used to determine electric power, and before that the galvanometer detected the energy in magnetic tems.

The spark of fire was the key evidence for electric behaviours, and was first observed with amber, then other material interacting together. The Leyden jar enabled energy o be collected and discharged in contact with conductors. It was thought this energy or charge passed through the conductor or along it. Volta thought along the wire there was  conducting atmosphere, Galvano did the same kinds of experiments but felt the chemical reaction had a bigger part in the explanation. He accepted the atmosphere around conductors but argued that chemical reaction supplied the real power.

Volta always claimed the power cme from the surrounding Aether. A committee of scientists decided in favour of Galvano's  explanation. They gave no consideration to the capacitative role of the electrolyte. The chemical reaction is in fact being catalysed by the electric atmosphere, and in this way the electrolyte stores nd releases bursts of energy.

Because Volta was over ruled it soon became fashionable to talk in metaphor about current  of electric ions flowing hrough pipes. This was in fact a development of Faradays explanation of hydrolysis.

Arago's experiment created a great stir among theoretical engineers. No chemical reaction was in sight, and no dielectric material was in sight. Only a magnetised needle. And yet the rotating disc was coupled to the magnetic needle upon rotation.

Oersted had written his theory of current producing sn electric field before the scientific community even heard that Arago's had found this coupling with rotation at about the same time. Again a committee was happy with the current of ions flowing in a conductor , so they had to model the behaviour by so called currents in the rotating disc producing magnetic coupling. These were Faradays induction laws and later Lenz 's laws.

However, Arago's was demonstrating that the rotating atmosphere around a conductor was magnetic, and that the triboelectric effect of the air rubbing against the conductor produced a magnetic flux. Rubbing a second conductor against the rotating disc produced a discharge like amber when rubbed by appropriate material. Arago's was demonstrating the Tribo electric/ tribomagnetic properties of materials. A current was not necessarily flowing in a wire but energy was surrounding a conductor and was diffracted by rotation. In addition, rubbing allowed this energy to conduct along the outer surface of a conductor.

Arago's did not as far as I know do the conceptual work of Faraday, and he went on to study light. He does no seem to have had or put forward another explanation of his disc, but Volta's conjecture was certainly given credence by Arago's experiment.

The Wilmhurst machine uses this principle of Arago's and the Tribo magnetic as well as Tribo electric effect to generate electric and magnetic energy.the van De Graff generator uses the same rotational element and Tribo electric and Tribo magnetic effects to generate a high capacitance low inductance effect on a spherical conductor.

The experimenters with coils and moving magnetic could also generate these same sparks, but because by then they had mostly accepted the current in the wire model, and the wire generating a magnetic field thereby, they could not think that the motion of rotation was the key factor, and this was a surface diffraction effect of an "atmospheric energy" about all materials.

Furthermore the Tribo contact was minimised by the Galvanic explanation of current.mfew pay attention to the sparking that occurs at voltaic  battery terminals, or even today's cells. This effect is designed to be minimal, and the triboelectric and Tribo magnetic induction is whisked away in the concept of conduction.

The chemical battery requires a catalytic explanation to its contribution to power, but the origin of power in chemical reactions is consistent with these chemical states being induced by external electromagnetic radiation interaction in the past. The role of rotation is crucial in making these spatially distributed distinctions in energy and how it is stored and released.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFa-IymyWHM&feature=youtube_gdata_player

http://async.org.uk/IvorCatt+DavidWalton.html

This link should reveal the long time theoretical proposition of Ivor Catt, with empirical data to up port his hypothetical direction.

Although I put it in these terms I am more than satisfied as to the soundness of this model. However, it is at a very early stage of development, due to the established electromagnetic theory committees blocking its publication and call for further collaborative research.

There is empirical data that light and all electromagnetic phenomenon represent the passage of " energy" dense regions through "energy light " regions. The boundary effect is similar to the terminal velocity phenomenon experience by falling objects, powered yachts, rocket powered vehicles etc. they all generate an intensed instability in the direction of motion that results in an oscillation that radiates out from the boundary and alo in toward the denser region.

The oscillation is characteristic of the mediums  and this is what is observed in attendance with the motile object. .

Catt can demonstrate a step of voltage dimensioned energy moving around the conducting wave guides. There is no oscillating wave form and yet the circuit emits frequencies and oscillating wave forms in the radio spectrum.

There are also differing voltage energy traces that travel at different Leeds in the same wave guide, use to the energy pulse encountering 2 forms of inductance, and thus 2 media: tha air and the copper .

The longitudinal propagation of light may not outstrip the speed of the energ dense region, but the transverse propagation is not so constrained. The variation in the transverse cross section occurs at the boundaries where a wave guide or antennae is utilised.

This series of classical demonstrations provides basic empirical data .mit is important to note that the demonstrations are designed to support established theoretical ideas. There is nothing bad about this as long as the empirical data is not tampered with. Some of the mathematical explanation of instrument design is therefore suspect until checked out.


http://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL74058E54264993C8

Note how difficult it is to find words to explain the empirical dat, nd realise that the premises for the descriptions go a long way back in our language history.

Thinking in terms of light Energy in dynamic behaviour around a surface may help you to think outside the box.

The speed of light was measured before 1801 . It was still considered as a ballistic phenomenon. So the movement of the light source could be added to the speed of light in the Galilean sense.

However young and Fresnel and Arago's established the undulatory explanation of light propagation. Ths was finally established by Arago's colleagues when they measured the speed of light as slower in a denser medium in exactly the amount required to refract light, and account for diffraction.

Newton had proposed attractive forces causing the light to speed up on entry into a denser medium and slow down in a les dense one, but quite how this refracted light I have yet to discover. On the face of it this should result in light refracting in the opposite way to that observed.

The aether was the assumed medium of undulation, but of course it was a potentially special aether, the luminiferous aether. This was an attempt to distance the scientific or physical notion of aether from the widely held religious or occult versions by the same name..

Arago's demonstrated that undulations were propagated more slowly in dense media, and it was assumed that the aether penetrated less easily into denser media. At the same time the aether was being constructed as a kind of fluid, and the theoretical formulations could not decide whether the aether was absolute and stationary, or relative and in motion.

The aether concept was in fact in disarray. Everyone believed in some form of aether but no one actually knew what it was.

In this context the Michelson Morley experiment has little to do with defining the aether. It's design was to see if light travelled at different speeds in if fervent directions, one with an additional velocity component and one without.

The results were said to be null. The experimental design has been ingloriously reviewed and re evaluated, and the results are still said to be null.

At the time this presented a problem for the specific aether hypothesis that was being tested. It later was generalised as a problem for all aether concepts.

Physics was in disarray. The successes of the time were in jeopardy of being untenable. So when Einstein proposed several unusual explanations of experimental results , which turned out to be measurable and verifiable in 1905, it was with alacrity that his other insights were lapped up and presented as a solution!

Lorentz, a crazy experimentalist who always redacted his equations to fit the data,exploring a different elliptical geometry was able to make things agree with observations if he adopted a few simple geometrical rules. Light was to be constant in sledding, and then like Doppler suggested for sound wavelengths could shorten or elongate.

Einstein derived a similar principle, but instead of making it physical he made it a fundamental principle. The difference is, fundmental principles are the foundation of experimental design, and not questioned!

Einsteins reasoning is faulty if taken as derived from Galileos mathematical rules. However, he did not take the mathematics he took the principle: physics should be the same in any frame of reference if they are in uniform relative motion.

The consequence of this is that certain distinct formulas are forced to fit in observably different situations. Then to make it all seemingly work, the Doppler shift is plied. In that scenario lengths alter if measured in different frames. This means time alters and these two fundamental dimensions applied to momentum and mass lead to wired contractions in physical measurements.

This seemed to work, and during the war years the scientists were more concerned about blowing the enemies brains out than any deep analysis of why.

In the meantime Einstein decided to tackle gravity relativistic ally, and got in a muddle. He could not resolve it and so he buried it under arcane mathematics.

This was good and bad. The aether was replaced by a complex mathematical model of its behaviour, and so he preserved the Aether in mathematical form during turbulent times. Later he would make an impassioned plea for the return of the aether into physics. The bad was that his muddle made it ifficulties to resolve the new quantum physics with his new theiry. And quantum physicists, seeing the freedom of mathematics presented their theories in arcane mathematics too.

Feynman freely admitted that he did not know what he was calculating but the calculations were proven right by experiment!.

The Doppler effect is a real physical phenomenon. Wave lengths and frequency do alter, lthough which is which is debate able. This means that clocks will run at different Peres because the the extra velocity component does physically slow things down, but to extrapolate that to living longer and going less rapidly is a stretch too far. If a chemical reaction acts at a slower speed then a system is more likely to fail than o slow down to accommodate!

The polarisation of light is another important non isolated factor.

If a bullet is accelerated in a train it will have greater or less kinetic energy depending on which frame it is measured in. When it hits its target it depends in which frame the target is positioned. If the train is moving and the target is not thn the target will reflect this in how deep the bullet penetrates. This will reflect whether the train is moving toward or away from the target..

Now it is usually assumed that the light is reflected from a mirror . This means that if light is moving toward a mirror with n additional velocity, if the mirror reflects it it also has this additional velocity on return. However if the light is absorbed nd re radiated it loses this afditional velocity and returns at a slower speed. . Similarly if light is radiating with a reduced velocity due to the source moving. On re radition it returns with a greater peed!

However, that is the ballistic explanation. In the medium of propagation light will indeed be constant , but it will have a different frequency depending on the frame in which It is measured. On retaliation the light will have a given frequency which again depends on the frame in hich it is measured.

Combining these 2 effects the interpretation of the null result has never been thus analysed.

For example, a wave with an additional velocity component cannot be generated in a closed system. This is clear because the medium in which the light travels is also moving at the speed of the source and the reflectin and polarising mirror. If the incident light is absorbed and retaliated. Any additional velocity is lost, and again the wave is travelling in a medium that is in the same reference frame as the source nd receiver.

When Fred Hoyle measured light from galaxies and saw the red shift and bloe shift he immediately used the oppler nalysis. . So we know that light in a vacuum oes have a fixed speed. But when we bounce a laser off the moon we have an opportunity to measure 2 different frames of reference where the intervening medium is not moving in the same reference frames as the earth and moon.

The light that comes back does show variation and changes as described. However this is usually averaged out and massaged to remove" experimental error!
http://www.fesg.bv.tum.de/91872-bD1lbg-~fesg~forschung~llr.htmlhttp://www.mcise.uri.edu/sadd/mce565/Ch12.pdf

The simplest description of the Maxwell Equation actually is possible via geometric algebra:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell_equations#Alternative_formulations

Only differential forms and geometric algebra allow you to formulate them in arbitrary space times and coordinate free form.
And only in geometric algebra can you summarize the entirety of Maxwell equations into a single line with mere four symbols. (the top row)
This fact actually was what got me more interested in that topic in the first place.

Thanks Kram1032.

Geometric algebra is my fundamental object of study, as is so called Electromagnetism.

The Maxwell equations are a bit controversial in my opinion. They are definitely worth study but not definitely taught correctly in most academic settings.

The topic is now being revisited by scientists who debate the two theories of Relativity,principally creations of Einstein.

The mathematical formulation tells you some of this debate exists, but not how deep a division exists in the consensus!

The concept of light has moved on, and it has further to go
The source and defining object of light is the sun
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ld5ecZuHECA&feature=youtube_gdata_player
http://youtu.be/_yy3YJBOw_o

This video gives us a close view of the sun, and should make us question our settled notions of what light is..
Here on earth, we have only recently been able to release this type of light, the only type of light I think, in nuclear explosions. Yet this same light shows up easily in fires, in heated metals, in electrification , in hammered sparks.

Can we now establish light as an attribute of all matter, and perhaps the most easily expressed of all matter?
The difficulty in the past was that light was visibly different to other materials, and illuminated other materials. We now know light is not visible in all it's manifestations. Light is " dark" until something happens to it, usually polarisation., but we believe it may also be quantized! But we do not know. It might be our instruments that are quantised.

In addition, we only believe space, that is SpaceMatter is continuous. At every scale we image we discover discontinuity, discreteness, but we should know our discrete methods of counting space and magnitudes will always return discrete results.

The uncertainty principle has a corollary that is the certainty principle, but again these are measured in extreme rationales, not continuous or even analogue measures. So light may as well be quantised, becausecwevcannot know otherwise.

What we do know is that light extends beyond the visible range of rainbow hued colours, and thus light is all around us. We swim , walk and are "wet " with it.

In terms of controversies, are you talking about / aware of this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauge_theory_gravity
http://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0405033v1.pdf

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msax6Cd3QKk&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Wet with light is a metaphor, but the sun produces those elements we call water. It is easy to slip into the atomistic particle explanation, after all it is our best model to date, but I want to connect things at the deepest level. That means the dual or split notions of conjugate experience.

In the past I have used the Sanskrit concept of Shunya. Google. " Jehovajah Shunya"  if you want to know more.
Shunya is everything. Thus Shunya is conjugated by a proprioceptive consciousness which is tautological in nature, and thus self aware. It has idemotor, ideologic and ideosyncratic responses that underpin the conjugate experience. That means in its own unique way it reaches out to identify and single out objects in its envions and responses in its experiences stored in memory. And it fundamentally compares them and any 2 experiences in a logos analogos reference frame.

This is unconscious level processing, and is the precursor to any synthesis or construction of any notion of self and other. Self and other is the fundamental conjugation. Both notions however follow a developmental synthesis which includes and develops experiences of a societal and familial nature. Among these societal constructs are the notions of time nd duration, magnitude and quantity.

The natural animate response, which conjugates Shunya includes reaching out, crying out ,taking in and subvocalising. Without memory, no consciousness is possible, no survival instinct is impelled, but ith memory consciousness at all levels inhabits the structures that hold memory.

At this stage , as self forms , distinctions and distinguished notions dominate the developing consciousness. The experiential continuum of Shunya is discretised and fractalised . Atomism is an analytical,consequence of apprehending Shunya. The individuation of the consciousness, the synthesis of the self, the identity, the idempotent nature of I is the major driver of behaviours within an identified and identifiable organism. Alongside this development is the development of important other.

The notion of important other develops the social dimension of the conjugacy. While independence is Yin, dependence is Yang, and that conjugation may be polarised to extremes, but it is always there.

It is a sign of growing maturity and the development of an adult consciousness when the value of dependence is enhanced in the realisation of the independence dependence dynamic. It is a sign of understanding when the interdependence within dependence is conceptualised and finally Wisfom is signalled when ,turning in on self reveals the Intra dependence of the various component structures within the experiential continuum.

Analysis of the conjugate experience reveals that we are limited . There is a " point" which signals to our processing that it is time to top as lying and start synthesising. When sn individual reaches that "point" that is when the mystery and myths of our experience become guides forward to a synthesis of meaningful concepts.

Where any individual starts that synthesis is their " choice" , and what they synthesise is also their product. Some build enduring adaptable structures, some build on sand. Some build rigid structures that are super efficient but snap in the vicissitudes of " life" and so on.

Just as an individual constructs self, that individual constructs a unique worldview. That worldview may never be shared, mimiced or admired by others because each indivual also builds a consensus model , model which the community assents to , overriding individual ones.

And so I come to the atomist view and the immateriality view of the conjugated Shunya. Though I polarise the topic, their are in fact a continuum of discrete versions between the 2 poles . Most do not realise that they are coerced into publicly assenting to a polar view and coerced to " recant" the " opposite" polar view. They are coerced because they know from experience if they do not behave in this way , "there will be strife and gnashing of teeth!"

Sometimes, a rare individual expresses, as if in a song, a beautiful rendition of the experiential continuum. This touches the heart of many and may generate a new consensus. All things flow, no thing remains! The opinion of Herakleitos is always relevant , not because it is " Truth" but because it is always true to experience once understood by the consciousness which utilises its linguistic structure and referential nature.

A new paradigm shift is coming in. The shift is toward fluid dynamics. It has been a long time coming, because we had the experiences but not the sheer computational power needed to make our fractals flow. Now more tha ever we can iterate a fluid element and aggregate fluid elements to synthesise complex fluid dynamics. The concept of elastic corpuscles can be replaced by fractal corpuscles which are inherently sticky or viscous because they interact viscously not elastiicly .

The surface of these corpuscles is dynamic, the interior of these corpuscles is potentially dynamic. We can iterate on 2 principles, one being almost self similarity, the other being evolutionary sculpting. The underlying principle has been reduced by Newton to rotation and extension radially, that is the ubiquitous vortex / spiral.

Ultimately newtons fluid motive will encode all our explanations of my experiential,continuum

I once read, that James Clark Maxwell original wrote his equations with quaternions?
But how this will look like, I dont know.

Here is my personel collection of Maxwell Equations. :dink:
http://www.wackerart.de/Physik/elektrodynamik.html (http://www.wackerart.de/Physik/elektrodynamik.html)

http://www.youtube.com/v/wtLFwP9ppls?version=3&feature=player_embadded


Http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtLFwP9ppls"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeJFKtCrWts
This model of light and electricity is an alternative view. I do not hold the same views as the Electric Universe model, but I do say it is a big step in the direction I am going.

Thanks Kram1032 and Hermann for your contributions and links. I will respond presently.

Thank you Jehovajah for these interesting videos. The how to watch the sun was very informative. :)

@Hermann, King Crimson are cool. I spent years listening to mainly Islands when younger. And a nephew turned me on to Discipline last year. They can push the arpeggios a bit much sometimes IMHO :) :)

Hallo Jehovajah,

you started this diskussion with the following statement.

Normaly physicist and engineers take the Maxwell equations as starting point. Which is noramly seen as one of the pillars physics is bulid on.
From Maxwells equations follows a wave equation. This gives a mathematical description of elektormagnetic waves.
That this waves realy exists was proven by the experiments of Heinrich Herz.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Hertz (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Hertz)
Today we see light as a electromagnetic wave.
With this basic view in mind I asked my self why you started with Fresnels formula?
To formulate this question I wrote down what I could remember on Fresnels formular.
I ended up with a question, that may give already some anwsers.

Fresnels Formular
When you have a glas of water and have a straw in it looks as if it has been broken. This kind of phenomena can be descriped by Frenels theorie.
Basicly one can have electromagnetic waves in vacum and electromagnetic waves in matter. The transition between vacum and one kind of matter can be described by frenels formula.
You get information about which part of a wave is reflected and which part of the wave moves into matter.
The directions of the elektrommagnetic field and the magnetic fields, their relations and the relations of the angels.
Light makes things visible to our eyes. Light is reflected by the things that surrund us. This reflection change the spectra of the incomming light.
That light is detected by our eyes and is then converted (I think this is not covered by Fresnel) into electromagnetic pulses that are then operaten by our neural system.

But isn't this more a philosophical view than a mathematical view?

Hermann

Hallo Jehovajah,

I revisited my internet page on electrodynamics after I had read your blog
http://www.wackerart.de/Physik/elektrodynamik.html (http://www.wackerart.de/Physik/elektrodynamik.html)
and discoverd that I had not inserted an integral formulation of Maxwells equations.
Which I always wanted to do but never found the time to do.

This formulation I like very much for the following reason:

• An integration improves the behavior of a function.
• If one looks at micro space quanten mechanics and quanten electrodynamis are the key player. Differenital equations use infiniti small items.
• Surface and a volumes can be found in reality and may make things more understandable.

Hermann

Thanks Hermann.

As you know, I try to look at everything with fresh eyes.
I was surprised to find that Arago had created a stir by showing that a versorium was magnetically coupled to a spinning metal disc! This was one thing that Maxwell hoped to be able to explain, and he says as much in his first chapter in his Electromagnetic theory.

I was also surprised to find that this experimental data occurred at about the same time as Oersted demonstrated a versorium or magnetic compass needle was deflected toward a conductor along which a Leyden jar or a voltaic cell was being " discharged".

Thus there was a chance for a different interpretation of what was actually bing observed, but things were moving so vast that researchers were scrabbling enthusiastically to make a name for themselves in this new area of knowledge. Consequently Sir William Golberts explanations were left behind in this mad scramble, and a new subject called eventually Electromagnetism shoved magnetic philosophy into its back pocket and walked away with the prize!

There still is a society of magnetic engineers to this day, but they are in the background, only being consulted when huge magnets are needed for projects like the Large Hadron Collider. Many of them arrive at the society via the electromagnetic theory route and wrongly believe they are working in a " dead" subject area.

Maxwells equations are about the electric" field" and the magnetic" flux field", but only a few specialists ever look at the magnetic flux field, assuming it is the same as the electric field, at least as far as the mathematics is concerned. This is not the case, and much work on this was simply abandoned after 1905 when everyone rushed to make a name in the new science increasingly based on Einstein Rutherford and Bohr's model of the atom, and the photon, deliberately based on the electron.

When I looked into Arago I found he was key to Fresnel being understood and accepted as a genuine innovator. Arago was at once able to connect Fresnel, Young and Huygens into a consistent wave theory that had a chance of overturning the Newtonisn corpuscular theory of light, heat and magnetism.

While this was an undulatory aether theory, it was the first to explain all the observations of light, heat and magnetism starting with Grimakdi. Arago, a corpuscularist until he found Fresnels's mathematical and geometrical formulation undeniable, immediately switched to the undulatory theory. He needed to show that light slowed down in denser media and he set in train a group of experimenters who were able to confirm this after his death.

Now you may wonder why I included magnetism in jAragos description. Among the papers in the Royal society I found many observations of those pursuing the reigning magnetic philosophy relating to the influence of light on the magnetic versorium or compass needle. In fact, one of the first uses Gilbert's Work was put to was to establish magnetometers to record the magnetic weather. Much data was and is collected in this regard, and Weber was among those of the philosophers of magnetism who refined the instrumentation and contributed much to the theory. His work was not ignored directly, it is too valuable for naval and marine navigation, but it was subsumed academically into the electromagnetic theory and marginalised.

Maxwells equations have been written and rewritten in many forms, but these equations do not always express Maxwells and Faradays empirical or experimental thinking. In particular, the fluid dynamic elements in Maxwells original set up are often ignored or recharacterized.

Both Faraday and Maxwell belong to the Pre Electron era, as did JJ Tompson. The equations relate to the transmission of strain through the aether caused by some unknown stressor, often induction by some unknown inductor. The theoretical model was a vortex, and Helmholtz and Kelvin worked very hard to establish the mathematics of these incredible natural phenomrena. Maxwell used their lastic properties only to model strin transmission. Unlike Kelvin, he did not see much hope of using their viscous properties to describe molecular and atomic interactions.

You mentioned Hamilons Quaternions. Maxwell was n extremely able athematicins. He at once saw the benefits of using Hamilton's Quaternions, and hiked them as a breakthrough in mathematical modelling of the aether. Unfortunately his colleagues and associates were not so bright! They could not make head nor tail of this new mathematics. Minkoeski famously could not be bothered to reformulate his theories in this new mathematical format. Leis Crtol, Alice in ondrtlanf's author, penned his books as a damning criticism of the new Hmiltonisn mathematics. Kelvin condemned the Quaternions as trickery. Instead he promoted the work of a young metric sn mathematician called Gibbs. This was because Gibbs was a great promoter of Klvins Kinetic theory and statistical thermodynamic.

The iPhoto of this was Maxwells equations were not understood. They were not understood for almost 20 or more years after publication. Maxwell bitterly regretted framing his equations in Quatemion form nd wrote as much. His earlier praise was rescinded. He attempted to rewrite his equations in terms of the Gibbsin vector mathematics, but had trouble getting the sign of E the electric field correct. Gibbs vector mathematics was flawed. Eventually Heaviside devised his own vector calculus and rewrote much of Maxwells equations in this form, emphasising 5 fundamental equations of the reputed 27 , of which 4 are commonly taught in electromagnetic theory. Heaviides telegraph equation is marginalised but absolutely fundamental to any one wanting to set up a power grid!

Steinmetz fundamentally rewrote Maxwells equations in quaternion form, but using a quaternion notion called a versor. This restored the mathematical symmetry and beauty of Maxwells original conception, but mystified everyday engineers. In part this was deliberat. Steinmetz needed to make a living, and his expertise was well rewarded. But mostly it was ue to the fact that most engineers are not mathematicians and certainly most do not comprehend algebra.

While Heaviside and Steinmetz simplified basic concepts covered by the equations so engineers could do their jobs safely, there is and was much that they could not convey to hose who are not mathmically gifted.

The introduction of Ampere's law by maxwell to cover the transmission through the aether inide and sround a capacitor of the electric strain and the Magnetic strain has been lauded as the mathematical breakthrough that discovered electromagnetic waves! I hope you will view that statement with some scepticism from now on.

Maxwell from the outset was formulating a strin wave equation for the aether. His 2 constants of petmittivity and permeability derive from strain equations for the transmission of undulations in fluids like water and air. The experimental measures of these constants in these kinds of medium multiplied together to give the known speed of light. As remrkble as this was, it was actually saying tht strin prop gets in the aether at a constant but unimaginably large velocity. It says nothing snout the maximum speed an object may be accelerated to or beyond!

Maxwell added the displacemrent current term to his equations to explain how a capacitor got charged hen no current could flow through the gap in the conductor! The idea simply means that a plate of conducting material takes time to build up what was and still is called charge. At this point we are asked to switch our thinking to either a model of electons or little circles ith + in them!  We then are distracted from the empirical data of ht is happening in this scenario.

To understand how badly this has affected electromagnetic theory you must read Ivor Catts work.

In doing just that I have bern brought back to the work of Arago snd Fresnel, Grimaldi, Young and Newyon and Huygens. Faraday and Maxwell built their theoretical understanding on the works of these men as well as on the empirical data of their fellow researchers.

Hallo Jehovajah,

thank you very for your long answer. But I miss one point in your overview, that is the work of Heinrich Hertz who proved the existens of elektomagnetic waves by experiment.
Only this breackthrough opened the way to the success of Maxwells theorie?

(http://www.seefunknetz.de/bilder_2/hhertz_2.jpg)

http://www.seefunknetz.de/hhertz1.htm (http://www.seefunknetz.de/hhertz1.htm)

Hertz Heinrich: Gesammelte Werke, Band 1, 11 und 111, Leipzig, 1894.
Hertz, Heinrich: Über die Beziehungen zwischen Licht und Elektrizität, Bonn, 1900.

http://www.youtube.com/v/IMESXH9XoI0?version=3&feature=player_embadded

Hermann

You are right ,Hermann. Hertz provided conclusive experimental evidence by mapping the standing undulations. However if he had not done his work, Lord was about to publish on the same topic. However it is a moot point, one that may be doubtful, if Hertz understood Maxwells theory. Certainly Lord only had a cursory grasp of it.

Hertz was among the one or two people in the whole of western Europe who had even heard of Maxwells theory, let alone read it.Hetz evidence was the more remarkable because he happened on the righ gap to see the transmitted spark.

In Maxwells theory were detailed Equipotential maps and a discussion of how to construct them. The work that Hertz did verified a theoretical equipotential diagram Maxwell had already drawn. In that light Hertz validated a detail of a theory and so in turn sparked an interest in a theory that was hardly known and barely understood.

Thanks for the article link. I had missed the detail that Faraday first proposed electromagnetic waves that propagated by electric / magnetic induction.  This is actually the part of the theory that is in question! Faradays varying magnetic field supposedly produces an electric current in a wire? We now know it cannot produce " electric" current inside a wire. The varying energy ( magnetic ) produces a varying energy about the wire! It is now highly probable that this is a magnetic current that runs vorticularly around the wire.

While the electric terminology remains it is increasingly demonstrated that active surfaces are involved in energy transmission through the dielectric . The magnetic nature of the conductor has a bearing on how that energy propagates around the "wave guides" and with what efficiency.

There is an emerging pattern which envelops the Electromgnetic spectrum. Light is propagated ith heat and magnetism . The higher the energy the greater the proportion of light o heat to magnetism.

Thus we ought to think of light as combined ith heat nd magnetism in such a way that the theories of light, heat or thermo dynamics and Electromagnetim are combined in a proportion.

At the moment, the electromagnetic spectrum is divorced from thermodynamics by a notion of " radiation" . This notion is unspecific, and in fact, experts when pushed are not able to explain the difference between heat and infra red radiation.

In fact it is relatively simple and most children see the connection immediately. It is the experts who stumble because thy have theoretical positions to mintsin.

Light is not divorced from matter. There is very litte visible light in the whole spectrum, so it is perhaps natural to think light travels divorced from matter. What is increasingly the case is that we find there is more matter than we can " see" because it does not carry visible light. But as soon as those Frequencies impact on that invisible matter, they reveal themselves by absorption or reflection or re radiation of those frequencies and through polarisation of light at those frequencies.

The wavelength of light is a concept of dubious merit, it was principally introduced to explain sinusoidal wave interference. However it is very unlikely that dinø ideal wave propagation is the norm. A trochoidal description of propagation exists and is more general. In fact the model for all,waves, water waves are generally best described by trochoids.

The significance of this is we do,not need a sinusoidal wave propagation model where in particular electric fields are said to generate magnetic fields. We only need rotating expanding idled of varying Frequency.

Hallo Jehovajah,

I do nor realy understand your problem in the way you stated it.
Light is an electomagnetic wave which is composed of a magnetic and an electric part.
In energy can be in an elektric field and in a magnetic field they are like ying and yan.
Every solid body has a temperature which is due to the velocity of the particels it is composed from.
When a charged particel is accelerated it will radiate elektromagnetic waves.
Solid bodies and gas are composed of charged particels. The greater the heat of a body or gas is, the higher the the velocity of the particels is.
If this particels are bouncing together this will result in an acceleration and hence you have electromagnetic waves.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/24/Dipolentstehung.gif)

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/da/Felder_um_Dipol.jpg)

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elektromagnetische_Welle (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elektromagnetische_Welle)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_radiation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_radiation)
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/W%C3%A4rmestrahlung (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/W%C3%A4rmestrahlung)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_radiation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_radiation)

You may also have a look on the black body radiation and the work of Max Plank. Which is one of the starting points of quantenmechanics.

Hermann
P.S. Thank you very much for the links to Wildbergers lessons on mathematics on YouTupe.
I yesterday watched his lessons on rational numbers. I also like his critical view on infinities in mathematics, which I share.

I want to explore the role light took in coming to our notion of matter and it's atomic structure. In particular the fundmental role of spectroscopy and spectometry in introducing the electron into chemistry and the redaction of the periodic table into its present structure.

It is not commonly recognised but chemists apprehend more about the nature of light and the anomalies in Electromagnetic theory than most physicists. This is because light was crucial to the formation and completion of the periodic table organised by Mendeleyev, drawing on earlier alchemical works like Lavoisiers. The work of Dalton and others in fluid and so gaseous chemistry , drawing on Boyles insights and equipment, also informed Lavoiiers taxonomy. It was Mendeleyev who drew attention to the octets in this chemical list of elements based on reactivity with standard agents.

The octet structure was a bold conjecture which guided chemists in completing the table which was organised by molecular weights based on the mole of fluid used to quantify reactants, reactions and reaction products. It was the mole formulary or notation that lead to a consistent notation for chemical reactions.

With this notation as a handle chemists could write down and note different reactions and their outcomes. In some cases they became able to predict outcomes, based on the octet" rules", but elements were still missing in the tables, and were difficult to isolate. Around this time spectroscopy started to record spectra for the elements when they were burnt in a flame.

These spectra, linked to the periodic table not only helped to identify new elements, but also to better understand the composition of elements internally. Spectrometry enabled these spectra to be measured and compared and differences compared with unknown specimens. Spectrometry soon became a vital assay tool.

The light produced in a Crookes ray tube was of a particular colour because of the copper wire. But spectrometry revealed other lines which were identified as new elements, rare gases . Spectosvopy was based on the molecular theory of elements and it was clear that elements were associated with light when heated. Thus electric sparks had to be heating elements and causing light emission, so called. But when it was declared, after some hesitation by Thompson, that he had found a particle called by this time the electron, a name he conceded to only after much persuasion, and that it itself was the light in the Crookes ray tube, then spectroscopy took on a whole new meaning.
Later Einstein based his concept of a photon on the electron. It was called the massless electron! Einstin posited that it was this photon that Thompson actually witnessed as Crookes ray, mingled in amongst the electron particles that carried the mass.

There was a huge problem with the electron, which has to do with stability. To make a stable atom Thompson posited a huge binding particle called a proton. The electron had to sit inside the proton to remain stable. Electic and magnetic activity somehow knocked it out. He had no notion of a photon. The problem with the electron was it could not travel at the speed of light because it's mass would have to be zero, for the mathematical theory to work!

Lorentz theory of the electron had serious flaws in it and it was Einstein who brokered a solution based on Thompsons electron concept, not Lorentz's.  Evenso, Rutherford continued experimenting with sparks and light rays and felt Thompsons model was wrong. Similarly Bohr came to the same conclusion. They imagined a minuscule nucleus and a circling electron like a planetary system. The photon then came from the electon as Einstin posited by changing its relative potential energy.

Chemists took this model to task. Refined it and suggested shell structures and orbit patterns. The light emitted or absorbed was related to these patterns and a complex structure that accounted for elements, the periodic table, chemical reactivity , atomic structure was developed. It was chemists that provided an empirical model that supported the Rutherford Bohr atomic model and which took light right into the heart of matter. However light was itself transformed by this association, it became the more general electromagnetic radiation. This concept was demonstrated by Heinrich Hertz, but it was posited nearly 50 years earlier by Faraday.

Fire was now incorporated ino matter by a theoretical construct. It would be some time before it would be renamed plasma, and contribute to a new model of matter .

Thanks, Hermann. Some cool graphics , and a nice summary of the standard model.

I do not have a problem with the standard model. Usually it is the other way round!
I have not stopped looking or researching or revisiting the empirical data, or examining the natural philosophy . I have not stopped questioning. You could say I never stopped reinventing the wheel!
 :dink:

The theory or model you eloquently presented raises many questions. Unfortunately, when you ask those questions you often get kicked to death! I exaggerate for effect. Lol!
http://openseti.org/Docs/HotsonPart1.pdf

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuCVsyPqAF4&feature=youtube_gdata_player

The active magnetic data of our sun collected over many years underpins the new theoretical dynamics or mechanics of light. The active surface of the sun reveals what is actually going on between the plates of a capacitor or around a dipole antenna or on the surface of a van de Graaf generator globe.

These magnetics are only part of the picture. The much more energetic and expanding " magnetics" are usually considered to be electric phenomena, radiation phenomena and heat and light phenomena.

The matter or plasma in and of which this is constructed is usually consigned to thermodynamic phenomena of convection and or conduction. The induction of electric and or magnetic behaviours is isolated away from this complex mix, resulting in a fragmented and partial description of a set of phenomena we experience daily, every second of our lives..

Perhaps it is time to think different!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpemX6lWFCg&feature=youtube_gdata_player
This shock resulted in a sall local power outage in the city of Lincoln Uk. The scary thing was, it took out the cell phone transmitters as well!

You knw something strange is happening when lights remain glowing when all the power is oft!

The notion of plasma is still relatively new. But I make a few points regarding Sir William Gilbert's view of magnetism here
http://my.opera.com/jehovajah/blog/gilberts-plasma
Today we have all but lost contact with the root concepts of the technology we enjoy. Our understandings are at least sanitised, but I own that they are propagandised by the rise of great commercial interests in the new powers being technologically harvested by ingenious engineers and inventors.

Much of what is actually known lies buried and even hidden in records of the philosophical and scientific societies, only now being released onto the Internet . That which still has commercial advantage or military advantage is still secreted away from public view.

You can be sure that what we do know is what some only want us to know.

Hallo Jehovajah,

are you aware of this paper?
http://www.fli-leibniz.de/www_kog/research/physics/JMP%201210.pdf (http://www.fli-leibniz.de/www_kog/research/physics/JMP%201210.pdf)

Hermann

Speaking of paper awareness; Did you already look into the one I linked?

Thanks guys!
Kram1032 I cannot say I looked into the x2 papers you referenced. They are quite detailed and I have not the time to get to grips with them yet, but basically the geometric algebra approach is  welcome.

The mathematics is not so important at this stage, though. The fundamental data is what I am revisiting. So for example the gauge theory of gravity hopes to explain how gravity works by gauge transfers. This is a way of saying forget gravity think about gauges. Newton more or less said I do not know what gravity is, by which he meant he had no credible mechanism to explain its action at a distance.

Newton's concept of motive required corpuscles to transmit its causative agency. Thus absolute empty  space defeated his model of transmission.  He did attempt to establish a fluid dynamic model of transmission but got bogged down and confused by the complexity.

The concepts of Faraday and Maxwell of spheres of influence restored the Gilbertian magnetic philosophy to its previous position before Newtons ideas  held sway. Newton had concepts of aether, and acknowledged the magnetic philosophy, but his astrologer acolytes down played these concepts and bigged up his Mathematics! In that sense he allowed them to establish his philosphical ideal praxis over the extant mostly Cartesian methods of reasoning.

I have to say he was wrong on several fronts and in details, but used his position to enforce his view. Genius no matter how great does not give the individual right to domineer, which Newton is known to have done in later life.

So we return to what I called Gilbert's Plasma, because it was one distinct version of the many aether theories. It had the advantage of demonstrating a field effect empirically.

We cannot have gauge theories without these empirical fields to originate and absorb the gauge transfers. The geometry of these fields is therefore very important.

So now we have to question the assertion of absolute space and the assertion of atomic matter sitting in and moving through absolute empty space. The very definition of Mass is Newtonian , that is, the common Teutonic meaning has been adhered to the Newtonian Measure:  quantity of matter!  We move, cleverly from geometry to mechanics and physics of the space around us, to which must be applied several metrics which depend on not just one sensory system but many . For each sensory system and for combinations of them we have to define metrics or units of measurement, and these units are linked to our geometrical notions of space.

Thus geometric algebra offers a promise of a more consistent approach to mathematical modelling, and that is why I have researched and am researching Grassmans analytical and synthetical methods.

Which brings us to Hermanns paper, which I have again looked at cursorily.
http://youtu.be/y-U3i8bwPfM
Such papers I give less time to unless they contain some fundamental analysis of the issues, which are what is mass and what is charge, and what is going on in Thompsons experimental set up?

You will note from the video link a quote which differs remarkably from what is generally taught and trumpeted in academia. Thompsons own corpuscular theory is available to read. Thompson thought in terms of a particle that carried charge. This particle was invisible and its effect only was visible in the gas in the accelerator tube and in the fluorescent material at the end of the manipulation tube.

So we have a presentiment of a particle, that is a bias toward a particle explanation, a selected anode " barrel" whose role is discounted, the presence of a noble gas to exude the excited material which showed filamentary behaviour usually described as ray behaviour and diffraction in a magnetic field with dispersion and deflection in an electric field.

The analysis assumes mass and assumes charge and calculates a ratio based on those assumptions.

It is a brilliant set up and demonstration, but it does not demonstrate the existence of a particle that is a point charge in and of itself. That version has been manufactured and taught to us by various groups of researchers and scientists each with their own agenda.

It shows that even at this late stage the wave theory or undulatory theory of light and matter was still not persuasive enough to inform the thinking of all scientists and chemists. In particular chemists were biased toward particles by the theory of Dalton and Mendleyev even though light now played a major role in assay techniques.

I think the research you two are doing is really valuable , and a great contribution to the thread. I hope you will continue to contribute and others will join in with their research.
Thanks again
• Newtons " motive" as a force I later came to understand not as a cause of acceleration but a type of centripetal force that is quantifiable by a weighing balance.

This is a lovely, clear exposition of the experimental set up, the theoretical basis of the calculation and the calculation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aKMsMs-5tc&feature=youtube_gdata_player

This fundamental  calibration then enables a particle, as a corpuscle to carry Oersteds and Flemings version of electromagnetism, and Newtons version of gravity . Thus a region of space as a corpuscle is filled with at least 3 kinds of motive, in a Newtonisn sense. This is why Thompson came up with the plum pudding model, and why it was so readily received as definitive by the scientific Societies at the time.

The decision to call it the electron was a decision made by the establishment of the time, who felt it was necessary o have a fundamental building block called the electron. It was never allowed to be destroyed until very recently! This is as part of a long term game plan to redefine "physica" nature nd many so called physical constants. Although it is seemingly being done in the open, in fact it is being managed behind closed doors. The public are not engaged in these redefinitions, only a few so called top scientists are allowed to advise on and make this decision.

This may sound conspiratorial and it is, but it is not without precedent historically. The best analogy is that of the setting of weights nd measures. The SI units are the world standard, but not the only standard. Because all measurement is ultimately affected by any revision in the basic constants, no one breakthrough is going to be allowed to upset the fundamental measures we use. So realistically there is a negativity to change and advance that derives from social and political considerations outside of physics and chemistry as well as n inter subject resistance between the 2 main physicl sciences.

Now see how these constant measures are used to build theoretical models to explain nuclear nd inter nuclear interactions.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3g6RtyGjX3o&feature=youtube_gdata_player
The use of these constants or symmetries or conservation laws by theoreticians is noteable. They no longer deal in " reality" but instead deal with a mathematical model or representation of reality. This approach goes back to Newton, who defined his measures do cleverly that no one really grasped that they no longer had contact ith the objective experience. To enter into Newtons Principia is to enter into a geometrical measuring tool or scheme that delivers measurements as outcomes.

Of course this may be hard to apprehend, but as n example think of spherical geometry then realise that spherical trigonometry is required to apply it to everyday problems or issues of measurement.

As another example. Think of Euclidesn geometry. Then realise that trigonometry perhaps codified by Hipparchus initially but certainly developed by Archimedes and Apollonius, Eudoxus and Ptolemy and many Indian mathematicians; Brahmagupta is but one that easily comes to mind. The trigonometry is necessary to apply planar Grometry to everyday problems.

Well Newton set up this kind of metric or measuring scheme for Astrology and it devolved into all of physics and mechanics. Eventually it influenced Alchemy, another of his interests. This is not to say that Descartes and others were not about doing the same thing. In fact it was the Zeitgeist of the time, and Leibniz probably was the nearest European philosopher polymath establishing a rival metric principle. Both were improving on Descartes schemes.

So it is a fantastic story to find out that the next real contributors to this metric representation of reality were professor Hermann Grassmann and Sir William Rowan Hamilton. Grassmann in fact was a primary school educatr most of his career and he worked in concert with his brother Robert on his father Justus ring theoretical ideas.

Hamilton was groomed to be the next Newton or Aristotle. He recognised Grassmann in ome sense as his master on reading the 1844 Ausdehnungslehre. I am not sure if he was aware of how Grassmann had been ignored under Gauss's academic hegemony, but he recognised immediately the fundamental importance of Grassmanns method and Analysis and synthesis. So did Peano, as a young Italian researcher and so did A N whitehead. So internationally the Grassmann family were responsible For influencing the next major shift in metric theory and metric modelling of "reality".

Representation theory develops on the back of the Grassmann ring theoretic method, especially when lied ith the work of Hamilton. The result is that theoreticians can now talk about models of reality as shown in this video

This video is really quite special. Everything in it is representational . It is derived from the metric models of geometrical or spaciometric "reality".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6bgABUyT3c&feature=youtube_gdata_player
It is quite fantastic, definitely mythical and yet factually based. You have to realise that humans create both myths and facts to realise what you are experiencing while learning from this video.

When you realise that you will apprehend how important geometry or Spaciometry really is in our social structure!

An additional derivation attributed to Heinrich Hertz
http://www.angelfire.com/sc3/elmag/
Both Heaviside and Hertz worked through Maxwells theory and made notes and comments. The two redactions appear to depend on whether Eulerian reference frames or Lagrangian reference frames were used. Thus the forms would indicate that the equations are not gauge invariant. The relativistic versions therefore are written in a gauge invariant form.
http://www.cpdee.ufmg.br/~fernando/material/Hertz_Maxwell.pdf

This a article details the difficulties of a mathematical model representing physical phenomena!
http://www.sonnetsoftware.com/support/downloads/publications/MWJ_AcceptanceOfMaxwellsEquations.pdf

However conservation of angular momentum is not the crucial decider! The symmetry or conservation laws are regularly broken in real situations. Energy dissipates in space and it arises from space because that is space! The light we cannot see, the background radiation we cannot measure, the negative energy we had not conceived are all in that observation.

Even in the waves in the sea certain inexplicable waves arise out of the general milieu, because conservation laws are only a useful tool, not a reality of space!

Thanks guys. I have learned some good documented historical details about Hertz and the Maxwellians. Also I have seen how the aether has been manipulated to support snd destroy empirical perceptions.

The displacement current term was placed into the equations by Heaviside to preserve symmetry.mthe concept of a rolling sinusoidal wave is nowhere to be found, but the generation of waves by alternation informs the development of mechanical aether models.

The vector or quaternion magnetic induction potential seems to have been a blind alley replaced by the symmetries between the electric and magnetic field concepts.

The suggestion is not obvious, but I believe the notion of vibration must be replaced by rotation. In that case the magnetic field rotates in complete rotations per second. The electric field is an artefact of an expanding rotating magnetic field or indeed a contracting rotating magnetic field.

Arago's rotating mass of metal now has a significance unrealised.

Hallo Jehovajah,

thank you very much for the links to the physics lessons, which gave me the change to get an exellent overview on things I haven't been in tough for many years.

By the way I have problems with getting access to the links in the post:
May be there are typos.

Hermann

Thanks Hermann . Links corrected in that post.

Sorry the links still doesn't work!

Try this::
http://www.sonnetsoftware.com/support/downloads/publications/MWJ_AcceptanceOfMaxwellsEquations.pdf (http://www.sonnetsoftware.com/support/downloads/publications/MWJ_AcceptanceOfMaxwellsEquations.pdf)
http://www.angelfire.com/sc3/elmag/ (http://www.angelfire.com/sc3/elmag/)

The third I couldn't find by google!

Hermann

Thanks for that Hermann
http://www.angelfire.com/sc3/elmag/files/EM03ME.pdf
Was the PDF I posted. I have properly corrected the links and hope they all work for you.

There is so much to unlearn about light and even more to learn. But the following videos show just how Schizophrenic our understanding is.
Do we really have a particle physics?
And what are physicists really talking about if they were honest?
And mathematicians what are they really thinking?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DGgvE6hLAU&feature=youtube_gdata_player

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8DGgvE6hLAU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTeBUpR17Rw&feature=youtube_gdata_player
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvN-prp1N78&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Forgot I had this great video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCyMZFwb_O8&feature=youtube_gdata_player
What has it got to do with light?
Think of light as a spherical expanding bubble from the source. The surface of the bubble is magnetic energy rotating in the surface, the expansion of the bubble is a radial velocity distribution from the measured speed of light to the measured speed of so called particles.

The gyroscopic magnetic rotations in the bubble surface provide amazing stability for objects moving in space. They also allow magnetic coupling between bodies with such stable polar axes. Simply ask the Gilberuian question, the question that Boyle asked: is this gravitational behaviour?
Newton was unwilling to give sn answer, but he used, as was common in his time, the metaphor of magnetism .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiHN0ZWE5bk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiHN0ZWE5bk)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotation_377226&feature=iv&src_vid=CiHN0ZWE5bk&v=YW8KuMtVpug (http://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotation_377226&feature=iv&src_vid=CiHN0ZWE5bk&v=YW8KuMtVpug)

Thanks Hermann.
Very enjoyable and the guys are good at articulating the issues without the math. I subscribe to the channel and recommend it.
The problem is when someone starts saying there is only oe true description. Then these guys show their teeth!

I do not believe in one truth , and do not generally recommend one way of describing phenomena. However when one critiques n aspect of a model or several inconsistencies thn something turns the group of physicists into a snarling pack of wolves'

That being said it is clear that fundamentally particles are a misnomer. Even corpuscles seems a slightly more informative word!

The reason this topic is here in this forum, nd not in some physics forum is because, like fluid dynamics we cn actually sculpt fractal patterns out of some of these process formulas. We can do it with a simple fractal programme and get results that look like interference patterns!

When I looked at some conceptual results I,had no reference images or theoretical understanding. This thread I hope will develop some fractal sculptures that are really informative of physical process.

Of course the traditional way is to programme a computer to move points and then put physical loops and stochastic statistical algorithms in those loops to predict or determine the next position. I do not want to do it that way.

If the field is the ultimate driver, I want to create events in a field equation and see what it sculpts!
As I have experimented along these lines certain functions and relationships called trochoids have become increasingly interesting.

That leads me. back to some simpler basic phenomena which I am keen to see if they appear in physical formulary.
I find that they do in one way or another ! But I have a long way to go to demonstrate any real physical references.

I just keep meditating on these things.

Ivor Catt has researched the early history of electric port transmission from about Maxwell faraday onwards. His conclusions can be found here
http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/uf26sbk0.htm
While not a complete history on the world stage, it paints a picture of sloppiness and intrsnsigence bought about by corporate power struggles. This in itself defines electricity as a commercial product rather than a theoretical exploration of reality.

The reason why I love trochoids!
http://youtu.be/tnbUJAKTR0k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnbUJAKTR0k&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Physicists do not recognise these forms in the solutions to their equations!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-PfJmmBjNc&feature=youtube_gdata_player
This video is just a taster, so anyone who is interested in a empirically based explanation of light know where to go to get some answers?

There is so much  to reference
Hertx original texts of his experiments
Maxwells text to his electromagnetic theory
Heavisides texts to his electromagnetic theory
Lord Kelvins  magnetic theory
Gilbert's De magnet.
McCullaghs theory on rotating aether and stokes objection

http://youtu.be/w4MIFnpWG4s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4MIFnpWG4s&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Coulomb's law in vacum:



The first important milestone in the development of electrodynamics is the publishing of Coulomb's law. Discovered around the year 1785 by the french physicist Charles Augustin de Coulomb. Where this law describes the force F between two particles with the charges q₁ and q₂ which are placed at a distance r. The direction of the force is on a straight line between the two particels. Remember, that there are two different kinds of charges: 'positive and negative', which have a fundamental influence on the direction of the forces. The force is attracting if the two charges have different sign and is repelling if the two charges have the same sign.

In this law one can see already the first problem. If the distance between the two particles become zero, the forces on the two particles go to infinit. This is of special importance if we have point like particles like the elektron and the positron. These two particles attract one another and will produce infinit forces and hence infinit energies when they come closer together.

That means on atomic scale Coulomb's law is not the complete story!

Todays theorie tells us that the two particles electron and positron will perform annihilation of one another when they come close together and the energy of the two particles will be transformed info two gamma photones. Where gamma photones are the particels of the electromagnetic wave at high frequencies. The following Feynman diagram describes this process.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e0/Mutual_Annihilation_of_a_Positron_Electron_pair.svg/200px-Mutual_Annihilation_of_a_Positron_Electron_pair.svg.png)

That shows, that matter can be transformed into elektormagnetic waves. Also the energy is resticted by the mass of the two particles and their kinetic energie. The energie that is assinged to a mass of a particle can be calculated to Einsteins famous formula . The energie of a photon depents on it's frequency . According to the following formula: and h is Plank's constant.
It is also possible to produce an electron positron pair from a photon, if the photon has sufficient energie.

Today we have basicly three theories for describing electormagnetic phenomena. These are the classical elektrodynamic, quantum electrodynamics and in partical physics the electroweak interaction. The electroweak theory combines electromagnetic interactions with weak interactions.

Thanks again Hermann.
These snippets of history are valuable and hopefully thought provoking.

Coulombs law was in fact inspired by a comment from Priestly, who was in communication with Coulomb and Franklin. Franklin mentionrd to Priestly that there was no charge inside a charged metal bowl that he could detect. Priestly mentioned this to Coulomb who immediately recognised an inverse square law relationship. The rest is almost history!

The rethink that can be done at this point is what is this charge,q?

At the time there was the aether/ fluid explanation with one or 2 fluids. Franklin, for esoteric and Masonic reasons preferred the notions of + and – and the idea of surplus and lack. Others thought of a corpuscle carrying the 2 fluids and swapping the fluids between each other in a similar way to Newtonian Motive. Coulombs formulation is actually inspired by Newton and based on the 2 fluid concept. 

However the obvious next question was what is this quantity of matter in Newtons Gravitational formula? Even though Newton's Principia was only about a decade or so in print, already mass and quantity of matter had become confused and enshrined in the law and in English Law. As a formal basis to the whole of the British imperial weights and measures, mass could not be changed to reflect new understanding or discoveries about matter.

By now the change has been accomplished by stealth! Now matter does not mean what it did in Coulombs time. And charge is no longer divorced from matter.. Our point of view is only now reflecting what Coulomb and others immediately suspected: matter is this immaterial energy that manifests charge.

Feynmann would not be drawn. He made a boast that he had no idea what he was dealing with, he just followed the calculations and they gave the answer verified by experiment. In that regard he emulated Newton. Newton would not be drawn on Gravity. Today's physicists do not even acknowledge that it is not known what gravity is! By the same token it is really not known what electric and magnetic fields are.

When Dirac reformulated his vector  Maths to do Quantum Mechanics and applied it to the Schroedinger wave equation he came up with negative energy. This was eventually redacted in an attempt to get rid of negative energy , to annihilation! Thus the equations by Dirac do not speak of Annihilation but of transition from positive energy to negative energy, by the release of energy . Similarly the absorption of energy changes the state of the system.

Light cannot be overemphasised as fundmental to our explanation of matter and it's behaviour. That we call it Elrctromagnetic radiation should not confuse anyone. We call it all manner of names from vibrations  of heat to particles of cosmic rays.

Our top physicists do not even think of particles anymore, just quanta of fields.

For me the time to refer to these things or phnomena as fractal regions is very much upon us. This is why I look at these issues in the context of this forum. Fractal and Grassnannian Geometry is crucial to the way forward .

As you know without Hamilton and Grassmann we would probably not be discussing these things in this way.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obCjODeoLVw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obCjODeoLVw)

Feynman always gives you the feeling that it is easy to understand what he says but it is difficult to express it in your own words.
When I try to understand a term of abstract mathematics I usally discover, that it is defined by other abstract terms in mathematics, that I don't understand.
Sometimes these terms are more abstract, then the things they describe.
If things are defined to abstract one looses the the capability to talk about it.
On the other hand it is also very challanging to find the basic examples that can be the starting point of understanding abstract theories.

So at the moment if have in mind how to develop the electric field from Coulomb's law. But it is very time consuming to write it down and then to shape things in detail, so that they have the a form I like. A form that allows me to look on things from different 'angles'. To write about something means, to find the right words, make the maths understandable have graphics, films and computer programms.

Sometimes the mathematics look very simple like the algorithem for the Mandelbrot Set. The basic programming is also not the big problem. The colouring and visualisation of it is a bigger challenge. But how to find words, to describe what you have found. The reception of the picturs of the mandelbrot set is very emotional. For example look at the Seahorse Odyssey of Pauldelbrot in this forum.

Light has colours when we see it, with colours one comes to art, especially to painting, fotographics, films, animations
Colour gives each point in four dimenional spacetime further dimensions in the form of colors.
The perception of colors is very emotional.
Every day we have to make many decisions, mostly based on incomplete informations so they are very emotional.

This post is more a sketch of idears in development, than a complete statement.

Hermann

Wow! "Light" is topic from movies.
But I assert that topic is in wrong chapter, but may be in chapter MOVIES SHOWCASE
 :peacock:  :sleep:

Hallo hgjf2,

with out light movies would be very dark. May be black as a big black hole.

A movie is basicly a 4-dimensional objekt. (Or even of higher dimension if on counts colors as additional dimensions)
A movie is normaly projected on a 2-dimensional plane but one can imagin the third dimension.
A movie moves in time, so it is a 4-dimensional spacetime object (expecially if the movie is in 3D)

If the movie is on your computer, you can let it run forward and backward let the movie run slow or fast.
You can also stop the movie and have a look on a single picture. So time travel is possible in the movie universe.

Light is the glue that hold Einsteins theoriy's of relativitiy together!

Hermann

Hallo Jehovajah,

thank you very much for the links to the lecturs of Leonard Süsskind on you tube.

From Süsskind I found this lecture on the radiation of black holes.
He gives a deep view in this subjects and his discussions with Steven Hawkins.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KR3Msi1YeXQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KR3Msi1YeXQ)

Professor Süsskind has also written a book on this issue.
The text can be heard trough the following link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxmJZ623L0w (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxmJZ623L0w)

The plasma universe
http://youtu.be/h24ZqDL-D0I

http://youtu.be/CMFvMO4pMac

The aether is an old idea which has a physical manifestation as plasma. Or put it another way round the various ethers are abstracted notions of the various plasmas! The overarching abstraction, the Aether is the most esoteric!
http://youtu.be/l0Ae5fXy4Zk

Thanks Hermann for the posts, particularly the audio of Susskind's book!

I have just come to some insight on the notion Förderung in my meditation on Grassmanns 1844 Die Ausdehnungslehre. This notion I want to study the etymology of in German, but I already know that it is a special aspect of analogous thinking. Logos Analogos underpins deep and rational meditation of an individual experience in and of space.

In my thread on the foundations of mathematics I exposit the axiom of acceptance. This underpins the notions of Logos Analogos, analogous thinking and Förderung. I need a starting scenario. Because I am a complex entity with a hugely complex sensory network, I cannot start with one point! I have to start with one scenario. That scenario feeds, establishes and is fed into and established by my proprioceptive processing structures. These functional structures provide me with a sense of self and other which is my fundamental Förderung, from which I , by accepting , start my own synthesis of my reality.

You see I have a choice. I can accept what sensory map is presented to me by my unconscious processing or I can reject it and wait for it to present me with another rendition! According to what I accept is what I perceive and how easy or difficult I find various out flowing processes and inflowing processing.

I have a choice and I can devote myself to the consequence of my choice having made it  or change again.

The difficulty is in changing when so much of your life and life's work may depend on what you have accepted.

Förderung is the kind of order and arrangement you have accepted or need to accept to move forward, to develop, to synthesise something which you deeply believe has it's own intrinsic value and which is worth an investment of time and effort and promoting to others, urging or inspiring them to follow suit or to join in the adventure!

It is now clear that theoretical philosophy uses Förderung all the time, in that philosophy of physics deeply relies on these principles of analogy and representation.

(http://www.wackerart.de/Foto/garmisch/garmisch_2.jpg)

Today I was in the Mountains with my Ski's. Kreuzeckbahn Garmisch-Partenkirchen.
A bright day. This light can give a lot of energy.

Hermann

Hallo Jehovajah,

I am very impressed by the time and energy you spend for this project. I have the problem that I have to spend most of my time in the office of my company to get some money at the end of the month. So if I would devote my life to science and art I would have the problem how to finace my life. I heard once that Tycho Brahe devotet his life to astronomie. I asked my self how he could finance his decision? I found out, that he was a danish nobel man who got the island Ven from the danish king. The people of the island had to pay hight taxes to finace his life, and even generations later they have a bad memory on him.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tycho_Brahe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tycho_Brahe)
The measurements of Brahe are the basics of the work of Kepler which lead to the work of Newton.

Hermann
P.S I should have read Benjamin Graham when I was very young.

Today I have watched an impressive presentation or Roger Penrose. Aeons before the Big Bang.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YYWUIxGdl4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YYWUIxGdl4)

Hermann

You hit upon a solid realisation Hermann. We are told what to think and who to revere. Especially as children we are moulded into what certain elements in society wish us to become.

Is all hope lost, then? No!

The very same power some seek to exercise over others reacts back over them in a vorticular law of " nature". What goes round comes round. Those that sow a wind reap a whirlwind! Etc.

As you know I admire Newton, not least because he is a son of the county in which I live. But I am not blind to his human side, nor that of Euclid, Grassmann or any other who I call my teachers or Guru's.

In the end I do not seek to pass on their teachings, nor even my own discoveries. I seek to survive and to sacrifice wisely. For we all survive by the sacrifice of others.

If now, what I uncover, create or even implicitly state inspires or is of use to another they are welcome to it and in that way benefited from all that benefits me.

"I " am grateful to all those trillions of cells that collaborate to make a system that can behave as I do in order to survive for the most part and to sacrifice for the rest!

Peace be unto you and all your household, and prosperity in this new year. Never give up your wish or your dream. By and by you will receive the greater part of it!

Thankyou for the inspiring picture!

I am sure being that much closer to the energy in the upper atmosphere is exhilarating, not to mention the lower atmospheric pressure, lower oxygen levels promoting a responsive homeostatic recalibration.

The frequencies of the light also promote good vibes!

Thanks for the video of Penrose theoretical explorations.

Of course I have expressed an opinion on the laws of Thermodynamics as popularly expressed, and on the second law in particular.

The relation to light is intuitively obvious, but physically less clear. Nevertheless I venture that theoreticians utilise the concept of entropy incorrectly, because they disconnect thermodynamics from the rest of physics in a curious way!

It is due to the respectful nature of some physicists not wishing to antagonise heat engineers, who after al have the practical,skills that run the heat engines of our technological society. In addition, not many theoretical physicists are as dedicated and careful as Carnot. They merely take his principles and run with the wind!

I never advise considering entropy outside its proper context of Enthalpy. The complete energy or heat in a system and it's environment modify the apprehension and application of the concept of entropy significantly.

Of course when one mathematically defines entropy one opens pnforas box!

One cannot disregard the strong religious bias of the early Victorian ngineers, or hom CEOs was the ievitbe outcome of a nature without the Christian God, or the empire of His rule! In that regard, they lifted entropy out of the normal heat engine cycle of evaporation and condensation! But in fact heat was a mystery long before that. Heat was and is the Peary kinaesthetic energy of transmutation. It is by our proprioceptive apprehension of it that we evn have the notion of different forms of work transmuting into each other. We know that our muscles get hot as we exert , and tht warm or cold food fuels this heat exchange within our bodies.

It is instructive to go into the biological system of energy transportation within the body. Suffice it to say that it is an electro chemical reaction process that is cyclical.
I will,not go into the ATP cycle but will remark that the electron is deemed to play a key role, and of course where the " electon" concept is used I have to disassociate that into magnetic and electric behaviours.

We understood already that light is a material phenomenon. That is it is not apprehensible without matter. But we alo,assent to the so called electromagnetic nature of light. Finally we. Acknowledge a spectrum of frequencies of light. One of these range of frequencies, the infra red is the most closely associated with kinaesthetic and proprioceptive experience called heat .

To keep it conceptually simple I invent 3 characters : Thermo, Electro and Magneto. In fact Thermo I might better call Thermolucent, to emphasise his direct relationship to light. However if I do that I must also draw attention to the full name of Magnetolucent and Electrolucent! I cannot justifiably distinguish them otherwise.

The three triplets therefore behave in contradictory way. Thermo tends to break down and destroy hat electro and magneto work together to build! Magneto is quite ponderous and has great gravitas, while electo is light and flits from place to place at lightning speeds. Electro seems the most ephemeral of the three, as if he is hardly there, but that is because he is everywhere, setting this up, reordering that, smoothing out a chink, preparing the finishing touches for Magneto to organise into a synthetic whole.

In the meantime Thermo rattles the fabric of space as Magneto chunks it into a concentrated whole. Wherever Electo has been Thermo is not far behind. Unsettling what Electo has settled , scattering neat arrays into scenes of trauma .

Because of this it is imperative that Electro out run and out manoeuvre Thermo, restoring order as much as possible. At lower frequencies electro can easily do this, but at higher frequencies Thermo and Electro entwine with one another at the speed of light. At these frequencies Thermo is light, x rays , gamma rays and beyond. But also at these frequencies  Magneto and Electro are formidable , trapping Thermo in bubbles of energy, forming a fractal region of seething radiating rotating bubbles of energy.
 http://youtu.be/YqM_npRraLI

So now the question of entropy increasing is contextualised. In the mythological description I have given it is clear that regions of differing energy densities are exposited, distributed according to frequency . However these entropic distributions are symptomatic of the current state of the measured volume. The implication is that a dynamic equilibrium order is extant in any system. Thus over " time " one would expect a system to equilibriate to  lower states of entropy, that is any fixed system will become cooler, more condensed and more ordered.

The injection of " heat" from an external source will raise the entropy to a maximum level after which it will radiate to a lower level providing the external source is removed.

The question is where do these " hot" spots come from?

The answer I give is that if you do not accept the Zoroastrian concept of an arrow of time pointing to the final judgment, then the cyclical or more generally vorticular dynamics discussed above will always provide hot, cold and lukewarm spots in a Fractal distribution around the universe, as an open system.

The nature of the extremes of hot and cold we have still to discover. But accepting, for sake of argument, Einstein Cosmology Black holes may be the source and sink of these 2 parameters. That is extreme cold at the centre of a black hole and extreme heat at the event horizon. Or, more naturally, extreme cold at the event horizon with extreme heat at the centre. In that case I say that the black hole has to emit some radiation beyond light radiation to be abe to shine in the measurable spectra, or Black holes as gravitational phenomena are questionable.

It is entirely feasible that geometric structures in dynamic or mechanical  motion are all I can consistently describe and measure.

I have watched a video displaying clashing Förderung. The clash is not really an argument, but an assertion of Förderung.
http://youtu.be/e3uiR-BIF0A
in the meantime Laz Plath's java script app helps me to visualise how radial extension and relative frequency of relative rotation develop complex surface patterns as TEM step fronts.
 http://home.comcast.net/~trochoid/TroWithMesh.html
As i intimated above, the TEM surface also encapsulates what we call Thermal Energy in a bubble, but because our mathematicians inerpret in 2 dimensions mostly, because 3+ dimensions is conceptually hard, Theoretical Physicists often pick the wrong analogues to explain what they are doing, and then they confuse themselves and us. And i include Newton in this conceptual confusion. The best that can be said of him is that he was generally less confused than most.

There is an anti relativity movement afoot so keep your eyes peeled and ears open. As usual, these scientific dissents are more about the concept that there is a "Truth" that is being obscured by Scientists who have a financial and career investment in maintaining the status quo . While this is certainly the case i disagree with the concept of Truth. This is why Förderung has such meaning for me. Förderung represents a model of the experience of empirical data mixed with a wish for it to be so, or a hypothesis, or conjecture. Every situation the model successfully explains improves confidence in that Förderung.

However, then aesthetics kicks in: if the explanation is too inelegant some look for a more elegant solution, while some look for a simpler more intuitive model! This will never change. One old guard will be replaced by another but the end reorganization will result in these same behaviours.  We cannot escape the vorticular nature of our experience, because we exist in and of vorticular spacematter.

This post is more about the thermal nature of these radioactive material than the scam.
http://youtu.be/UXgqTtMHcBk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXgqTtMHcBk&feature=youtube_gdata_player

It demonstrate how the nature of matter is in fact an electro Thermo magneto complex. By positing atoms and molecules, we tend to think of solid or fluid elements separated from the natural anode cathode circuit in a Crookes Ray tube, for example. But in fact the positron, the neutron and the electron are a miniature model of an electric circuit with a magnetic intermediary ( the neutron). The model then portrays a heat source derived from these fundamental behaviours of an electric circuit. In the end we may simply describe it as circulating energy fields which we perceive as heat or light or electromagnetic radiation!

The Spaciometry of these rotating fields is vorticular, but that does not mean it looks like a cone! The easiest natural object to compare it to is a rotating bubble which rotates in a tumble, and only occasionally like a gyroscope.

Version 1.0 to be continued.

Thanks  Jehovajah for the following video, which was very inspiering for me and I now have started to write down some of my idears.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3uiR-BIF0A&feature=youtu.be (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3uiR-BIF0A&feature=youtu.be)

[url http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3uiR-BIF0A&feature=youtu.be]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3uiR-BIF0A&feature=youtu.be[/url
To make things a bit clearer I will repeat a part of my post on Coulomb's law:

Todays theorie tells us that the two particles electron and positron will perform annihilation of one another when they come close together and the energy of the two particles will be transformed info two gamma photones. Where gamma photones are the particels of the electromagnetic wave at high frequencies. The following Feynman diagram describes this process.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e0/Mutual_Annihilation_of_a_Positron_Electron_pair.svg/200px-Mutual_Annihilation_of_a_Positron_Electron_pair.svg.png)

That shows, that matter can be transformed into elektormagnetic waves. Also the energy is resticted by the mass of the two particles and their kinetic energie. The energie that is assinged to a mass of a particle can be calculated to Einsteins famous formula . The energie of a photon depents on it's frequency . According to the following formula: and h is Plank's constant.
It is also possible to produce an electron positron pair from a photon, if the photon has sufficient energie.

Today we have basicly three theories for describing electormagnetic phenomena. These are the classical elektrodynamic, quantum electrodynamics and in partical physics the electroweak interaction. The electroweak theory combines electromagnetic interactions with weak interactions.

If we take a look back on classical elektrodynamic we find right to the beginning of this theory coulombs law:

Coulomb's law in vacum:



The first important milestone in the development of electrodynamics is the publishing of Coulomb's law. Discovered around the year 1785 by the french physicist Charles Augustin de Coulomb. Where this law describes the force F between two particles with the charges q₁ and q₂ which are placed at a distance r. The direction of the force is on a straight line between the two particels.
 
Remember, that there are two different kinds of charges positive and negative, which have a fundamental influence on the direction of the forces. The force is attracting if the two charges have different sign and is repelling if the two charges have the same sign.

In this law one can see already the first problem. If the distance between the two particles become zero, the forces on the two particles go to infinit. This is of special importance if we have point like particles like the elektron and the positron. These two particles attract one another and will produce infinit forces and hence infinit energies when they come closer together.

From experiment we know that energie, momentum and charge are conseved when the elektron and the positron crash. But the elektron and the positron disappeared. What happened to them?

The Elektron Positron Crash

When I take Coulomb's law and combine it with Einsteins theories of relativety I get bewildering results!

An elektron has a mass. Knowing this mass of an elektron one can calculate ist Schwarzschild radius:



A positron has the same mass as the elektron. (Remember that they are seen as point like partikels and hence they have the radius 0 if this theory is correct they should already be black holes) on the other hand because of Coulomb's law to different charges like an elektron and a positron are gain more velocity as closer they come. This will lead to greater mass depending on the velocity. The mass will go to infinit if particels have the speed of licht.
This is governed by the following formula from Einsteins theorie of special relativity:



So the mass of the elektron and the postitron will increase. So the Schwarzschild Radius will increase.
On the other hand time will slow down, if mass and velocity increases.



What is this all about?

We life in a relative stable world so what stops the creation of black holes?

For this look at part two of the discussion of "The Electron as a Black Hole" the uncertainty principle.
http://www.fractalforums.com/complex-numbers/light/90/ (http://www.fractalforums.com/complex-numbers/light/90/)
I also will start a to do list in this post later.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfYon2WdR40 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfYon2WdR40)

Where does mass come from? Todays top theorie is that the Higgs Boson gives particels their mass.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqNg819PiZY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqNg819PiZY)

The Video of Prof. Dr. Anton Zeilinger - Nicht lokalität in der Quantenphysik is now in a later post.
With some background Information. It also opens another topic and so its better to have it in a later post.

Hermann

Look also at Part II of this discussion.
http://www.fractalforums.com/complex-numbers/light/90/ (http://www.fractalforums.com/complex-numbers/light/90/)

I know you haven't finished this yet but I can already see where this is going. You should probably check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_in_general_relativity#Questions.2C_answers.2C_and_simple_examples_of_mass_in_general_relativity the second question there. (Or the source http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/BlackHoles/black_fast.html )
Basically, your formula is true in special relativity. But Black Holes require general relativity and thus a much more complex formula.
Black holes do not form from going fast.
However, a few questions below that, movement does have an influence on gravity. What exactly this influence is, is hard to quantify and depends on what type of mass you're looking at: Surprisingly, mass in general relativity is neither unique nor always definable.
What movement does is to cause non-uniform gravitational fields and also an average increase in gravitational force.
But since mass isn't actually the source of gravity in general relativity (it's actually the stress-energy tensor), a stronger gravitational field doesn't mean more mass. It means more energy.

Thanks Hermann.
Please continue to develop your idea. I used to be spurred on by getting to grips with an issue in my own way. At times I would think" I am discovering new things!" but later I would say" I am discovering ideas new to me!"
Indeed everything is relative

By evaluating your thoughts as worthy of consideration, and being tough enough to allow public scrutiny of them you can really find where your unique processing makes the difference.

Consensus wisdom and expositions are only starting points, not finishing points! In fact We progress when we review past consensus from new vantage points.

You could say relativity is nearly 100 years old, time for a review! Or you could say wasn't Einstein, Minkoeski, Poincaré etc etc weren't they geniuses beyond our critique! It is up to you.

Thanks too Kram1032. This long held consensus is finally achieving its goal, the paradigm shift from judeo Christian theological certainty to an Indo Greek pan theology. The Jain concepts of primordial reality , the inchoate aether could not have progressed in ultra conservative America, if Einstein had not redefined the principles of Mechanics and Physics mathematically. Later he appealed for the aether to be allowed back into scientific discourse!

Because few do review, few understand Newton and his influence on Einstein. Einstein himself was not aware of the Newtonian influence that came via the Grassmanns. The Principia is an Astrological text, that imbues a radical metaphysical philosophy garnered by Newton from many ancient thinkers. But one principal principle was to replace concepts by measures. Not only did this help to sharpen the concepts, but it also enabled proportional philosophical discussion, discourse and geometrical construction.

Turning to the measure mass, this was defined as a geometric proportion of another measure called density, and a purely intuitive geometric measure called volume. In fact it was a quadratic proportion of these 2 measures.

The unfamiliar concepts in special and general relativity arise from the quadratic nature of many proportions in Newyon's scheme of measures. Einstein was just brave enough to allow the usual enforced linkage to move relatively or independently.

The logical bais for allowing this kind of behaviour is not physicl or mathematical. It is Philosophical. The deep principles that Suuskind refers to are philosophical principles. Some are even psychological ones!

Einstein wanted to make his subject more accessible, but without the Aether he could not. Both Newton and all other radical thinkers, Euler, Maxwell etc could use the aether to embed their physical intuitions. Einstein could not, and so his equations mark a wholesale departure from accessible physics!

Many physicists today struggle to find the everyday analogues of the mathematical terms they manipulate so frenziedly.

Scientists are seeking a way back into the everyday common sensical metaphors that they realise they have disconnected from.

There is a famous video in which Feynmann rubbishes any attempt to explain gravity by pastiche bombardment and shielding. Few recognise the historical target of this modern day Don Qixote. La Sage pent the greater part of his adult life developing just this theoretical exposition. At any time Newton could have published his view and squashed La Sages efforts, but he did not, because he could not. He never defined gravity, he just measured its behaviour!

In fact La Sage came close to a complete model of particulate bombardment and shielding, which Newton followed ith great interest but privately. At the end of his life's work La Sage was not hailed as the discovere of Gravity, Newton was! La Sages Peers felt able to rubbish his work, but Newton's proved too subtle for them and it survived by imperial decree as well as genuine philosophical merit. The Weights and measures of the British empire relied on Newton's principles. Only the colonials could express how oppressive that imperial view of Newton's work really was.

Around the world Newton's concepts were respected as starting points for further philosophical development. The impact on Kant and the subsequent debate on the nature of mathematical geometry lead to the Grassmanns developing a new mechanics and geometry from critiquing the French Evoles versions of Euclid and Newton via Lagrange and Legrndre..

We may see that from the outset matter is not defined by mass, but rather by density, and the simple question is: what is this density?

As time has progressed I think we realise that is this Electro Thermo Magneto complex we call energy, and where it inhabits we call "a field in space and time".

Light is but one experience of this energy and the field in space and time tht it inhabits.

Hallo kram1032, thanks for your reply and the links, I have now worked a bit more on my post. This post is more a collection of questions then the finale result. And a compare of different theories. If coulombs law alone would be correct the energy would be suffient to produce several universes not only one black hole. I also know some basic quantenmechanics and the uncertenty principles and how from this prinicples an hydrogen atom is stable. But the elektron and the positron disapear and the complete energie and momentum is converted into photons. Energie and momentum are conserved but what happens with charges?

Look at the diagram again:
Spacially, the two particles never actually meet in the same point! They get annihilated before that already, turning into two photons.
AFAIK the reason for that is, that uncertainty due to quantum effects actually makes it virtually impossible for two particles to meet perfectly. Remember that, as position is known better and better, impulse is known worse and worse and vice versa, and with impulse also velocity.
The closer the two particles are to each other, the more they react to each other's presence (both due to Electromagnetic and, to a very minor degree, due to Gravitational Forces), which is equivalent to them "knowing" of each other where they are relative to themselves.
At some point, the impulse uncertainty could become so big, that the two particles, despite flying right past each other, might actually turn away in a completely random direction, including the direction they just came from.
Because they never actually meet, infinite Forces and infinite Energies are avoided.

This is a video on light as used in Astronomy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiv3uVBSEAI

However all explanations of light cobble together various metaphors and analogies. Apparently the mathematics is too difficult to give one consistent metaphor. Actually it is because subject boundaries are pulled together to give this broader overview.

I think that the electron and photon explanation queers the pitch, despite being highly researched and empirically grounded. The issue is the concept of the electron, the concept of electron motion, the concept of sinusoidal waves and the concept of energy.

Temperature is also in need of review.

The Uncertainty principle is often used to the detriment of the certainty aspect of the probability, but the use of statistical and probability mathematics at the quantum level of research is standard because we cannot be certain about anything. But we have always worked with approximations in physics, so what was the big deal?

In reality the big deal is that scientists should be able to give us a break down of the probability of certain events happening. To my knowledge, this part of probability is buried in the back addendas of research papers if published at all.

The claim that Quantum theory has never yet been proved inaccurate is a sine qua non. True quantum research will estabLish a range of probabilities, and of course in that sense cannot be falsified in the classical right and wrong  principle.

I cannot separate " matter" from " light" with any justification, any more. Thus I have to rethink the notion of matter and material and the notion of light and luminous or radiant.

This second video- about force, while interesting , shows how confused even the more radical thinkers are about the nature of space.
http://youtu.be/qVF1OQhNeDo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVF1OQhNeDo
The latest empirical data by Ivor Catt et al in the Wakrfied experiment undermines all traditional concepts or rather classical concepts of electromagnetism, as usually presented today.
https://blogs.ncl.ac.uk/alexyakovlev/2013/10/15/newcastle-electromagnetism-seminar-with-ivor-catt-and-david-walton/

In fact, Maxwell and thes who came to be caled Maxwellians, we're far more radical than today's classical electromagnetism.
http://async.org.uk/IvorCatt+DavidWalton.html

The declaration of the Electron set theoretical electromagnetism on the confused track of particle physics , mediated by eager chemists seeking to improve the standing of theoretical chemistry. Light, which oncecLaVosier included in his table of chemical elements was conceded to the physicists during the constant subject boundary wars.

It is ironic that Newton and Lavoisier were both highly aware of levity, and sought to study it scientifically, but once Newton was declared to have discovered Gravity, levity was quickly pushed away under the carpet. Today we are still told gravity is the only force with no opposite! Well it's opposite is Levity, and to every centripetal force Newton posited a centrifugal one. This force is discredited in gravitational physics today, but no real reason is given. In fact I think they have now created a theorem to extinguish the centrifugal force in gravitational systems!

If we do not look for levity we will not find it, nor will we recognise the oppression of thought exerted by gravitational physicists and the I peril weights and measures who wanted to maintain mass in our scientific equations long after it became apparent this measure was inadequate!

The Newtonian concept of a force measure has many derivations. The form is derived according to the situation.

The gravitational force was derived in terms of centrifugal and centripetal force acting on a point. Newto knew that in space or a distributed body pressure was more appropriate.. Newyon was well aware that a pressure field exerted force. His difficulty was, given space was ot empty, how could this pressure field act radially about a planet in motion? His fluid dynamic analysis confused him too much. In conclusion he referred back to his point analysis, but pointed out that this formulation was an untenable action at a distance in an empty space!

Newton did not posit an empty space or that aether did not exist, he merely stated that in his approximation these things were minimised or left out, and yet doing o gave him the most remarkable agreement with he dats! This was the puzzle: how could a deliberate approximation be so highly accurate?

The interesting aspect here is the supposed Thermo plasma of impact is denuded of its magneto and Electro components by current astronomical science. But it is clearly present in their data.
http://youtu.be/O1f99ReNJVw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1f99ReNJVw&feature=youtube_gdata_player

OMG this man looks like and talks like Hermann Grassmann!

in the years 2002 and 2003 I attended the lector series „Iconic Turn — Das neue Bild der Welt”, at the Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität in munic.
http://www.iconicturn.de/ (http://www.iconicturn.de/)

One of the lectures was from Anton Zeilinger on non localety in quanten mechanics.
Here is the Wikipedia Information on Anton Zeilinger. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_Zeilinger (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anton_Zeilinger) He is from austria.
http://vcq.quantum.at/research/research-groups/zeilinger-group.html (http://vcq.quantum.at/research/research-groups/zeilinger-group.html)
He and his group is well known to bring up quanten mechanicel states on long distances.
That means one prepares a system localy and spreads the systems up to a big distance and then make measurement at distant points.
For example you measure spin up at one place you will mesure spin down at a remote place or the other way around. But it will be always the opposit state.
This states can be mesuared simuntaiously. The state is either up or down so it is not possible to communicate with the speed of light.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement)

See also Roger Penrose on this issue. I think at the disussion he gives a good explanation on this Issue.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAWyex1GKRU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAWyex1GKRU)

A wave function is prepared localy. Then spread out over a large distance. A measurement is made and by this mesurement the wavefunction is forced into a state. This state can be mesured over a large distance simultanouesly. If one prepares the wavefunction again in the same way it is possible that a different state can be detected by the same kind of measurement. For this reason it is not possible, to transfer Information faster then the speed of light. But the mesured state appears simultaniously on different places.

Anton Zeilinger is working at the University I'm studying at.
He tried to teach 1st-semesters last semester but he gave up, heh. He was a bit too harsh with them. I never actually saw his lectures but apparently he tried to teach it as if they already knew Quantum Physics on a deep level.
His public lectures on actual Quantum Mechanics and also his books on the matter are pretty good though.

The next wave of experiments will actually go towards quantum gravity. Zeilinger himself has been working for quite a while now on measuring uncertainty phenomena on larger and larger structures and has arrived at molecules of quite significant size.
Other parts of the group are working on entanglement of (comparatively) large-scale structures. If they succeed, and they are pretty close, they could potentially have scales that can directly measure masses of even single protons in the same way a normal scale would. (Normally, you'd use something like a mass spectrometer or another particle accelerator for the task. This would, instead, be a pretty much completely passive way of measuring things. You wouldn't need to directly accelerate particles. You'd just bounce them off a surface. - except, of course, that you'll need to super-cool the surface which is not exactly trivial)

As I know we have no accepted theory of quantum gravity. Do you have some background Infomation?

Hermann

How to use this software? Seems it doesn't work in my browser.

Hermann

Well, yes, that's precisely the point of those experiments. The main problem with theories on quantum gravity is that none of them are testable as of yet. They are designing experiments that may start filtering out some of the already proposed theories as well as give clues on new theories that can be constructed with actual experimental data in mind.

http://vcq.quantum.at/research/research-groups.html here you have the current research topics. Anton Zeilinger is working mostly around quantum optics and quantum information theory which will hopefully eventually lead to stuff like "off the shelf" quantum computing. Markus Aspelmayer is focusing especially on quantum gravity. These experiments are really young. Some of them began 2012, so it really is cutting edge research.
But all those experiments are interrelated to some extend.

The current experiments may not seem much like they would directly be about quantum gravity. Rather, they are about quantum effects in large large scale structures (compared to single atoms, that is), and in some instances about measuring pulse transfer of single particles, which basically means you have an ultra accurate scale (basically as accurate as it gets) which, in turns, means that perhaps the tiny general relativistic fluctuations in mass in quantum scale objects could actually be observed. (Special relativistic observations are easily possible in particle accelerators and the like and there even are some experiments which simply involve particle scattering in the atmosphere, where high energy particles (99.something% of speed of light) are produced which have an extremely short half-life, like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation_of_moving_particles#Rossi.E2.80.93Hall_experiment )

At the same time, Časlav Brukner leads a team focused on theory, trying to come up with experiments that may be feasible in the near future. This experiment may very well be executed and evaluated soon: http://iopscience.iop.org/0264-9381/29/22/224010/pdf/0264-9381_29_22_224010.pdf

The various teams tend to work together at the bigger goal of understanding the fundamentals of physics but they all go slightly different paths.

Hallo Kram 1023,

I have now worked a little bit more on my post (Schwarzschild Radius of an Electron) and started to bring in a bit quantenmechanics. But quantenmechanics is a curtain which I try a little bit to look behind. Also this theories are presented at very high speed at University and too often questions and discussions are suppresed.
http://www.fractalforums.com/complex-numbers/light/60/ (http://www.fractalforums.com/complex-numbers/light/60/)

Hermann

Today I have read an artikel, that we have much activity on the sun's surface. I found the following video and an article on the swich of the magnetic field of the earth.
Sorry its all in german!
http://www.focus.de/wissen/videos/hoehepunkt-der-sonnenaktivitaet-2014-sonne-steht-unmittelbar-vor-einer-umpolung_id_3501729.html (http://www.focus.de/wissen/videos/hoehepunkt-der-sonnenaktivitaet-2014-sonne-steht-unmittelbar-vor-einer-umpolung_id_3501729.html)
http://www.focus.de/wissen/weltraum/astronomie/sonne-starker-sonnensturm-rast-auf-die-erde-zu-2_id_3524426.html (http://www.focus.de/wissen/weltraum/astronomie/sonne-starker-sonnensturm-rast-auf-die-erde-zu-2_id_3524426.html)

For an English article on the pole flip:
http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/the-suns-magnetic-field-is-about-to-flip/

It is a java app, so you must have java enabled and updated. It is the update part I am not sure about. My machines are old and not updateable any more. For example I use a original series iPad . It works fine on that.
The controls seem mysterious but intuitively you want to click on them! When you do things happen to the numerical controls . You can also click and hold on the numbers and drag to alter them. Bit hard to do that on the iPad!

I could go on but I think you will find it fun to click on every box and see what happens!

This is John Roman Iwaszko.

His experimental work is of fundamental importance. Like so many others he is struggling to find the vocabulary to describe what he is seeing and demonstrating empirically. While he gives classical explanations it is only because he does not have an alternative language to describe the phenomena with.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChRKs4fJ02I

The traditional retreat is into so called mathematical languages, but there really is no such thing.
The failure by theoretical / mathematical physicists to explain what they are talking about is glaring and no longer acceptable.
Instead of seeing themselves as communicator failures they reverse it and call students " ignorant Dullards!" or worse! This reversal trick is as old as the hills. When a professor can not explain what we are paying him for he has no right to belittle our intelligence! Instead he or she should seek therapy to reconnect to the common forms of speech and analogy.

All my life I have been told by friends and others they fo not understand ehat I write or think! I regard that as my own personal failure to communicate!

In ancient times in Greece Rhetoric was the principle subject of study under which Astrology and Poetry and dance and many other arts were but subsidiary subjects. Kairos, the study of the opportune moment was the principle life skill influencing rhetoric. You passed your rhetoric exams only if you could explain anything to anyone!!

Aristotle however never completed his Pythagorean studies for political reasons. Thus he never strained the status of Mathematikos. In addition he contested key Pythagorean concepts. That was expected of a student. Over time the Musai would reveal further insight to disciples it was believed and at that time most controversy ceased as the students finally had given to thrm the same insights as the masters. Then they were given the title Mathematikos!

This never happened to Aristotle who subsequently established a ill patonic tradition . This divergence in essntislly Pythagorean teachings has resulted in confusion ever since . The biggest confusion was the introduction of the term "algebra". This was Aristotelian thinking mixed with Indian subtlety and presented by Islamic Scholars. The corresponding Pythagorean thinking is found in Euclid's Stoikeia books 5 to 10. The Arithmoi and the symbolic arithmetics described therein are the basis of Rational thought, and the rules of Analogous thinking.

While Aristotle's fame outstripped his wisdom in many respects , his grammatical nd logical studies and rhetoric were received with much admiration. True to form he made these studies foundational  or introductory to his higher level courses! In the Pythagorean school you could only qualify as a rhetorical master at the time you received Mathematikos!

My advice to any student is do not be brow beaten by any professor. Be respectful and continue to ask your question until you get a satisfactory reply. Sometimes the may hand you off to some other lecturer or phd student because they are too busy or possibly do not know how to communicate so well! But that does not matter, just patiently ask until satisfied.

If you have a good learning community they will tolerate this kind of questioning. If not you will soon know because they will start to use strong arm tactics and bullying on you or tell you to shut up or just ignore you!

It really is quite dreadful how they coerce individuals to think the same way!

The language by which physicists may speak of the phenomena they observe is bring constructed., but we must not leave it to the academicians or the mathematicians only. We need artists and artisans to be the consultative base  for this language. It is the trchnologists who impact most directly on our lives!

Where physicists failed before they can now learn to speak in terms of fractals, of scale free  or almost self similarity at any scale. This means one can choose very accessible models and iterate them to explain he omplexity we find.

So light is our simple model! We iterate it to explain the complex dynamics of everything we call matter!

I am not sure I understand entanglement as a concept. I understand the complex conjugate relation of our conscious action on space. That is I can never be free of the objective subjective experience of any experience.

So if I have a cell that is about to undergo mitosis and I conceal it in a box that can be split in 2 , when I separate the box I do not know if the cell has split or not. I take one part of the box to Stockholm the other to Berlin. When I open one box that tells me what is in the other box!


Am I missing something?

I was in the Lesson Anton Zeilinger gave and couldn't find out what the clou was or if I hadn't understood an important part of quantenmechanics.
For me the things became clear as I listend to the video of Roger Penrose I posted above.

My understanding I have expressed in the following sentence.


The Experiments can be seen as a realisation of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Paradoxon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_paradox (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_paradox)
So it can be seen that Einsteins criticism on quantemechanics was wrong, but his criticism gave a deep view into the theorie of quantenmechanics.

Dr. Physics gives a very good introduction on this Issue:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x9AgZASQ4k (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x9AgZASQ4k)

There are also lessons from Susskind on this issue but I am not through with it.
---http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=A27CEA1B8B27EB67---

Hermann
P.S Thanks for the links to Dr. Physics!

Thanks for the post.

Here in the south of germany we have extrem warm weather at the moment. About 10 degree celsius or even more, which is very unusal for january. In the states the weather is extrem cold.
It seems as if the klima has been moved. Has this something to do with the solar wind, that hits the earth, that has its source on the activities on the survace of the sun?

Hermann

There are a few variants of answers to this:

You can't take a single year to talk of climate.
Climate becomes apparent in long-term trends; something like 10+ years.
While it is ultra warm here in Europe, if I understood this right, it's unusually cold right now in the US. - it's warmer in middle Europe than it is in Texas, south-North-America. (Correct me if I'm wrong and the cold over there is, in fact, expected)

For a single year you can just talk about an anomaly. Last year this time it was significantly colder around here.
That being said, if you look at a multi-year-trend, things are indeed heating up on average. At the same time, they seem to become more extreme

If you take climate, as a crude approximation, to simply be described as temperature over time, and you fit a gaussian distribution on that data, with parameters µ and σ for your mean (and expected value) and your standard deviation (the expected distance a particular data point would land from the mean) respectively, it might be that the distribution shifts to the right (it becomes warmer, the mean µ increases) but becomes wider (it becomes more extreme, things are further away from µ, the standard deviation σ increases).

That seems to be what's happening right now, although the truth will be much, much more complicated than that: Weather is a highly thermodynamic, chaotic process. You can only predict stuff very short term (a week or maaybe two in advance) or over much longer periods of time, where variations average themselves out (over the course of a few years - the more years you take, the smoother and more predictable your results will be). That middle ground over just months is very hard to predict.


By the way, a living cell in mitosis is also a highly thermodynamic object. It is somewhat of a bold assumption that you could separate such a cell from the world well enough to have quantum effects play a role, e.g. to have a blackbox suitable for a living cell.
If you *can* do that - and we're making progress in that direction: the largest objects are small-protein-sized molecules so far, but that's still ways and ways off of cells - then yes, that would happen.
Except that, in all likelihood, the conditions under which you'd need to store a cell like that are... well... not exactly friendly for life. Most likely you'd kill a cell before it completes mitosis. You'd essentially have to cool it down to temperatures where you'd get stuff like Bose-Einstein- or Fermionic Condensate. And since a cell is made up of various different atoms, some of which would have integer spin and other half integer spin - this makes the difference between a Boson and a Fermion - you'd probably get some kind of Bose-Fermi-mixture goo that, upon rewarming, will probably not at all resemble a cell, let alone a living one.

Sorry I would wouldn't speak about a long term clima change. At the moment it looks as if warm air from north africa has moved north and the cold air from the north pole  has moved to north america. The question goes more in the dirction how far we have understood the influence of the solar wind on the atmospher and hence the weather.

Hermann

The discussion of the elektron as a black hole has become to long so I have splittet it into tow parts.
For the first part of this discussion look at the following page:
http://www.fractalforums.com/complex-numbers/light/60/ (http://www.fractalforums.com/complex-numbers/light/60/)

Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle

Also known as position-momentum uncertainty is due to Werner Heisenberg and his development of quantenmechanic. It states that postion and momentum can not be messaured simultaniously with infinit accuracy. The accuracy of measurement of both values is limited by the following fundamental law:



Basic state of a Hydrogen Atom

This principal not only describes a frontier of possible accuracy in measurement of position and momentum of an particle simultaniously, but also has influence on the behavior of a particle. If we measure the position very accurate ( is small) it is allowed for the momentum to become very big:



That means, the particel will proberbly not be very long at this position after the mesurement. If we now look at the hydrogen atome we have an attracting Lorenz force which will tend to set the elektron on the proton. On the other hand when the elektron is on the proton, the position is very well defined. Which allows it to have very high momentum,  so that it can escape from the surface of the protron.

The lowest state in a hydrogen atom is the reuslt of the superposition of these effects. The attracting Lorenz force and the perpelling effect resulting from an accurate position measurement.

It is also possible, also with very low probability, that the elektron is catched by the proton to form a neutron. But a neutron is not a stable particle and will emit the electron very soon. (weak forces)

Hermann

Thanks guys for contributing to the thread!
This is kind of a new experience for me, and I am a bit humbled by your support and interest.
With regard to your question about the weather anomalies, I can recommend the daily weather report on the Suspiciousobserver channel on YouTube.

Thanks Kram1032. The specifics of the entangled state are important . If Thermo is restrained that leaves Electro and Magneto are dominant and individual,regions will be linked by contra " spin" relations. It then does not matter how far the individual regions are separated they will still be in contra spin relation.

The question is then how do the regions get separated? What is this local wave function?

I have started watching Leonard Susskind's exelent lecture on quantum entangelment. He describes each detail slowly and carefully.
But at the end one has never been faster in the center of quantenmechanics. Many of the items he talks about are known to me for a long time. But Susskind puts the Puzzel together. So at the end you can see a big Cathedral.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Eeuqh9QfNI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Eeuqh9QfNI)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtBRKw1Ab7E (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtBRKw1Ab7E)

Wow! This topic continuing like the topic FS MODEL

How long is this story?
 :peacock: :mandy:

Hiya hgjf2

The topic will likely continue as long as it takes!
Here is another view on light
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gx67FSiKwyA

You see there are many views, and many ideas to explore. The amazing thing is that light was once considered as one of the fundamental elements of matter. Alchemists owned it as part of their province of study. even today you will find that chemists have a better understanding of light, and all so called electromagnetic radiation, than physicists.

This is why light naturally connects to the questions about the nature of matter, and its behaviour, and why physics has lost its way.

For example, why is the sky dark at night, if the sun is the source of daylight? And how can we see starlight?

Positronium
An electron and a positron can form a hydrogen atom like system known as positronium.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positronium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positronium)

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/db/Positronium.svg/200px-Positronium.svg.png)

Energy Time Uncertainty

A comparabel fundamental law is the uncertainty of Energie Measurement.



This law is very fundamental in particle physics and how forces can be distributed through space. Put also the law where a great problem of quantenmechanics becomes visible.
Time is not a observable in quantenmechanics on the other hand position and momentum are observals in quantemechanics and describing them by quantemechanical means (operators) is very importent in physics. In Einsteins theory of relativety the three dimeinsion of space and time form a unit and can not be seen seperate!

The energy time uncertainty is not only a limit for the possibility of mesuarament. It is more fundamental to the structure of the physical world. If becomes smaller and smaller, bigger and bigger 's are allowed to exist. Until the Energy is big enough to create particels. For this tiny little amount of time so called virtual particles are allowed to exist. This also means for a very short time the violation of the conservation of energy is allowed. It is allowed to borrow energie from somewhere which has to be gived back very soon. This virtual particles have mesurable effects and are fundamental for important physical theorys. For me it looks as if nature plays a very wild game behind the curtains when we are not able to mesure what goes on.

Virtual partical appearing in the vacum also play an important role in the theorie of black holes. If a pair of virtual particles is produced close to the event horizon of a black hole, it is possible, that one of these particles is drawn in the black hole and the other with of cause very low probability is able to tunnel out of the gravity field of a black hole.
The mass of the black hole is then reduced by the borrowed energy of the escaped particle. The result is, that even black holes are not totaly black they show some radiation. This radiation depents on the size of the black hole. The bigger the black hole is, so lower the temperature of the radiation will be. But it is possible, that black holes will loose all there energie by this kind of radiation. Even if this will take a very long time. But small black holes have very high radiation. If the last state of their existence, they will evapurate in an explosion. This effect is called the Hawking radiation, named after Steven Hawking who became famous for this theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation)

So if our elektron and positron are able to form a black hole this black hole may not last very long cause its mass is very low.

To be continued

Pair production
In the first part of this discussion I showed, when an electron and a positron can come together that the can anhilate to form a photon, that carries their energy and momentum. But the opposit process is also possible. If a photon has enough energy it can give up its energy to form a electron positron pair.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ab/Feynman_diagram_for_Pair_Production.svg/227px-Feynman_diagram_for_Pair_Production.svg.png)

http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2010/02/14/lets-draw-feynman-diagams/ (http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2010/02/14/lets-draw-feynman-diagams/)

Vacuum polarization
To be done.

Casimir effect
To be done.


Hermann
P.S To be continued

This is an animation trial of experiments i have been dong with twistors and gyres as basis elements for fluid and electro thermo magneto dynamics.

At the moment it is just a random sculpture using Quasz, but its significance is that rotation and radial expansion and contraction produce a conserved spatial region and dynamic stable forms.

I apologise for not making it into an action movie! I am still learning how this animation feature works!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTExXTPpLzI

z= e^(8*(ln(x#)+1*y#*i))+e^(8*(ln(x#)+1*imaj(z)*j+1*imak(z)*k))+1*c

is the generic formula and the render is a mandelbrot type iteration, which means z and c interact interdependently during the algorithm like a trochoid formulation.
This particular basis represents a circle orthogonal to a circular disc plane, ie a tangent disc to a great circle. At the time i was not clear what might best model electro thermo magneto beheaviours, and went with my intuition.
The sculpture shows only what remains as the quaternion block is iterated . The sudden jumps are more indicaive than the long still shots! the motion of zooming in probably produces some codec artifacts rather than rue dynamic behaviour , but the rotated mandelbrot form(lathed mandelbulb) is indicative of some rotary action/

This is my experimental plasma template

z=exp(sin(y#)*cos(imaj(z))*5+x#*i)+exp(sin(y#)*sin(imaj(z))*5+2*x#*j)+exp(cos(y#)*5+3*x#*k)+1*c

The trial renders were done on Quasz, using the julia type and the slice was set to y,z,w(orthogonal complex basis)
The renders were done on max bailout(1000000) at both ends of the magnification scale.

the almost self similarity is striking!

Theses are not sine waves but trochoid waves.

This is a mandy or mandelbrot type render of the above plasma template. The waves are trochoidal and based on full rotation not "sin wave" oscillation .
We forget that the trigonoimetric functions derive from spherical rotation, and so accept a poor view of wave phenomenon that does not fully accord with "nature"

I think that rotation will simplify many current differential geometric descriptions of space waves and active or undulating surfaces and make more sense than the partial differential equations we now use to describe dynamic geometry.

These trials are not definitive, just feeling my way through the maze!

always rememeber, any sculpture is in negative! the sculpted forms only give an indication of what is happening in the space in and around them

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URL6VrGEqWQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JYJY7g_atg

compare with the plasma mandy trial sculpture

I am busy on Herrmann's Audehnungslehre again, but I wanted to share a sudden insight brought about through watching a video by the Slowmoguys in cooperation with Gettingsmartereveryday.

Justin mentioned sonoluminescence but was skeptical about having captured it.

I then YouTube researched sonoluminescence in view of its relevance to this threads topic. Sure enough it is a difficult phenomenon to capture, and the flash in most bullet movies is compression combustion of unspent explosive: kind of like a diesel engine firing up. It is cool to watch any way.

But then I found it was linked to cold fusion, a reaction state of matter, which I then found was mostly studied in water!

Finally I chose a channel called hydrogen to add to my burgeoning playlist because it tracks just about everything to do with hydrogen as a potential energy source, especially for fuel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FErksas4U0

Lo and behold I wake realising that hydrogen is the fundamental element of material chemistry!  It is our fundamental notion of Matter!
Then my philosophical construct SpaceMatter ( google jehovajah SpaceMatter ) took me the rest of the way. Plasma is hydrogen plasma!.

We can go deeper into the nucleus of hydrogen, but what we are doing then is a fractal zoom! Instead of things becoming simpler they will become more complex until we get back to the simpler form which will be almost self similar to hydrogen!!

Thus, humour me for a moment, and let us say that the mandelbulb is a single hydrogen atom. Then it's dynamical structures represent all the bosons and Fermions of so called particle physics. The various structures identified represent the electro Thermo magneto dynamic effects of a metaphysical property I call Newtonian fluid motive, after Newtons attempt to extend his ideas to fluid dynamics. This metaphysical Newtonian fluid motive is analogous to the plasma state of excited hydrogen.

I have thus a suspicion that sonoluminescence is nothing more than the concept of electro Thermo magneto complex at the required frequencies to emit visible light. In other words, the above video showing plasma excitation by a coil in a liquid is Sonoluminescence! It is created because the hydrogen is dissociated and excited by the magnetic electric and thermal fluxes and becomes a plasma. The oxygen is catalytic ally removed to the outside of the bubble, which grows and breaks into many bubbles . Eventually the plasma reaches the frequency of light!

The oxygen of course also bubbles off but cannot react with the hydrogen at those frequencies and in those electro Thermo magneto conditions!
Instead we see hydrogen in its plasma state interacting Thermo electro magneto nuclearly!

Cold fusion!
So what about the neutrinos?
The smoking gun is pointed at the neutrino source. If you already have a source of neutrinos why do you need to create them in a bubble? What creates them in a radioactive source at room temperature or at very cold temperatures?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivVeOx_wbWk

Pay attention! Scientists are pathological liars when it comes to protecting their subjects! Cold fusion is a non radioactive nuclear event!
Why?
Because it does not come from radioactive materiss!. Neutrinos come from radioactive materials not from nuclear events.

What is the difference?
The size of the nucleus . A large nucleus is unstable due to vortex shedding at extremely high energies. Among those vortices shed one will find a class of vortices called neutrinos.

This does not occur in smaller nuclei. The energy is not greay enough. But since nuclei are vortex phenomena they can still fuse into a complex vorticular form, releasing excess heat and light!

Physicists do not understand matter as well as chemists do. They just don't!

Cleaning my windows just now suddenly gave me insight into the electro Thermo magneto complex and it's effect on active surfaces.

The smear patterns on glass are thin film diffraction effects, but what that means is that the rubbing of 2 materials together creates those " ridges" which we see and which actually diffract incident light and also polarise it. These ridges clearly form in the surfaces of bubbles as the water is motile and spreads actively to different thicknesses. On a flat windscreen however, the spreading is done by "friction" and this creates definite bounded( Wada boundaries!) structures. These structures are electro Thermo magneto structures. I could say that water molecules and ions arrange themselves into ridges and regions by the electro Thermo magneto potential generated in the glass. These structures then diffract incident light and we see the diffraction pattern as a smear.

While the smear appears to be static, we know it is dynamic because it gradually disappears by electro Thermo magneto processes!  Thus they are dynamically active structures that have a temporary equilibrium form.

In terms of rotation and radial expansion and contraction, the space within the thin films exhibit this in terms of evaporation and boundary morphing. This is clearly visible in some thin film rotational experiments I will post.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK5jRHR6NIg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ngnle11rVQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myB1js1KI8k

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qO6VVyhRO54

http://www.physics.utoronto.ca/nonlinear/pub/MdM_Jstatphys_91.pdf

This strongly visual example illustrates how a spiral coordinate frame makes sense of this kind of behavioural motion, flipping expansion into regions that dominate the behaviour of a test particle. However the point is the overal dynamic stability results in varying frequencies of regional change.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxQ1BjQcicg

This is Maxwells original conception of electromagnetic behaviour, with the strain frequencies represented by " wave" patterns of whole system oscillation or undulation!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ao9yvBet7FY
Consider this in relation to Arago's disk
The similarity between sheared rotation and so called electric rotation is weakly visible.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGFt5mpFWIA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFIgLbFVo28

One could say that rotating the disc created weak electromotive rotation.

However Arago's rotation is associated with magnetic coupling. The magneto motive force is currently explained as electromotive force generating magneto motive force. This introduction of electromotive force is a dream of Faradays. It is possible to explain all phenomena in terms of magneto motive force.

Arago's disk stands counter to the electric current interpretation based on the voltaic cell, which was agreed by committee to be generated by a chemical galvanic process!
Volts thought differently. He theorised it was due to the " atmosphere" around metals, again a magnetic atmosphere is entirely feasible!

For me the mechanical case for electromagnetic and Thermo antimagnetic behaviours is strong. Different frequencies and planes of rotation can account for distinct " electric " and "magnetic" behaviours especially in conjunction with radial variation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Do4LPboa3Lk
SpaceMatter is ubiquitous hydrogen and oxygen hydride( hydroxyl).

The respective mass of each element is 1 : 16, the octal base is evident.

Additional lines of enquiry.

http://magneticuniverse.com/discussion/22/the-way-electricity-runs-in-a-wire#Item_30

Prepare to paradigm shift!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkdEUp5LSFQ

For more then half of a year know, my company has send me to Ulm.

Every evening when I go from the hotel to the city of Ulm, I will pass the following monument:

(http://www.wackerart.de/Foto/Ulm/Einstein_Ulm.JPG)

May be not only  Jehovajah's post in fractal forum have drawn me very deep into physics.

http://www.einstein-website.de/z_biography/ulm_inhalt.html (http://www.einstein-website.de/z_biography/ulm_inhalt.html)

wow!
how comes I haven't stumbled upon this thread yet?!  (perhaps because the subforum mathematics and complex numbers put me off.. ;))

I have just touched the surface of this thread by now and probably every single post deserves some deep thinking (and for many no chance of understanding for me math noob).
but yet I wanted to mention this, when I read the smetic film post:
generate x-rays with adhesive tape:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQBjRF9mX1Y

and the fractal patterns that are generated when repeatedly pulling it off and resticking:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-ApTxUrIno

I have corrected a previous post on Arago's disc and convection vortices in a smectic fluid under shear rotation, because it was electrically induced vorticity.

The above video shows what I was looking to compare.

The difference in energy in the rotations is indicative of the energy density and conductivity/ inductivity of te material., but the same structure eventually emerges.

Thanks Chillheimer.

The reason it is in his section is because the equations that I am looking at as fractal generator formulae are so called complex number functions.

That being said I hope to keep the Maths simple and accessible for those who want to try and generate fractal images and sculptures from this stuff.

My issue has been recognising what the end results depict! For a long while I thought the concentric rings were boring until I realised they were diffraction patterns.

At last a decent animated zoom into the fractal pattern posted earlier.

Some of the effects are due to the animation app filling in frames by some kind of estimation, so they are artefacts I think, and I am only a beginner at using this aspect of Quasz, by Terry W Gintz at Mystic Fractals.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DuMlArW0CwI

This iterative function is another experiment exploring circular roll against tangential rotation, in a tangential disc.
z=exp(0+(5*imaj(z))*i)+exp(0+cos(y#)*j+sin(y#)*k)+0.01*c

The second is a mandy of the equation. The sculpture shows greater erosion, so the space is filled with a kind of turbulence which is vorticular.

The 2 images are surfaces. If we replace them by dynamics we can envisage a progression that undulates with a given frequency and amplitude through space, for the Julia. This progression is actually banded! The image is at the wrong angle to see this.

The Mandy represents a more complex progression , probably one through a dense medium?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BujD4iYBcNI

In my research on Barycentric calculus I came across the above seminar.

Optics is the same as mechanics!

Well, yes. Or rather, Optics is a branch of mechanics that deals with the paths light will take through matter.
This was surprising before the calculus of variations was well developed but nowadays it is pretty much obvious.

Thanks Kram1032.

Do you think it really is obvious?

The professor, for example threw this comment in as a throwaway remark! Later, he had trouble understanding a question from a questioner about the reasons behind the various developments of the same equation.

The history, especially the long correspondence, and the previous long history of the least action theory for Mechanics suggests to me that this is a knotty issue.

We rely on 2 great mathematical minds, one an outright genius, the other an outright mechanical engineer of the highest order. To say they came to a settled opinion quickly , along with D'Alembert is clearly not possible. Yet we say we can decide it!

My point is they did the work, some of us want to reap the benefit, but without understanding the issues!

The ballistic model of light has given way to the undulatory theory of light. As the professor said at the end, we can use one overriding method but we cannot claim to understand it always! This is why individuals choose different methods for different aspects:,to use their understanding while irking through the difficulties.

Thus, despite being a wave theory, light is still explained in terms of quanta or pseudo particles!
These pseudo particles change mathematical description in dense media, and are hard to describe!

The paths light takes is still a mystery, I think.

This cymatics experiment on a bubble of water is worth studying , but ignore the commentary about dark energy etc.
Sympathetic vibration induced resonance of the bubble shows many " modes" or dynamic equilibrium behaviours. All depend on the gyres in the bubble. While it is implied that one range of motion is gorging the bubble, actually this is not the case, and it is physically impossible to achieve this experimental set up!

The best we can do is attempt to factor out of our experimental design other external inducing forces including electri Thermo magnetic ones.

However th tempt to do this makes the point: virtually all motion at Ny scale is vorticular. It takes exceptional circumstances for translational motion to exist in free space!

Our mathematical models mislead in this regard, unless they are based on iterative sequences: that is a fractal generator!

The hidden aspect of such a generator is the second part which is the Z plot. This attempts to plot a surface onto a selection of points. This is an automatic and perhaps unconscious implementation of surface tension!

Some z plots fail. Others drastically smooth, but all are interesting when viewed in terms of surface tension.

The implication of a strain model of light propagation is that a surface tension is posited for light. In that regard this surface tension propagates spherically and any vorticular motion is posited to be transverse, that is within this propagating surface tension.

Once a light bubble has established itself, the TEM vortex rotations do not stop. This is the frequency of the various types of light that we measure.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyk-NG18B64

There is an issue at the foundation f the standard model of physics a, and it is charge.
This fundamental, mythical concept has escaped proper scrutiny and analysis, because it is assumed to be part of common dogmatic belief systems in science. Instead we find a fundamental tautology and doublespeak that exists in the description of force and matter, and the dynamical structure of quantum regions loosely called particles..

http://youtube.com/watch?v=p5QXZ0__8VU

This second video attempts to describe the dynamic structure of matter in terms of charge, but under plays the spherical and rotational paradigm on which the concept of charge is ultimately based.

You will note that the electron is shrouded in mist! This is because it is as mythical as the Greek gods of nature! The central region, a later addition is thought to be independent of the cloud. It is the cloud or charge in general, whether electron or quark, so called, that is said to be the generator!

This in fact shows the limit of our ability to describe the behaviour of this cloud. We might as well replace this generator notion with the notion of energy transformation. This is because it is c,ear that ths is a circularity of tautology , hole a cloud obscures this actual status in our reasoning.

Tautologies are fundamental to our understanding and distinction making processes. They need to be clearly identified, not obscured.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Vi91qyjuknM

Do we in fact need the notion of charge?

My answer is no. The notion of force is quite adequate, especially if we abandon the notions of rectilinear action as fundamental. Rectilinear action is such a special case that it is perhaps a surprise to some that nothing in their entire experience has ever been rectilinear! Using a trochoidal motion model for force action is not only more natural, but eliminates many quantum level mcro level difficulties.

In addition, we can have one preferred tautological myth in science called energy and this can then be transformed into trochoidal motion which characterises the electro Thermo and magneto complexes of action behaviours.

Force is the fundamental transformation of energy.

This lovely Förderung or promotion video for the standard model belies the fact that many careers depend on the big funding required to maintain these programmes, which ultimately have returned little to the community that has not been harmful or extremely dangerous!

This is not to say chemistry and biology have been without potential harm either, but they have not been such a huge financial drain on our public purse!

In any case, much of what has been useful was found nearly 200 years ago .
http://youtube.com/watch?v=V0KjXsGRvoA

You will note that within the community of particle physicists, it is a mistake to believe in particles at all! S is truly a Förderung, a promotion of a myth to achieve a desired purpose!

What is that purpose?

I looked that liquid in two cups at a special tension can become sticky like as magnet attraction.
I don't know what liquid was used for this experiment.
 :peacock: :wow:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Y_9vd4HWlVA

Because he believes in photons he describes it so, but what I see Is matter emitting light as a strain passes through it.

The Earnshaw instability for inverse square root forces created a problem for Stability.
Redefine charge in your mind! It helps to understand what is bring promoted( Förderung) under disguise or ignorance.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=fgdZoUrMZ0g
Thompson was well aware of this, but Bohr chose to decree a quantum solution! We wanted stability and by god we were going to get this model to work!

Hidden behind mathematical symbols a quantum rule was imposed on a shell shocked engineering community.. With Einsteins support and Rutherfords tacit agreement scientists quelled all opposition or controversy. Spectroscopy and X ray crystallography were used to back up the imposition. The discrete bands were called absorption bands and said to show quantised energy absorption few bothered to recognise that these were frequency bands. In fact the ultraviolet catastrophe was historically a high frequency Anomally in the model , which Planck tackled in his black body radiation experiments..

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mod6.html
 
Very simply, quantum are based on rotation not translation. Absorption is due to kinetic energy being transformed into rotational kinetic energy rather than " vibration" from side to side in 3 dimensions. The notions of fixed orbits in the planetary model, relates to vortex shedding in a fluid dynamic model. The vortices rotate around the region in the vortex structure of a spherical vortex or spiral , and these vortices exist in anti parallel gyres. Their stability is due to vortex dynamics rather than " charge" dynamics.

Thompsons sticky pudding model has reasserted itself in the particle physics of today as the gluon model in the nucleus, but a simpler alternative and intuitive description is a vortex model based on tornadic or hurricane structure, but considered spherically.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=-YYBCNQnYNM

http://youtube.com/watch?v=B7pACq_xWyw

This explanation combined with vorticular dynamics provides an alternative explanation to the structural dynamics of matter.

Interplanetary shock "waves " or shock steps are explained in terms of magnetic and proton disturbances, with auroral light shows.

The connectedness of all these descriptors has a mechanical theory underpinning it: Space rotates an varies radially in that rotation. Space as a fluid medium varies it's density in this way, but in a fractally distributed manner. These distributed regions of rotating space varying radially are Newtonian fluid motive or energy dense dependent on their trochoidal( roulette or simply rotational) complexity.

These regions therefore squeeze out and suck in energy phenomena like light and shock steps as strain transmissions with general regional motion( proton count variation).

http://youtube.com/watch?v=S8SLDL3K1Pg

Ivor Catt on advances in Electromagnetic theory.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=YbWWrR4dgtw

http://youtube.com/watch?v=bOhGrO7zi4Y

The quantum of light?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=dHR6LiNzBaw

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ygQIl-JaUUc

In a bottle of water twistedwaterstarter's YouTube  channel showed how these cylinders around stars are formed.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=RabeuXuuhl8

Because of conservation ideas everything looks and feels static. In fact it is always dynamic. Thus iteration is required to model actual field behaviours. We think we know, but we do not. Our ideas are based on static forms, static interpretations. So called chaos is mostly dynamical equilibrium!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=FLzJ2_DfNX0
We now know charge is a misleading concept . Capacitors contains electro thermo magneto complexes of energy in dynamic motion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2W5jaxKlgU
http://youtu.be/z2W5jaxKlgU
While this explanation is apologetic for the electric universe, it is still preferable to the standard view.
However, light does not require" electric "  current causality. The electro Thermo magneto complex is the natural energetic behaviour of matter , emitting light etc as space compacts trochoidally.

Go to Thunderbolts Project channel on youTube if you cannot access this video by P M Robitaille

http://thewatchers.adorraeli.com/2014/04/05/dr-pierre-marie-robitaille-on-the-validity-of-kirchhoff-s-law-eu2014/
http://www.thermalphysics.org/thermalphysics.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Hstum3U2zw&hd=1

Rotation is a sufficient motion to count for all perceived phenomena at all scales.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=waXWOv0YqFE

As we understand more about the rotational nature of the electro Thermo magneto complex the more we produce light as spark energy twisting space into its plasma dynamic state  . At a certain rotational frequency  what was already happening invisibly suddenly also becomes visible light. Beyond a certain frequency it again cloaks itself in invisibility as our visual sensors can no longer respond to the incident rotational stress.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=Mli66pnZbNA

There are some detailed problems that arise out of our current model of the electro Thermo magneto complex. The problems derive from the notion of an electron.

While it is not evident on the small scale that space is a collection of rotating fractally distributed regions, our concepts have to be based on this fluid dynamic experience . However, rather than moving entirely to the fluid dynamic paradigm, theoreticians have formed a consensus of ad hoc ideas which allows someone's expertise to be tapped in specified situations. The result is the standard model which is the consensus view. There are better and more consistent models but they attract little support from the scientific communities in physics etc. human nature over subject boundaries and associated finding streams as well as reputations blocks the necessary paradigm shift and remodelling.

Here is an advanced discussion of an emerging consensus which points out the flaws and potential areas of research to confim a better model. Unfortunately it relies on the electron despite the ubiquitous mention of a new space fluid called plasma!

https://youtube.com/watch?v=Cn_lFYUTE88

I hope that the relevance to light is not missed by this technical discussion. The electron has its origin in the study of light emissions!

Ignore the brief particle theory at the beginning, concentrate on the rotating magnetic field" energy " or Newtonian fluid motive.

A conductor guides this spherical vortex fluid motion into long cylindrical vortex fluid motions which everywhere impinges on the conductor, rather than travelling through the conductor. The frequency or frequencies of this rotation provide the variation in magnetic field intensity usually called electric potential or voltage.
 Rotation occurs in a gyre which means that it can be flipped into an anti parallel configuration. This is stable in reflection, but unstable in parallel transmission. Thus anti parallel gyres may travel along the same conducting guide where parallel ones will result in destructive tensions.

We feel we can control this magnetic Thermo electric behaviour but in fact we are at it's mercy. Like the great rivers for example, we make use of their fluid motive power at our peril!
https://youtube.com/watch?v=8TRL03nkeYM

Alternative history.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=pe6DN1OoxjE

What has it got to do with light?
The early records start with the stars and planets as sources of plasma, but our modern myth and fact making severely impairs our ability to understand.

At this time, the Thunderbolt project is the only movement linking the evidence together and deepening the understanding of the electro Thermo magneto complex..

Ray tracing a fractal.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=u3EPsUTMXwQ

Electrothemomagneto complex or plasma
http://youtube.com/watch?v=YVEDGg43ZR8

Dlectrothermomagneto energy and geometry.

While we cannot see much of space dynamically rotating unless it exudes strain torsions at the frequency of visible light, nevertheless we have experience of how metallic twisted copper wires guide this rotational behaviour. The energy or Newtonisn fluid motive of space is still mysterious, and capable of being transformed into many things, but for now at least I use the concept of a hydrogen plasma as the definition of space. However I do not use a particle but rather a fluid dynamical description. The basic regional structure would therefore be a spherical vortex in dynamic transformational mode and fractal in geometry.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=jSR67NFs11E

Now I have a handle on Grassmann I can recommend this exposition of the Euler / Cotes identity.
Plane polarised light and much more relies on the behaviour encoded in this identity for cogent expression.
This is perhaps the most famous trochoid formula we know, but it is only the beginning.
http://mathsforeurope.digibel.be/Euler.html
http://www.songho.ca/math/euler/euler.html

This hand held van de Graff generator illustrates a fundamental misconception in terminology. There is no electro-static energy!

Electrodynamics is better , but electro Thermo magneto dynamics ie the best so far!
You can clearly see nothing remains " static"!. And of course, why old it if light is constantly moving?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=xTeckXuARwE

The next video shows that because an energy is constantly moving does not mean stationary phenomena cannot be generated. Unfortunately we call these phenomena standing "waves" but they are clearly not waving if they are standing! A more fundamental notion is that of spherical rotations! These are standing or stationary spherically rotating regions. Because they are rotations we can apprehend the relevance of Frequency or revolutions per second! The concept of wave length is better described as spherical regional dimension. This always occurs in "anti parallel" pairs. This phenomenon of anti parallel spherical rotation is often misdescribed as matter anti matter coupling or even entanglement.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=lSdjj29fJqY

Rotation is a group of  complex phenomena we are currently misunderstanding big time!

Finally this last video shows how our notions have misinterpreted volcanic activity.mthe electro Thermo magneto complex phenomena generate spherical rotational spaces at. All scales and frequencies.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=9F7KnNkBNPU

http://youtu.be/3Hstum3U2zw
This may not play on the iPad!
But Kirchoffs law of thermal emission is not valid, and thus Planck's law is not universal. Emission is dependent on the material, which essentially means light is absorbed and transformed and emitted differently by each material.

The perfect reflector does not exist. The refle tion of light energy is very complex, and Snells laws represent a simplified process, even with Arago and Fresnels formulations.h

http://youtube.com/watch?v=px3oVGXr4mo
Light as a viscous medium may be unusual to think about, but here we see the viscosity of light( ie it's bending) used to create shadows.

Refraction and diffraction are some of the hardest concepts to grasp me hanically without a concept of elasticity  derived from the concept of reflection.  Using the concept of elasticity in the light medium one can then generalise it to viscosity to get a better apprehension of refraction nd diffraction.

Grimaldi  conceived of light splitting longitudinally, along the path of its projection. Newton conceived of light splitting transversely into corpuscular chunks with a ballistic behaviour. Thus the refraction due to a prism was different o the diffraction due to a sharp edge!  Newton could not explain diffraction but did rename it as diversion, vibe in the mono chromatic beam dispersed from a prim. Grimaldi simply conceived of the sharp edge shaving light off from a propagating beam. In formulating this notion he used the analogy of shaving wood off a beam or spray off a stream of water.. BOth rely on viscosity in the mediums. Because Newton conceived of light as already split into corpuscles he had no real conceptual basis for viscous behaviours in light.

Newtons work on water waves shows his ingenuity in drawing analogies from sound, but this is again firmly based on a mixed medium in which compression caused the dispersion of water vapour as droplets on the side of the compression vessel. Thus his corpuscular presuppositions explained the transmission of sound and light as a mixed medium phenomenon, but in light he supposed no other material construct for the interstitial space. In sound he supposed air to be fulfilling that role.

Thus his fluid dynamical investigations do not start with viscosity but with resistivity. He thus considers the behaviour in terms of lubricity, which is a direct frictional opposite to resistivity. Viscosity on the other hand is an inverse property to resistivity.  Several properties of friction are thus mechanically incorrect, in particular the slope coefficient of friction!

Frictional forces are still misunderstood mechanically, even now when viscous forces are better understood and included in the analysis.

The viscosity of light is a substantive property of the media through which light passes as a strain propagation. Light , as a phenomenon is not independent of a medium of transmission or propagation. Thus in very sparse medi "light" is invisible because the strain cannot rotate the medium at the frequency of visible light. However in a dense medium the strain is not only able to rotate the medium at the relevant frequency, but in fact at many co dependent frequencies relating to the viscous interactions in the medium or media.

Researching De Broglie and Rayleigh waves brought me to this speech by De Broglie,

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1929/broglie-lecture.pdf

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCICoR6czcc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZ3EaEay3YM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a54W4w6_10Y

Rotational waves or Rayleigh waves are the norm.

The use of sine or circular functions strictly speaking is not about waves but periodicity. The difference is that periodicity is not a description of a " wave" . However undulatory is a description of a perceived motion which has some recurring variation. The concept of a wave is thus not as precise as some would preach.
De Broglie simply draws an analogy between a statistical aggregation of periodic behaviours which has a peak as a result of periodic overlap and thus interference. This peak he defines or suggested should be associated with the electron.

What followed from that is a clever melding of bodily behaviours and perceived peak behaviours.. He never asserts that they are the same thing hich some now o, rather he sets out how one may mentally cross between the 2.  For him the electron was real and the peak wave phenomenon was real. He felt they should be associated if physics was going to be reconciled.

Was it an advance? Certainly it promoted acceptance of a mathematical wave mechanics, and Schroedingers characterisation of a dynamical system with periodicity, but it was more his interpretation that was admired. Suddenly he could make sense of particles and "waves" in terms that satisfied both camps. And there were 2 camps.

It seems we have got used to agreeing to differ and working collaboratively together. Nobody really wants to rebuild physics and the sciences from the roots, instead they just want to get their share of the financial cake and maintain their disciplines.
http://www.numericana.com/fame/solvay.htm
http://scholarsarchive.library.oregonstate.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1957/21636/NyeMaryJo.History.AristocraticCulturePursuit.pdf?sequence=1

http://www-gap.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/history/Biographies/Rayleigh.html

While still researching it is clear from DeBigkies speech that the sickness in physics and in science arises out of a belief in something called expected or rational truth! This notion is derived from religious and cultural expectations. However, accute empirical observation often generates a conundrum or a contradiction, but this contradictory status is only in the mind or consciousness of the observer/ expositor. Thus the contradiction is formal, rhetorical and due to mis proportionate thinking. Simply put our Analogues do not form a proportional statement!

Using analogous thinking allows the thinker to move beyond such stumbling blocks. The appropriate analogy allows the appropriate comparisons to be made. Here DeBroglie simply compares waves and corpuscles in an analogy. That is the ratio of corpuscles to corpuscles are analogus to the ratio of waves to waves. This s Eydoxian Logos Analogos method, but applied to notions as s systems of magnitudes rather than just bare magnitudes like lines or planes.

The fundamental Spaciometry that allows or supports this analogous thinking was joy characterised until Mandelbrot gave it the name Fractal Grometry. That is not to say that it was not intuitively used by great pragmatists of the past.

Pragmatism is the doorway to idealism and ideal form. This is so because empirical data is so varied and multiple that a pragmatic decision has to be made to avoid Zeno's and Parmenides paradox. Making that decision makes an " ideal" . That is a firm, a Metron, a Monas, a prototype. Because the decision is set or fixed the form or idea is fixed. This form can now be perfected in what is called Skesi or schematic thought, that is thought based on drawn representations,, or even sculpted model. Once the properties of these schema are apprehended it is then pragmatically possible to reapply this ideal to the empirical situation.

The application of an ideal to an empirical situation requires constant adjustment, particularly by division. It is this division that encodes a notion of scale within its notion of factorisation into multiple form. This notion of scale and factorisation is the logos Analogis interpretation of similarity, and fractal geometry encompasses a more pragmatic notion: almost self similarity. This notion and it's connection to factorisation by division is the fundamental Euclidean Akgorithm which is iteration!

The products of iterative Algorithms are the topic of my next post.

Lord Rayleigh ( John Strutt) made some influential notes about wave motion throughout his life. Bearing in mind he was born just before Quaternions were announced and Grassmann published his Ausdehnungslehre to a dismal response, and was in university at Cambridge about the time Maxwell published on Electromagnetism, using Quaternions and MacCullaghs curl potential, we can see he was right in the thick of the wrests early attempts to model 3 drotation mathematically.

It was really down to a few doughty souls to progress physics of the wave to its prominent position vis a vis yhe corpuscular dynamics of chemistry, which was making noteable headway in the industrial setting.

We have seen how Arago and Fresnel created a huge rift, with young , in the philosophical explanation of matter in the aether or plenum. While Newyon provided a consisten theoretical model based on corpuscles , it was evident that it was not physical or empirical. At the same time the Wave theory was not physical with regard to light. Youngs experimental double slit interference patterns were not convincing enough , and it was the influence of Fresnel and Arago that enabled the results to make headway in the broader scientific, non chemistry based community. These tended to be more mathematically minded scientists who could understand the sine  graph, intruded by Euler as a model of a wave.

The notion of a wave is very rarely examined. One is usually immediately programmed to consider the circular functions of Euler as a wave. Thus a disconnect with physicality is immediately taught. Scientists no longer see any real wave, but rather approximations to the ideal sine graph! However in this process the ideal sine graph is misconstrued as a wave and so it's true meaning is lost even as it is plainly laid out before the students eyes.

Firstly let us remove the blinkers.

Euler took a circle of unit radius, that is its radius was defined as 1. Then he defined it's semi circle or hemi arc as to about 30 decimal places. Thus he was able to draw an axis marked off in units of . Thus this axis represented the rotation of a point around the circle or the motion of the centre as the circle rolled in that axial direction . In each case the circle was in dynamic motion called rotation.

Thus the sine graph represents not a wave motion , whatever that may be , but a rotation motion.

Now let us turn to wave motion. It must be observed that wave motion, vibration and periodicity are tautologically the same perceived behaviours. Any difference lies in the observers intention or purposes. Thus in the context of a sea wave the perception of a rolling body of water traversing the surface of the sea and rolling out onto the beach gives way to the undulatory motion of such waves on the personal stability of the observer. Indeed the bobbing motion of floating objects predominates over the passage of a rolling wad of water beneath !

Waves are observable on the surface of flats flowing rivers, but there the current predominates the observers senses and little mention is made of them. So what are the causes of these mounds of water in the surface of a dynamic fluid? It turned out not to be bobbing at all , but complex vortex behaviour. Both Lord Kelvin and Helmholtz regarded this as a groundbreaking phenomenon and they set out to describe a kinematics of vorticity. A first attempt.

This was a major influence on Stokes, Navier and Rayleigh, but Maxwell was conceptually in advance of these 2 great mathematical physicists. He wanted the vortices to act like gears nd springs and transmit strain. He opted to use Hamiltons Quaternions to express his ideas. Lord Kelvin was not amused. He like many scientists in his time felt this use of the imaginaries was Jabberwokky. A term coined by Lewis Carol, a prominent traditional Mathematicin, who derided this kind of Alice in wonderland mathematics in his book of the same title.

Consequently Maxwell was forced to recent, and in a remarkable turn around went from prise of Quaternions to a dire denouncing of them! This was at the behest of Lord Kelvin who was developing the ideas of vectors set out by a young American student of thermodynamics called Gibbs. It is a dark but not unfamiliar tale of underhand tactics. As a result, overnight research into Quaternions was shelved in America after a fateful conference on the issue of how physics should be taught.

Maxwells statistical approach to gases suited Lord Kelvins own Kinetic theory and so statistical Mrchanics was developed by Gibbs to great effect, but the mathematics of fluid mechanics and ths Elrctromagnetism based on that floundered. This was because Maxwell expressed all the main concepts in terms of Quaternions. The fledgling vector algebras were not sufficiently graped to be able to compete with this elegant description. In addition, the Curl of a vector field was developed by McCullagh a mathematician in the same tradition as Hamilton, who used Quaternions to formulate his ideas, and the relationship with Knots and the properties of vortices in space.

The second tautological concept of a wave is periodicity. Thus when we experience the unwise everyday we apprehend periodicity, but hardly intend to call it a wave! It is clearly a rotation which involves very large scales of distance and time. Nevertheless we have to cknoledge that repeated variation which immediately makes it sn logos to regular bobbing up and down as in wave motion.

Periodicity reveals to me the essential rotation that is evident in a sea wave is lo evident at a much larger scale in astronomical terms. Astronomers since Eudoxus have modelled these circular motions to give. Apparent relative motions of planets. These motions were very wavelike and hence planets were called wanderers!

We now know that our solar  system wanders in the milky way galaxy on some spiralling rotating arm of the galactic structure. This wavelike motion is on a time scale of tens of thousands of years and on a displacement on sn astronomical scale .

My third example of the notion of wave motion is vibration. Typically we think of a piano string or a washing machine . We are told to think a piano string vibrates up and down. In fact it vibrates round and round! Despite precise plucking or striking the mechanical behaviour of taught wires in vibration is rotational. These rotations may be elliptical rather than circular but they are not up and down like a slow moving tension curl in a skipping rope.

While it is always possible to dampen the elliptical motion ofa vibrating string by placing constraints, this only emphasises the point. Vibrations are helical waves travelling bidirectionally in a tensile medium.

It really does not matter what scale you go to vibration or wave motion is due to rotational motion .

It is clear that rotation at any scale is almost similar. Thus we can expect the same mathematical formulae for wave motion to apply at ll scales.

Schroedinger's wave equation is simply derived for rotating systems at ll scales. The idea that an atom is a planetary system look alike makedps this expectation almost inevitable. However we must not confuse rotation with planetary systems. A much more general graph of a rolling circle is called a trochoid.mit is complexes of these that better describe arbitrary rotation in space. We shall see that means regionality is inherent in rotational motion, as is integer relationships between regional complexes.

These regional complexes define a fractal Gometry and a fractal distribution

http://magneticuniverse.com/uploads/FileUpload/e4/24d9314e3aa202313fd3cf4259d19e.pdf
An important document on Maxwells theoretical limitations.
Also check out my posts on the Magnetic universe forum!

Light unfortunately is associated with wave motion. This arises due to the Fresnel analysis of superpositional interference : constructive or destructive interference. In truth wavelength does not enter the picture, but a picture is drawn to expound the concept.

From the start of measuring the speed of light, light pulses have been used to provide an Intrinsic parameterisation.  That means within the beam or promulgation of light a natural or imposed division of " time "was  established. To precisely mark the time a spinning shutter or mirror was used. This rotational frequency was used to calibrate the time stamps

Of course frequency allows us to calculate a length once we know the speed. Determining the speed required ver precisely synchronised clocks and very precisely measured distances.

The frequency of the flashes were crucial . Several methods of measurement were tried but most relied on the synchronicity of the flashes. Thus frequency is the paramount measure of light .

Later as the popularity of the sine wave model grew it became possible to calibrate by spectroscopy the interference patterns , and this revealed a variation in wave length. Light colour or spectrum was then calibrated in terms of wavelength as opposed to the optimum frequency required to get good interference patterns..

We need to understand the role of rotation not only in calibrating light speed and wavelength, but in the nature of light propagation itself.

Huygens model of spherical intermediary light sources , induced by incoming light  is always drawn either as arrows or wave fronts. The physical fact is wave fronts are spatial. They are not ephemeral boundaries. Thus a wave front passes through a region of space by a meaurable disturbance in that region.

Until now that disturbance has been mis-characterised either as a transverse motion or a plane front! . The transverse motion has always been accompanied by a transverse motion out of phase. This has been interpreted as an electric and a magnetic signal. It may also be interpreted as a rolling spatial motion.

This rolling of space is regional but it is accompanied by many regions like it spread spherically throughout the space around a light source.. As they promulgate in contiguous contact, they behave like Rayleigh surface "waves", giving the appearance of a surface , characterised as a wave front.  This means that light also has a longitudinal  or compression like progression, but of ourselves at these speeds it is hardly meaurable, requiring Doppler techniques to properly distinguish the phenomenon. The wave front is slightly bluer at one phase and slightly redder at the opposite phase in the rotational cycle, but the eye will not detect this in the overall intensity of the progression through the medium.

Rolling wave fronts best explain diffraction and dispersion , but the necessity of a viscosity in the medium is what has hindered the consideration of these physical phenomena. The viscosity in the vacuum is misinterpreted as electro magnetic constants. . These change as the medium of transmission is changed, but the assumption is that the vacuum is perfectly  non viscous. This cannot be true as light and other electromagnetic phenomena reflect and refract and diffract at regional density boundaries, with absorption and retransmission. In the vacuum very little light is visible from the surrounding space because no retransmission takes place. The free transmission of the rolling wave front  is only interrupted as the viscosity of the medium it is absorb into transforms it into different frequencies  for re transmission.

When pictures of the sun are taken at these different frequencies the viscosity of the space involved is clearly visible, but where the viscosity is uniform, no retransmission continues to occur.

Ivor sent me this link to a revision of the need for displacement current.

http://www.ivorcatt.org/icrwiworld78dec1.htm

Technically, displacement current is about charge build up in a capacitor. Thus the vortices empty into a dielectric between plates. This drags in more external energy into the vortex which then continues through the next section of wire.

The capacitor discharges when the dielectric can no longer contain he vortex energ, sending a vortex ring pulse onwards.

Daniel Russels page gives an understandable description of " wave" reflection.

http://www.acs.psu.edu/drussell/Demos/reflect/reflect.html

Of course it opts to call on Newton rather than actually explain.

To start with, a sine wave is not possible in a madium with no tensile attribution or property. In general no viscosity no sine wave. The only possible wave is thus longitudinal and the medium must therefore possess an elastic attribution. Again no viscosity no compression wave.

Simple compaction will transmit into a medium with no elasticity but the energy will be absorbed and dissipated by contiguous contact and the build up of affected inertial mass. The energy of the system may be constant but for the impacted medium what Newton called the measure of the quantity of motion.mv will be increased with no appreciable net velocity gain. Thus mv is a measure of the energy within a body, and the logarithm of mv² will be a type of temperature measure.

Temperature is usually a measure of heat pressure, that is the quantity of motion transmitted to a very motile fluid such as water or mercury. As it is usually measured in a small region it represents a proportion of the whole which is quite small. The method for accounting for small proportions was devised by Napier in his famous treatise on logarithms. Establishing a base for these types of logarithms requires a geometric proportion which is why mv² is used.

The input of temperature( heat pressure) into a medium results often in material property changes and usually the creation of viscosity. Once viscosity can be adduced then lastic and wave behaviours become possible and probable. Quite often a fine plasma envelops the impacting body as the inertial mass increases creating an elastic fluid reaction product that ejects past the impacting object taking a good proportion of the quantity of motion with it. The viscosity of this plasma has yet to be measured I think, but its presence is well attested.

Viscosity therefore is necessary to expound on any wave mechanical description, and if it is assumed not to exist, natural events seem bound to create the property.

Returning to the medium which permits compression waves but supposedly not transverse waves, the compression creates a viscosity / elasticity in such a medium. The chemistry of this product is usually ignored by physicists, but in fact it is quite important at the small scale. The injection of heat pressure encourages endothelial reactions which may be homeostatic, releasing the compression product in an rndothermal reaction , restoring the initial state. This is a viscous behaviour.

Newton spent a great deal of time and effort attempting to understand these chemical behaviours of materials. He wanted to know where the " stickiness" in matter came from. Unfortunately in fluids he assumed they were resistive media only and considered only lubricity, that is how easily an object passed through another. He dd not think that this was a function of stickiness or viscosity.

Thus we can expound upon compression waves in terms of a measure of elasticity. As for gases this elasticity was renowned and called pressure. Boyles Gas pressure laws helped to account for sound compression waves. Waves at ths time meant like we see in water! Newton in fact used a very elegant water vapour demonstration of waves in gases based on the humidity of a gas, which was observed to vary with pressure.

The viscosity of a gas was yet to be explained, and it was Maxwell whose velocity probability distribution , based on Boltzmanns observations, that gave Kelvin the grist for his kinetic theory of gases. The viscosity was locked away in the energy density due to the contraction of volume. It took a while for viscosity to become isolated as a general factor in wave propagation.

Light however was thought to be different. Descartes felt it was a wave propagation like all the others, but Newton felt it was a ballistic rø paganism of corpuscles. He saw or refused to see any evidence of water or harbour waves. Grimaldi on the other hand believed he had detected them in a phenomenon he called diffraction.

The problem arose because no one saw any reason to admit rotation into the general discussion on waves. Compression waves were all assumed to bunch up like water. Nobody actually investigated water to see what it was doing until waves became important.

When they were investigated, chiefly by the fluid mechanics, Helmholtz, Navier Stokes  Rayleigh it became obvious that rotation was involved. But by then Fresnel had accounted for light by means of sine" waves" nd insisted transverse motion was ll that could properly account for it. Young believed that longitudinal motion had to be involved but he was overruled.

Rayleigh demonstrated that longitudinal motion was involved but he was marginalised to the seismic community and later the radio engineers!

In fact Ray,eight demonstrated that at a surface rolling waves were the solution.

We can now return to compression waves and add in the left out rotation factors. All compression involves some element of rotation, and in fact strain methods account for the behaviours of materials using strain ellipsoids..the viscosity of the material effects the behavioural outcome, especially when viscosity is known to behave rotationally!

Finally we address the wave motion in a tensile medium.

The medium is viscous because of its tensile nature. This means compressive and rotational moments of force are resisted viscously, ie elastically. Providing the viscous modulus is not breached a medium has a restorative force behaviour. Hooke is the most famous scientist to use this to describe force, it is often overlooked that Newton derived his force measure from Hookes observation. Hooke was interested in statics, Neeton in Dynmics, thus he observed what Hooke factored out, the accelerations involved in these restorative forces.

In many senses inertia means Hookes steady spring state, that is a force equilibrium. Newton just observed that inertia is achieved over time as forces tend toward equilibrium.. Acceleration thus was the determiner of that active principle called force with celerity or velocity bring the result of force.

When Newton observed that rest and uniform motion were both equilibrium states he opened the eyes of engineers forevermore! The question of why objects continue moving when no force is applied was quickly forgotten. Newtons philosophical causes Motive and celerity were removed from consideration by simple measurement! His formulae derived from his deep thinking were good enough to build bridges with! Let the philosophers ponder the rest!

So in a tensile medium any change in the balance of equilibrium results in a restorative force that is equal and opposite. The behaviour of the system under these conditions produces oscillations that damp down. The reason for this Newton observed is complex but it is a redistribution of the quantity of motion often resulting in a rise in heat pressure.

The actual chemical and viscous behaviour was not examined until fluid Dynamics started to be computationally possible.

In the tensile material long chains of material are linked by electro Thermo magneto dynamics. As the material is deformed these chains are stressed or compressed . They behave viscously, that is like springs. The rounding of the material produces rotational forces in the material that restore the material. Thus it is rotational forces that generate the restorative forces as tangential components to the rounding.

Imposing a potential energy initial condition in a tensile medium results in the restoration of the medium through rotational oscillations. Applying the potential as an impulse results in a rolling wave transport in the tensile medium. The rolling wave carries the potential impulse and the restorative ftces in a time dependent way. It is how quickly and how strongly the restorative forces act that determines the speed of the wave. Interestingly this speed is determined by mc² = T the restorative force! However m here is an inertial mass constant , but a mass related factor even if dimensionally different,

This rolling wave is time dependent, but the front of the wave is carrying the potential element which is generating the restorative force that acts at the rear. The rotation is thus a swivel backwards and forwards.. The amplitude or spatial motion of the tensile medium determines the action of the rotating swivel . It will lift the medium against gravity on the leading edge and assist the material with gravity on the trailing edge.

When we now look at reflection we see that the leading edge encounters a different viscosity medium. This absorbs the potential as a rotation and begins to return the tensile medium by its restorative forces.in so doing it counteracts the potential imparting force by its own equilibrium restoring forces. If these act fast enough it can return the medium to the rest position before the peak potential arrives and then send back a reflected wave that interferes with the on coming potential..

If the medium is not very fast as in the second case the return wave pulse can be returned as the rear restoring force interacts. The 2 forces combine to send back a strong signal without interference or polarisation by phase. If the medium behaves inelastically  the wave may just be damped at the end as if it was free.

The important point is that this wave motion requires a rotating or swivelling bend to propsgate.  Propagation does not occur without this time dependent rotation in a viscous medium.
http://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_bulk_sound_speed

This time dependent rotation of the material is hidden within the bulk characteristics of a medium.mby that I mean the usual ideas for measures do not admit the rotation that is present , but rather use trig ratios to measure bending strain. This bending strain is dynamic and so really should be thought of as a rotation. In particular to propagate a rolling wave form usually called a transverse wave , the trailing edge must accelerate the tensile restoring http://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_bulk_sound_speedforce: thus the whip hand effect transmits the pulse as opposed to just raising the tensile medium.

Finally, all these modes of behaviour in media characterise the transmission of a fluid motive we now call energy. What all these behaviours demonstrate is how energy is first transformed into various kinds of force based on rotational forces.

http://www.roymech.co.uk/Related/Fluids/Fluids_Characteristics.html#Compressibility

While vector fields are one derivation of a Grassmann twistor algebra of line segments( the vector concept) I feel that they are not the best mathmatical model. I have recently posted on the Grassmann twistor as the most comprehensive format for fluid dynamics, leading to the observation that Fourier transforms best describe fluid motion behaviours.

So why post this under light? I want to stimulate a thought process that recognises light as a fluid dynamic process, and downgrades the wave representation of electrothermo magneto progressions. I return to the vortex conception of fluid dynamics using the Grassmann twistor.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=DRte6vRCIgI

As a beginner in fluid dynamic representation I did not know the difference between a streamline, shon in the video, and a streamline ( not possible to show without superimposition). A streamline is a mathematical model that defines the tangent envelope by position at each time step. The flow of material points is given position wise or by tine dependent variations for a travelling material point( Eulerian). The difference is quite subtle and Einstein characterised it by saying what would he experience if he could travel on a photon.

I guess an everyday example is the experience of being in a car travelling or on the side of the road watching the car travel. Speed cameras can tell you the speed of the car at a particular point and time, while the speed dial tells the driver the average speed at a particular time. One has to use a common time to match the cars position, and only then can you compare the speed calculations.
Eulerian frame gives you speed and time. Lagrange or laboratory frame gives you speed nd position. Finding the streamline for the Lagrange frame is relatively easy if you have a velocity description st a point.finding a streamline for an Eulerian description again requires a velocity description, but this time it is a velocity at a given time. To draw the streamline we need to know the velocity at each position st that precise time.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=If6J-jWnb7c

Note emissivity is a measure of " electric" field strength(? Whatever that is!) and mu is the permeability of magnetic rotation in space.

The rotation of magnetism is fundamental to our theories of light and matter, and yet we consistently ignore this spaciometric fundamental of motion in space.

This is a note to state a proposition or hypothesis.

The fundamental constant in fluid Mechnics is viscosity. This is a measure of bulk space properties and incorporates inertial constants via the Reynolds number, which essentially is a logarithmic scaling factor( or at least geometric) . The concept of viscosity is equivalent to a product of the emissivity and permeability of space which are bulk properties of space measured by magnetic and electric forces so called.

The final constant is that of thermal conduction which again is equivalent or proportional to the general viscosity of space.

Consequentially the constants that separate out the mathmatical measures do so in a relate able way, which relation relies crucially upon the bulk rotational properties of space .

The method that best describes these relations is most accessibly put in the algebras derived and synthesised from an nlytical approach go Hetmann Grassmann.

Here is a treatment using Riemannian concepts, and where Riemann is Grassmann will not be far behind!
http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/ORTHOGONAL/04/EMExtra.html

Google "jehovajah  sound magnetic base" to find out what Andre Marie Ampère has to say about electromagnetism.

This is a turning point in the history of Light!

The X-ray light source was used to split the electron. The electron is not a fundamental particle anymore. It never was.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvzT1Pz6W4Y

So what is time?

For me time does not mean anything objectively. Subjectively as a consequence of memory I construct a motion filled spatial reality. This I do sequentially, in a massively parallel way that is spatially distributed.

The sequential nature of the construction is a fundamental period or episode, a raster rate. This raster rate is intertwined with a frame generation, each frame itself is sequentially laid down into memory.

If " I" move, or turn I create a different , personal memory, a personal event record that u call among other things time! The word Tyme is old English for a record . Modern time is a construct , complex and mitigated from all these records and apparently, only apparently, founded on empirical observation.

The question now is, how useful is this old construct?

Whatever the answer I object to dogmatic assertions like the speed of light is the same in every reference frame!

What is the speed of light?
What is space!
What is motion?

Each of these constructs " I " personally and subjectively have a view on, a local take on, a subjective contribution to.

Enjoy?

http://youtu.be/GVOmUzXmGws

Ok, so now I get the Galilean principle. It took a while and it required the freedom of Grassmann Schwerpunkt or weightpoint concept to understand where I was not understanding!

Newton distinguishes his quantities as mathematical not physical. Most physicists not being philosophers will not catch the difference.the word Mathematical is a translation of the Greek which was eluded into the Latin. It is simply a qualification for a Pythagorean scholar or adept. Thus if I rephrase Newton as saying his quantities are astrological not physical, you may understand why his Principia is better translated as the Astrological principles.

There is a story that Newton picked up a astrological tract from a penny arcade and found the figures therein incomprehensible! This was his first introduction, the story goes, to Euclids " geometrical" philosophy, which to be fair is in the Stoikeia, but he probably was reading an Islamic Atistotelian version!

What the Galilean principle states, in the mouth of Galileos characters in the dialogue is that a uniformly moving and isolated box imparts its motion to everything within it. Thus an observer within cannot tell any difference in the physical laws of phenomena! This last induction or rather adduction was added principally by Einstein nd Lorentz. However it is well founded in Galileos thought experiments based on his astrological observations of Jupiter!

The Jovian system is a carriage without walls, an isolated system, apparently, in which the moons circle the planet  as it wanders! As Galileo says, " All is explained in a diagram".

It is clear, but an assumption nonetheless, that the diagram implies that Jupiter is a " solar" system. In the terms of his day that was a Copernican system. Thus in showing Jupiter has moons that circle it , and the earth has a moon that circles it, he removed the main objection to the idea that the sun has planets that circle it! This is a fractal system if ever there was one!

But then the objection becomes, how can these moons follow after their planets ? The answer then was the basis of the theory of gravity. Each moving centre imparts by Newtonisn accelerative vis a motion to those bodies circling it , so that the sum of their motions may be called the motive vis in the Newtonian vis economy. This is none other than a restatement of the Galilean principle, as illustrated by his diagram. In addition, Newton idesteps causal philosophy by separating out absolute vis as causal.mthus he was free to develop the accelerative motive vis relationship as a quantitative measure relationship.

Leaving that to one side, we must note that the Galilean principle is used to deduce an action st a distance principle called gravity. It may also be used to deduce a centrifugal principle called levity, and finally it was adduced by Einstein principally to say the laws of physics hold in a reference frame that is moving uniformly.

Now a reference frame is not taught as a physical obstruct, but rather as a geometrical ubjectively construct which may move with the observer. It is formal, geometrical and relative. It should have no affect on physics whatever! So what is missing in the mathematical geometrical understanding of a reference frame?

Principally it was the motion of a luminiferous aether! At the time most philosophers took for granted that an aether pervaded all space including the vacuum . However it depended on your religion as to whether it did nothing , or rather was allowed to be anything physical. It was hoped that science might determine these things, by certain scientists, philosophers shall we say. However certain theologians were opposed to this idea of empirical evidence.

Nevertheless the Galilean principle relies on the centre imparting motion to the circling bodies. So far the only accepted and epicurean idea was that of gravity. Newton was at pains to point out that the word was not defined! But it was convenient for the church , philosophers and others to define it tautologically.nthis led logically to the idea of action bring caused at a distance by no coupling medium! This was abhorrent to Newton.

Later Faraday and Arago  demonstrated a magnetic field of force affected iron in space around a lodestone or a current shrouded wire, and Örsted and Ampère demonstrated that this force was a circular force! Even today scientists can't accept that empirical fact, but back in Ampères day it was met with incredulity by Lagrange, Laplace , Binot, Savot, and even Maxwell! Coulomb in particular was convinced that the "Newtonian" gravitational mathematical model was all that was required. By then most had rejected Newtons subtle modifications to his Galilean reference frame and baldly stated that force acted only in straight lines!

Ampère was convinced that electrodynamics revealed for the first time a fundamental circular force and set out the laws for it. However after convincingly demonstrating his hypothesis he returned to his studies, troubling the status quo no further. Consequenyly his ideas were not advanced into the public consciousness. Ironically the force he so meticulously deduced the mathematical law for is known in France as Laplaces force!

Thus by the time we come to Einstein a spatial field of influence concept , mostly based on Faradays description and philosophising was ripe for the picking. The Galilean principle could now be recast generally as a field effect with gravity and electrodynamic fields as empirical examples.

Because aether became a political word during the world wars it meant that physics was in a crisis. Einsteins concepts of a Galilean principle evidenced by the empirical fields, plus his photoelectric paper allowed American scientists in particular to recast physics in terms of fields, and the Geometry in terms of spacetime. This seemed to be a new conception in the 1920's but in fact it was an out working of the Galilean principle. Because it seemed new many dictatorial versions came out, and press releases dumbed down the subtleties.


Einstein never gave up the aether concept as a physical medium. The mathmatical version of it was his concept of spacetime . But how could a system in our universe be isolated from its observers? This was a conundrum brought about by the misunderstanding of the Galilean principle. The Jovian system is not isolated inside a box, but it clearly has its own local reference frame. It's local reference frame means that observers have a relativistic choice: they can and do describe the moons of Jupiter treatise to Jupiter, or they can describe the moons and Jupiter relative to their local system. The two descriptions are independent, mutually exclusive and in that precise relativistic sense " isolated" from one another. But they are combined in the same super system or higher reference frame, which can be understood as a 3rd all encompassing frame.

Why not just ombine them in each others local frame? The reason is conceptual. Each frame has its own frame points that move with the observer. Thus these frame points overlap but are not the same! The concept of a weightpoint captures this aspect that any arbitrary point is the sum of an infinite set of specific frame points. As one frame moves the point identifying an object in another frame changes. If however that object is within that frame, the point identifying it will not change as it moves!

The moving jovian system shows this quite well, with the moons  moving with Jupiter. A more everyday example , nowadays is sitting in a moving car. Thus the concept of a reference frame in the Grasmann system is physical, not mathematical. For Einstein a reference frame means all of the measurement structures with all of the physics!

Now space has a physical constraint on the speed of light. This is a bulk property of space. The permeability snd emissivity officiants in maxwells equations are bulk space property ratios. Yes they are fudge factors o make the equations ok, but that is how we model physical behaviours by mathematical quantities. We never say more about a physicl system by obscuring the behaviour behind quantitative symbols! What we do is reveal precisely how we process these symbolic relationships in our algebra.

The fact of light being a bulk property constrained phenomena is seen every time we see a refraction! A pride for example so constrains light that it appears to,split it into rinse colours. In fact what is happening is relativistic, the speed of light is slower in glass than in air  but as soon as the light hits air it " speeds up" . This strange phenomenon we call refraction, but it is an everyday example of the Galilean principle. But the prism is not moving! Light however is moving within the prism. For someone within the prism the speed of light would be constrained to a value true for them . They would be unaware that light could travel at a faster speed in a different medium.

Now suppose the prism to be moving, that will not alter the speed of light within the prism! It is now a local centrally constrained bulk property! What will alter is the phase properties of the light within the prism. This is the Doppler effect, but it principally acts at the boundaries between the media. The amount of incident light energy will vary with the motion of the prism altering intensity within the prism, the exiting light energy will be lower the longer the path through the medium, not due to absorption and reradiation soldly( which cannot be discounted) but Also simply due to the motion of the prism, as it transfers fom one bulk property constraint to another. The speeding up stretches what is coming out ,if you will, lowering the frequency .

Another way to apprehend this is that the frequency of oscillation of the bulk deformation is altered by passage through a different medium, so what comes out has a different frequency at a different speed!

The prism is meant to put Galileos principle inside a glass box. What comes out is inevitably altered by the surrounding bulk space properties. Add into those observations the oncepts of gravity and electrodynamics and you have one hell of a can of worms that needs sorting!

I think we can do it best using the Grassmann method of Analysis very carefully, without relying on it to tell us truth, rather to use it to model empirical behaviours and see if the model predicts empirical observations.

The philosophy of relativity comes of age with the students of Einstein. Compare this with the philosophy of quantity of the students of Newton.

http://youtu.be/YRwZ55zjzxc

The difference is that Newton did not believe his own " hype"! Newton warned, perhaps ineffectively , that his readers should not confuse the physical , extensive property filled medium called aether or space with his mathematical measure derived and interpreted model of it!!

Relativity is not a new idea by Einstein, it was a constant philosophical observation since analogous thought can be gleaned from the Akkadian or Sumerian cuneiform records! So Newton had a choice to establish the philosophy of quantity, whether to allow each to have his own time or to insist that each adhere to the absolute time of the Creatir, so called.

It is common and indeed expected that any philosophy will set certain requirements on those seeking to understand or debate it. These are called by Euclid/ Apollonius Aitema. Later they came to be called Axioms. This word is a Greek loan word moved into Latin. It means axle! In other words the debate or philosophy swivelled round certain required axles. Later these became identified with axes.

To avoid confusion or simply to make rational sense to himself Newton demanded absolute time in Gods universe. This did not mean what we mean today by time. It comes from the old English Tyme which means a record of position of planetary bodies and stars. In addition Galileos observations and principles showed that a fractal structure in the universe based on centrally rotating bodies was an empirical deduction from empirical data. To establish a quantitative measure of these things Newton required his measures to be summative. Thus it becomes a arithmetically necessary that units be established. These units were all defined by ratios of invariant phenomena. The period of a pendulum was such a phenomenon, and Newton boldly used it as a metronome for his concept of absolute time, while acknowledging its absolute variability relativistically!

The period of a pendulum depends on 2 things: the pendulum length and the strength of the gravitational acceleration! Newton knew this and sought empirical data to confirm this variability. He sought data on how the length of a pendulum varied to beat one second. Where did this 1 second datum come from? How was it translated from place to place?
It took the development of accurate clocks to do this. This was well under way in Newtons time, but it required Huygens and Harris to really advance clocks into accurate time pieces, and the British navy to make these standard tools for navigation. These clocks were used to carry the standard second round the world, to measure pendulum length.

How was a standard second beat divorced from a pendulum swing! The use of gears and governors regulated the tick of a clock to isolate it from the full swing of a pendulum . This allows wiggle room and keeps clocks " accurate" or relatively invariant at least on the surface of the planet earth. Higher up in the atmosphere or at mountaintop altitudes the timepieces ran at different rates.

At sea level Newton was able to use the pendulum length to measure "gravitational" strength variation. In his opinion this meant the earth was an oblate spheroid! ( not a perfect sphere.)

Time thus has always been variable and relative. The insistence on absolute time was merely a religious faith principle to recognise his creators fundamental viewpoint. It also allowed hom to claim universality of his mathematical laws, especially gravity.

Actually the universality of his laws derives from the astronomical observations of Galileo with focus on the Jovian system. This became Newtons description of the quantitative measure of vis or force., the motive, accelerative and absolute vis. The Jovian system made the sun centred solar system believable. It also made a fractal the fundamental basis of universality! To make the point clear Galileo drew a diagram!

The Galilean principle goes hand in hand with this diagram. The motion of a central point with accelerative vis is imparted to  the surrounding bodies in the System of  motive vis( the summative measure) as an additional motion! It imparts this motion to every part of the system, and as such an observer in the system will not be aware of this additional motion if it is non accelerative.

This Galilean principle has the inevitable consequence of the Lorentz transformations! Using lineal algebra the lorentz transformations  fall out naturally using the Minkowski light cone Geometry. Norman has an introductory lecture on this .

The Galilean principle implies that bulk space properties remain constant within a medium that itself may be moving ! The medium itself moving means that a local reference frame within the medium that is fixed to the medium will not record any distinction in the physics between that medium at rest or in uniform motion.

The difference comes when an observer outside the medium, considered as isolated from that observers medium, a closed bubble within that medium, a glass carriage if you will , attempts to measure what is happening in the bubble. The Lorentz transformations describe how the measures are related.

So what is " time"?. It is a formal calculated ratio construct empirically based on space and motion. It is variable and relative , but then so is displacement measure . We cannot avoid this interplay between our measure, which is why Newton demanded on time as his first absolute!

To go beyond Tyme we need a new philosophy based on change in perception, but that is another story.

Norman has continued his introductory lectures on relativistic geometry and linear algebra, precisely as I engaged in further research into the Galilean fractals model of the universe expressing his principle of the same relative motions in relatively moving systems.( uniformly).

It strikes me now that the fractal and recursive nature of these ideas are inescapable except by ignoring them and concentration on a local frame! Thus our intuition is adequate for the frame and scale we choose to accept, but unfamiliar with the relativistic variations necessary to advance beyond that frame. In this regard relativity theiry is fundamentally crucial, even if shot through with many less empirical opinions!.

The relation to light, electro and particularly magneto dynamics is a fractal revelation. The computation schemes required to visualise the behaviours of forces and energies , masses and systems now exist in fractal generators. The consequence of this is that simpler rules can now be used to solve these system equations, because computers can do it more quickly making elegance and efficiency of secondary importance.

Of course mathematicians were afraid of this from the outset of computing algorithms, but they need not have feared. It requires the insight of mathematical and computational training to improve the efficiency and applicability of these algorithms.

Meanwhile the surface layering algorithms add some physical property extension possibilities only dreamed of by earlier mathematicians nd philosophers. We can now add " mass" to equations of relativistic frame transformations in the form of regional surfaces and colours.!

I have long realised that the surface plot aspect of the fractal generator was a topic I needed to understand, but now it seems I have the underpinning framework and analogies to do so in a way that is meaningful and exciting to me.

It is these surface plots which give " life" to the dry bones of the reference frame transformations, and connect directly to my sensory experience of dynamic spatial environments.

In addition, the quantum level is no longer a strange world, rather it is an uncendored world which as the information passes up my sensory mesh becomes filtered and srnsored into one unique view, one reality out of the many at the base of my sensory network.

I will explain that concept more as time goes on.

A number of YouTube links seem to have died. However I have tried to reveal the original link so that a search may be made by interested readers for the new link if any.

Watch and learn.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-2uvQ_MJz8

If you want to understand this video go to magnetic universe.com

http:/www./youtube.com/watch?v=rO4L5Tca574

The complex ,versor math is a version of lineal algebraic math. Norman Wildberger is making clear how that works and is connected to relativity , but not as taught by the Einstein scholars.

For those who revere Newton as I do, and yet perceive him as flawed, as I also do, attend to this :-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mgMv7fed1Q

And so to the great unravelling!
Newtons philosophy of quantity was developed on the basis of a principle of Galileo. It was Grimaldi who attempted on behalf of the pope to falsify many of Galileos ideas promulgated in the Dialogo. In the course of doing this he became interested in the behaviour of light as it passed a sharp edge. He called it Diffraction, the shaving of the light into light and dark rings or patterns. It was not classical refraction, which occurred on entering and leaving a transparent medium, it was a shaving of a light beam or ray by a sharp edge that bent and split the ray.

Galileo had made lenses so powerful he could see the moons of Jupiter. Was it possible that these were a mirage of diffraction? Grimaldi did not have time to advance these counter arguments to Galileo before dying. The work was published posthumously and read only by a very few. Newton certainly never read it, but Hooke did.

Newton read the principles of Galileo in the Dialogo and various developments of them. He formulated his own based on a wide reading of the best minds of his day. Further he elaborated on what he apprehended as key principles of Mechanics, empirically verifying them by a geometrical measure or metric system.

In the Dialogo Galileo sets out a fractal system of the universe. The universe consisted of a set of possibly 9 spheres! The idea was a fancy of Copetnicus, who provided no real evidence to overthrow the prevailing earth centric views handed down by Eudoud.. These were so called epicyclic universes in which a fractal structure was elaborated in a dependent way .  There was one system dependent on the earth with planets made to wander in eccentric motions by the ordinance of the earth!

Copernicus thought this was ridiculous, and that the sun ordained the motion of the planets, including the earth. Of course the Inquisition would have made it impossible for him to seriously entertain promoting this notion. However Galileo saw the Jovian system isolated and pure. With no other power governing the moons than tht of the " god" Jupiter!

Secondly he saw Venus showing phases nd growing larger and smaller, as does our moon . He deduced that the size change was due to Venus orbiting the sun , not the earth!

These and many other observation he published and in the Dislogo ventured a Galilean explanation which was a fractal structure of moons circling planets and planets circling the sun. In order for this to occur he suggest the principle that the planets impart their motion to their moons in such a way as to keep the fractal stable and eternal. It was these observations Grimaldi sought to overturn in his study of light.

It was Newton who elaborated this principle into the absolute time, Absolute vis quantitative system in which he clealy explains the notion of relativity and the nature of his absolutes.

His absolutes were designed to give autonomy to fractal regions of space and autonomy to a constructed concept of time. In fact it was to liberate time from the construction process which is why he proposed absolute time.

These absolutes belong to a metaphysics of absolutes, which no educated or cultured person would dream of denying! And yet they have no empirical basis. They are either platonically "real or shadows", the reader must decide.
However underneath these Newton constructed a triumvirate of vis which starting at any absolute vis or power like the god Jupiter, would account by quantitative measures for acceleration and motive as the sum of bodies in motion toward a centre. Thus his triumvirate was based on centripetal force, or power, acting acceleratively on and throughout an absolute region of space in such a way as to generate centripetal motion in plumes of matter or bodies in that space.

With this reasonable prologia he then connects weight to the concept of motive vis or power and establishes the balance or the spring balance as the device to quantify this motive vis.

What he had done was provide a bridge between the everyday commercial weights and measures and the Astrological demiurges of the heavens! The Jovian system was and is his model of an absolute vis system.

The distribution of this accelerative vis in space allowed him to derive the inverse square law by men's of a geometrical argument, and a plane geometrical one at that. And the whole system was then verified by serious key measurements and observations.

This quantitative approach relied on a vast network of reliable observaions( their reliability is still in use tigon today!) and the collaborative efforts of traders roaming the planet or the empires. His own measurement of comets and those gleaned from other sources were crucial tests of his systematic unit tatie structure, which was locally absolute but universally Fractal

It is sobering to think that in 1905 when Einstein put all Newtons ideas together in the theory of relativity the universe was thought to be as big as the Milky Way! Newtons system is ideal or local or absolute closed systems, but we now think the universe is infinite! We have no comprehension of how to model such open systems beyond the local Newyonian scheme, in a Galilean fractal Universe.
http://youtu.be/wOe8VTWIRaI

"Light scatters" is a useful but unfounded metaphor.  It belongs with other descriptive metaphors which are more or less useful. Light reflects is a metaphor of surface behaviours not light. Light refracts is a metaphor of internal medium behaviours not light.mbut light diffracts is a metaphor of material behaviours under shear, nd thus relates light directly to the class of shearable media.

It turns out that this too is a more complex phenomenon than wood shavings for example, and the only suitable metaphor is that of water waves in a harbour entrance or around a harbour wall.

Such concepts were familiar to most natural philosophers of Descartes Era, but not universally agreed as applicable or substantive. The problem is and was that these metaphors are qualitative. One is thus able to accept or reject them on aesthetic grounds entirely!

So is there no reality that we cn describe in a way that is universally accepted and aesthetically and logically undeniable?

Newton, by relying on the eternal verities of the forefathers , the ancient Greek influenced philosophers felt that like Plato and perhaps more in tune ith Aristotle, Mathmtics of the platonic philosophers was the key. He was therefore of the mind to establish all his reasoning and philosophy on these grounds. In so doing he concedes to the Archimedian principles of Mechanics and the Pythagorean principles of Astrology, and the feedback and feed forward loop that exists between these two areas of measurement and dynamics.

His philosophy of quantity owes much to his peers, and much to Hooke, but is uniquely his own opinion and creation inspired by these commonalities or sharing of ideas/ forms.

So light by the fathers was symbolised by a ray, a geometrical line segment, by which they could described directly observed behaviours of light reflected off mirrors or concentrated through burning glasses or the eye..

To these "geometrical" or rather mechanical scratches or drawn lines in the ground he added the ballistic motions of corpuscles in motion under powered propulsion. This complicated notion of light rays as streams of corpuscles, I believe was a Newtonian erroneous understanding of the concept of Diffraction which having heard of , but not read Grimaldis treatise on the subject, inspired him into a ballistic fancy drawing together his growing interest in the Atomic concepts of Alchrmists, the observed microscopic details of corpuscular forms in works like the Micrographia of Hooke, Loeuwenhooke etc.

It is clear , even at this stage that empirical observable and thus measurable phenomena were to him paramount in any systematic and general treatment. This was in contrast to his peers who took advantage of the freedom to Hypothesise, that is to conjecture or just guess!

What evidence was there of a wave metaphor for light? Hooke in fact was developing a careful argument to support this idea empirically based on the diffraction concept of Grimaldi. Huygens was hypothesising a kind of chain reaction propagation based on circles expanding not on light rays. However Newton published his ideas on a ballistic model, with the impressive prism demonstration! Without a doubt his presentation was apprehensible by the naked eye. Thus the small fringe effects of diffractio were easily ignored! His ballistic model was appealing to the eye and the mechanical frame of mind of his peers.  Hookes more careful consideration relied on microscopy.

Lenses and Microscopes were a specialist field, and expensive. Only a very few elite people had access to them in Europe! Thus the number of people able to contest Newton old be very small, and would require them to have a faith in lense that was unjustified! In fact Newton was so dissatisfied with the quality of lenses that he replaced themby mirrors in his optical telescope. This not only made astronomers very happy and converts to his optics but also highlighted the unreliability of lenses. Huygens thus, as a lens maker had to overcome many inherent prejudices to lenses before his ideas would be accepted.

Huygens propagation of light through a lens relied on the lens maintaining and concentrating the incident light. Thus his system required each part of the lens to become a light source. In addition he recognised the sphericity of light in all media over the concept of spreading rays. This was a much more novel concept and drew on his observation of Moire patterns involved with diffraction gratings.

While diffraction gratings came into their on much later under the Mathematicl Analysis of Fresnel, the grinding of a lens has always required the pattern of a diffraction grating to shape the lens surface. The light splitting effect of these gratings was for the most part ignored. These were just construction curves or lines. It is to Huygens credit that he incorporates them in his propagation conjecture, without , however, clearly identifying them . They ar the basis for his insistence on a wavefront being a source of multiple sources of spherical wavefronts.

As a diffraction grating model it is clearly Leo a highly Fractl model. Evn today researchers do not appreciate Huygens fractal insight into light propagation in a lens.

To say that light travels through a medium is an ancient and Newtonian conception, not really reconcile able ith a wave propagation. Light actually is in and of a medium and travels as a " wave" disturbance of that medium. In holding this position I must also extend the concpt of the bulk properties of a medium beyond the me hanically compression measures of a medium, which underpin the deformation concept of wave propagation.. Sound for example clearly vibrates a medium, but the compressive behaviours for certain frequencies are hardly measurable by bulk medium compression.

In addition, the largest amplitude of a sound propagation would be characterised by the compression value measured, but the speed of propagation or relaxation of the medium cannot be measured in this bulk way.

Thus I am drawn to investigate how the speed of sound is established in terms of the bulk properties of a medium, and consequently now the permeability and emissivity coefficients are established in the case of electro magnetic wave propagation. It would seem to be that these constants are established from the speed of sound and light, not the other way round.

Heaviside maxwell equations modified by magnetic monopole  or skymion created in 2009.

http://youtu.be/Ng-uZ_wD7Uc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ng-uZ_wD7Uc

The magnetic structure of light.

http://youtu.be/LP4Mu4eKq7w

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LP4Mu4eKq7w

While we say light is an electromagnetic radiation we have very little empirical cognisance of that, and our classical theoretical concepts are inadequate.

Here we see the empirical structure of radiation, and how the magnetic systems are structured in association with that radiation. We see how gravity is not understood at all, as. Newton clearly stated! The plasmas twist and curve tracing out the magnetic structures and then return back along these traced out structures. Some of the plasma simply stops glowing, while sone crosses from one force loop to another. There is no simpe universal gravitational force empirically. There is a complex structural system of forces including otational forces; and in fact the rotational forces are the fundmental building blocks for a unified system based on curvature.

The luminiferous Aether was a profound philosophical and linguistic error. How it arose I will not go into, but it did not arise amongs philosophers. It arose among engineers, and technicians hurrying toward fame and fortune in the late 19th century. Crookes radiometer may have had some small part to play, as did spectroscopy and the glowing of burning elements.

For a while Newtons corpuscles were real. They were material. However, suppressed Grimalfi, Huygens and Hookes empirical based theory of an undulation in the aether was gaining credence. Once it burst onto the scene there was much confusion and rgument about the validity of the supporting empirical data. The phenomenon was reduced to its crudest terms: wave or particle? , or rather wave or corpuscle.

The difference between a wave or a corpuscle is minor. Both are flexible formations of matter. Nobody asked the question what are corpuscles or particles made of?  They do now at the LHC after deciding that the thing they are studying is a wavicle! A quantum of energy, a packet of waves, all terms which confuse but allow exploitation of that confusion.

In the day a similar oxymoron was coined, the luminous aether!

What is light? The clear and obvious answer is a sensational experience mediated by the eye as an organ of sight! The question that Newton sought to investigate was how the eye was stimulated. It seems sensible that pressure from articles would be a good model. However the particles would need to be soft, hence the use of the biological TEM corpuscle. Newton convinced himself of the nature of sight sensation by poking his eye socket out!

How could a wave in the plenum produce the same results? What was the plenum, as Descartes termed it? It later gave way to the term Aether, because plenum was too wide a notion, it was thought. Surely this wave did not wave everything? Surely some things were solid and resisted, reflected or refracted this wave? At the time no one but Hooke and eventually Huygens knew about Grimali's if fraction propagation discovery. Today some still do not get diffraction, the splitting of a light beam along its path of travel .

Newton should have got it from his tidy of Harbour waves, but he refused to change his published opinion, which was well received and gave him a fellowship!

The question bothered Huygens too. Where did all the extra light come from? By this I mean as a light ray is split there should be gaps, which eventually there are but before the gaps become visible there is a spreading out of the beam. Where dies the extra light come from to spread the beam? And then why does it eventually separate? Huygens wave front theory was an attempt to answer that question and all wave behaviour as it spreads. It is still not understood today, at least Feynmann stumbled over its meaning.

Every point is a light source that emits not a ray but a circle( in the plane) of light! This was classically unheard of. Rays not circles were the obvious geometrical symbol. However what Huygens observed were the Moire patterns of overlapping circles. These Moire patterns give the "rays" of light by intersection or superposition as they now like to call it.

But what about the backward progression of the light circle? Huygens was not able to answer that, nor was Feynmann. In fact the backwards progression of most phenomena are ignored! The backwards progression is complex but not obscure. A light source has a greater intensity than any other light source responding to the interaction of its circular wave fronts. Consequently the backwards progression is much weaker and often swamped  (but not eliminated by destructive interference) by the forward progression. In addition reflection of the backward progression may occur, but if not it combines with the progression on the other side of the light source's circular emission. This of course is a fractal behaviour repeated almost self similarly at every point source so stimulated.

For Huygen the Moire pattern and the extra if dimmer sources accounted for the observed behaviours. But it took Laplace, Euler, and Fourier to set up a mathematical model that Fresnel could apply to the diffracted light experiments and thus eventually to all light.

What was being waved was the plenum or the aether. Young undertook detailed studies of the eye and the retina to conclude that certain sensors existed sensitive to this wave " excitation" or intensity variation. There was no evidence that soft blunt trauma was necessary!

So after Arago set in motion a definitive attempt to measure light speed, why I'd some want to ind if a luminiferous Aether existed? Frankly because they were not convinced light was a wave, and they felt that pace was empty! Considering that even up to 100 years ago astronomers thought the Milky way was the entire Universe, you can gain an insight into the level of understanding the brightest human minds had then!

A luminiferous Aether is sn oxymoron. Light is an experience not of a luminous aether vibrating amongst many other supposed , guessed and theorised aethers, Ethers and mediums conscious or otherwise. Light is the experience of the eye responding to an undulation in the progression of light itself. Just as a wave is a form on a body of water a light wave is a form on a body of light. Our eyes can decipher these variations in light itself to stimulate the wonders of what we see.

But what were these luminiferous aethers Crookes and others were demonstrating? These were and are the plasmas which far more than being the very essence of light are the primordial primitives of materiality! It is the variations in the undulations of these plasmas that give us our colour spectrum and beyond in either direction. Thus some plasmas with a very slow undulation pass through us as heat while others with a very very high frequency of undulation dismember the very structure of the proteins in our cells!

From the outset waves of the plenum necessarily must pass through some seemingly solid objects without any visible means of passage, because a wave of the plenum waves everything! However certain waves are particular to certain substances and elements, and this is what the whole subject of spectroscopy relies on. The ones in the visible range are aminiscule subset of such waves. It is because of these plasmas with these frequency fistributions that we have an experience of a material world through sight!

We take for granted our other sensors which are tuned to different frequencies and so give us a different experience of plasmas  vibrating in and around us.take air for example. Invisible and yet translucent to light modulations. Water vapour, absorbs an re emits at a microwave frequency light modulations. Thus we feel warm when water vapour is in the air and it is irradiated by light long enough to warm up.

The light from the sun is a plama emission. Not all the plasmas are good for us. The plasma dynamic of a magnetic plasma structure diffracts these plasmas around the planet and filters out much that is harmful.or reflects and scatters it to a more tolerable intensity.

These plasmas are dynamic and flow to as well as away. As they flow away colder plasmas flow in and cooling occurs .

The flow of Plasmas in space above the atmosphere is so extreme we could not survive without some plasma modifying suit or situation.

Light is the sensory or sensor reaction to a narrow range of frequency deformations in a dynamically stable equilibrium of rotating plasmas. Perception of light is a conscious experience of the reaction of the eye or retinal sensors mediated by the neural computational mesh within the human organism, or animate organism.

While these may seem adequate expository statements , they are not the " truth" in my opinion. They serve as part of a much broader dialectical process that I am engaged in with other interested parties who may provide a contradictory exposition. By this means we may " scientifically" progress to a better resolution as an expository model. For example I have not expressly described any nonphyical or rather immaterial interaction.

A Hegelian dialectical stage!

http://youtu.be/BFvJOZ51tmc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFvJOZ51tmc

What is the resolution?  
The Hegelian dialectical process enables us to journey toward one.
Is Einsteins speed limit universal? Surely by his own assumptions it is a local constant. In addition his 2 postulates imply that faster than local light speed is necessary in absolute systems within a common third system and is resolveable by the Doppler shift, providing that light has a limit in the third system. Thus Doppler shift is evidence of light sources travelling fast enough to impact the speed of their light, but the bulk properties of the intervening space only permits the resultant to propagate at light speed.

No observer of light can determine this, but the reason can establish this by the above model of absolutes. But that same reason thus knows that light speed is not a universal limit, but a local bulk property limit used to explain observed Doppler shift which implies faster than light speed within the boundary of the absolute system if measured by the system outside the absolute system . Our measurements have to be factored down to maintain the bulk property of space. This is precisely the Lorentz transformations, and the mathematical factor that accords with the Doppler shift.

Therefore the limitation is ours. We can observe with our visual sensors only frequencies consistent with the speed of light, but we can conceive of unlimited speeds. So called quantum entanglement and Bells inequalities demonstrate that there are things we can conceive beyond our ability to measure, but whose effects nevertheless are observable.

All is lost therefore for any model that claims absolute deterministic certainty . We are free to go on exploring empirically and conceiving improbable things, if we wish. Both myth and fact are products of the human mind/ Geist.

Open your eyes and see . Waves are not what you think !

http://youtu.be/Nsl_ZuivgDo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nsl_ZuivgDo

The spatial modulation of light is a gross scale modulation of the subtle trochoidal modulations that occur by frequency in all signal transmissions in and through space. The magneto Thermo sono electro complex deforms space trochoidally with extraordinary effects that we detect in a range of sensors.

Subuantum kinetics. LaViolette explains the Townson Brown research project and its effect on Blackwotks op.

http://youtu.be/ifEgGMFK-VU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifEgGMFK-VU

And finally the fractal study of light culminates in the following, which is adduced despite all erroneous metaphor or attempt at mind control

http://youtu.be/4gHhAA-9o_8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gHhAA-9o_8

Note how light spectra a wrapped around a centre to come up with a model of a hydrogen atom.

The problem is :,the spectral lines are frequency bands not wavelength bands.  Diffraction , when I was taught it was explained using the sine "wave". The sine curve has no wavelength, it only has a frequency.. So what was done, is done is a fictitious wavelength is created to model a frequency. We are then told that an interference occurs in space at a given angle of interaction. This is obtained by allowing the wave length to " slide" past each other, this is assuming light travels in a ray like manner . So we substitute a sinewave for a straight line and we " see" superposition.

Well this is nonsense. The disturbance we call a wave emits at least spherically. The interaction does not depend on the wavelength but the frequency. The spatial position of constructive and destructive nodes depends on frequency . If we use Sclieren optics we se the pressure front pass as a shock wave but we do not see the frequency patterns that follow behind. We see " turbulence".

Wavelength has become ingrained, because we look at the sea and supposedly see waves? Look more closely. What we see are rolling cylinders with a rhomboidal cone like shape. We see turbulence. The spreading out of ripples are toroidal cylinders rolling . The frequency of their rolling it what we observe, along with the amplitude of their disturbance, how much power they are rolling away.

Diffraction thus demonstrates how these frequencies peel off into filaments when translucent and transparent material snag the rolling frequency bound disturbances.

Our energy level model is helpful, but it tells us little about any quantum structure so called if it is believed to be spread around an infinitesimal sphere.
http://youtu.be/KnwIpcyJJiM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnwIpcyJJiM

Norman Wildbergers universal Hyperbolic geometry is a wonderful course for those interested in differing geometrical relations and thought patterns, but is it useful for anything else?

Well yes it is useful for grounding Minkowskis version of Special relativity. However that is way too out there for most engineers.

However Steinmetz a mathematician realised he could use it to describe and understand generators and motors and transmission lines. When he came to America and joined GEC he was a small guy in the big machine, but he soon became a small guy with a giant switch! He literally resolved many transmission line problems GEC was having setting up their power grid. He became fundamental to GEC success

Here is how

http://youtu.be/GObB67ETvRQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GObB67ETvRQ

The formula

Z = E.( exp(øi) - exp(-§j))  + A.C

Will be a general electromagnetic fractal pattern where C can be a second transmission line  to the Z transmission line.

The variation in ø and § are time or phase variations.

The more complex magneto Thermo sono electro complex require fast Fourier transforms to represent and describe and the fractal patterns for 2 or 3 dimensional Fourier transforms can now be done giving a fractal of our  magnetics in space and time cycles or frequencies!"

Magneto thermo sono electro fractal

Steinmetz lectures in which I hope to find some spacetime manifold Candidates, in other words a reference frame that stands in place of an aether concept P

Transients (http://magneticuniverse.com/uploads/FileUpload/a2/f9a17b3318e59babbfe2122c7ae16c.pdf)


calculation of Transients (http://magneticuniverse.com/uploads/FileUpload/ef/dec9ee34bce2a413dea22c53c0e2b9.pdf)

Standing Wave models

The facts and myths of mankind are alike human creations.

We simply need both to maintain a sane and sagacious presence in our universes. The miracle is that we can share experiences with fellow animates and inanimate materials in an undefinable fractal interaction, so that now " even the rocks cry out to us!"

A universal or monistic view must of necessity encompass contradictions. It is the dialectical resolution of such contradictions that represents shamanistic sagacity, true wisdom.

Whatever ritual, whatever prayer whatever curse or blessing has it roots in our
Logos Analogos Sumbola Sunthemta Summetria response to the space in and of which we are.

http://youtu.be/gRGzJg5A3m8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRGzJg5A3m8

This epistemological lecture is clear. We know nothing for sure! What you believe is a matter of faith and in many cases tribal bigotry.

http://youtu.be/oU4DtaE11TU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oU4DtaE11TU

And so to light.
The magneto Thermo sono electro complex becomes light when the magnetic "'current" that is induced mases.

The crossover between ed Leedskalnins explanation of electricity, Tesla's conductive conception  of the
 Aether and Heavisides Mevhanical medium based on Maxwells conception is the Townes Maser, of which an inductive  furnace is but one example.

http://youtu.be/0HdbKKvOiWU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HdbKKvOiWU

This video has a wide applicability, especially to fluid mechanics, but I place it here initially to provoke insight.

I recently watched a bio video on Einstein contextualised, re-expressing how his ideas became singled out .

He meditated on light. Newton meditated on light, Volta and Ampère meditated on "electro dynamic" behaviours in materials of all sorts. The empirical observations are related.
http://youtu.be/ZMsaH6SY4CY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMsaH6SY4CY

One of the puzzles I have pondered over for a while, especially since I really tried to understnd what a wave deformation is , and especially as a Fourier transform , was reflection.

The natural occurrence of reflection in all physical systems of deformation is easy to overlook when you are attempting to understnd the sine wave model of a wave. In fact wave deformation propagation as a function of the phase angle time dependent change is a bit tricky to grasp algebraically, even if very clear visually.

As a "physicist" looking only at time dependent deformation progression the concept of a reflection occuring at a specific position was hard to generalise. The system itself appeared to require complex programming including damping, all of which would be time dependent.

In a Fractal generator context that would require animating .

However for a standing wave ( including phase shifts) that complication would be less, and probably more interesting fractally. What would be the equation for that?

I have played around with the exponential function getting results I did not understand but structurally interesting.

But now work I am doing on Grassmanns methods reveals the fundmental rotating " motor" that drives wave and other cycliclly or periodic models. It is the cyclus group.. The cyclic interchange group is used to drive all rotations, but as a Permutation group it actually contains the rotation and anti rotatio( or reflection) occurring at the same time and generating a standing wave.

Visually it looks like the wave. Advances one way then flips the other way( if you set the sequence out in a tree format)

This means that Steinmetz had identiified the standing wave formula for the generated wave cycles.

Working with the Steinmetz formula therefore gives insight into how the magnetic current, the deformation of the magnetic dynamic around a wire wave guide may look and behave like.

This has implications for fluid  dynamics in terms of radially excited pressure waves in interactions.

Colour theory

http://youtu.be/LpqwdIoWgw0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpqwdIoWgw0

The best materialists that I low are chemists . Surely then they should be " the Kings of Science"?

And yet, by Plato the Astrologer has been lofted into that position, and the Physicst close behind! Newton it is now known excelled in Philosophy of the classics and went on to develop Astrological principles   Mechanical philosophies seized upon by the physicists who later followed and Alchemical experiments of penetrating inquiry. And yet this latter was hid from us by his students and those who would utilise his genius in Astrology, in great Brutain.

On the world stage he was as important an Alchemist as he was an Astrologer, and a champion of the new in his day subject of Mathematics, lately bought by Isaac Barrow the Geometer from Europe and Arabia by perilous travels!

A corpuscle is an Alchemical term, that lies at the join of biology and chemistry as it was in his time . While Leibniz designed his Mrchanics on hard billiard balls, later migrating to elastic ones, Newyon always considered the biological corpuscle seen in blood by microscopes and glorified by Hooke in his Micrografia, as the living embodiment of the powers and forces of his universe. His light, though ballistic , was corpuscular, divided into pieces by God's ordinance, but kind upon the eye so as to transmit colour and light by angle and by impact on the retina. He resisted the deforming of the plenum as unobserved guesswork.

Today we accept that hypothesis because we have bern taught to do so , but physicists still want to retain the corpuscle in the form of a photon. They still want a physically observable " presence" in light.

The wave in the Plenum, an idea by DesCartes, extensively researched by Grimaldi, and modified by Huygens, finally championed by Hooke, only took hold when Young, Fresnel and Arago could demonstrate a suitably rich mathematical model with counter intuitive predictive power. But even today physicists still prefer the photon. It is a material particulate body we can apprehend.

The mystery is really not a mystery at all, for we see wave deformations everywhere around and in us, but we do not want to grasp so insubstantial a thing as a deformation in the plenum! And yet it is not a hypothesis, but a plainly observable phenomenon, or class of phenomena. Helmholtz and Kelvin were surprised to witness the palpable nature of such waves, called vortices . They initiated a wave of theoretical investigations and hypothesising into the extent of this phenomenon, but they could hardly describe it, let alone demonstrate it by reason or it's mathematical bodyguard a mathematical" proof".

Maxwell laboured hard, using Navier and Stokes fluid dynamic differential models to account for electro magnetism, but none of his contemporaries could grasp his strain transmission concept. They wanted a corpuscular vortex!

The Mathematics of the Maxwellians slowly unpicked Maxwells concepts, but did little to advance our understanding of the natural phenomena better described by empirical observations.

Today we like to mislead by covering the hard work of empirical inventors and Mechanics and engineers, by an ill fitting academic fig leaf. What we have and what we know has arrived by the expertise of those materialists who got their hands dirty, but were not eloquent in explaining what they were doing or believed .

The story belongs to the eloquent, the articulate, the myth and fact makers, but the actual doing is due to the empirical artistry of those who interact with materiality, whose expertise is developed by risk taking and quick wit, luck and intuition born of being in the mix.
http://youtu.be/WSYEApgJkh0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSYEApgJkh0

The magneto thermo sono electro complex entities.  Light as it will eventually be!
http://youtu.be/qLk46BZfEMs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLk46BZfEMs

Anouncement:
At year 2017 , Romania will launching the biggest laser from the world, at the University square Magurele at Bucharest's outskirts.
The future institute of research will contain a laboratory, a headquarter , and a big basement with 8 floors with research's logistics with bunker lab.
This institute will have researcher hired, and good scientific team, and the american colaboration, and devices of last generation, and will be a big realisation of the european research. This institute will powered by the Institute of Atomical Physics from Magurele and the Institute Polytechnique Bucharest

The institute is yet under construction, at project phase.
Here is drafts on NEMETSCHEK for the future research institute

Thanks hgfj2.

The problem is not new lasers, but new old thinking!
One hopes that those who run such powerful facilities will understand how tenuous their positions are! The illuminati, big business,bankers,the military Industrial complex, will all want their goals and agendas met. What we as natural philosophers may want to know may never be released to the public!

And yet it is plain to see, and we do not need huge facilities to demonstrate it. What is needed is worthwhile jobs and opportunities to survive and grow a family in a ever changing climate that is ruled by the magneto Thermo sono electro complex entities in upper space.

How to survive humanity in relation to any number of perceived threats and corrupt practices is worthwhile research. If this facility contributes even the smallest insight into the solutions to that problem it will be a worthwhile investment and an honourable labour.

Anyhow finally my country will have a big physics research center. The strongest laser will be good at medicine, at light and cutting with high precision, but and at military technology as defensing our planet against asteroids, and at measurings and topography in outer space.

I pray your country fulfills your hope and altruism, and your hope is not disappointed. :D. May they make you proud.

It has been a while.
My philosophical inquiry continues but specific to the Grassmanns, masters even of Sir William Rowan Hamilton!

The question arose about the Nature of light to which Descartes responded: it was a disturbance in the plenum! Descartes slo explained planetary rotation as vortex action in the plenum. These were the consequences of pure reason, and thus considered as logical answers. However who was to say this was right? Who was to say what this meant in terms of Phusis of the general plenum? Indeed who was to say what the plenum might be or how it might be?

In the absence of any other authority religious doctors gave their " inspired" opinion, but these opinions were mere words, theory in its base meaning of "god revealed discourses", and hardly challengeable by the faithful!!

So the Reason brought about by observation and based on accurate concordance with observable behaviours was dismissed as worldly . And yet pragmatic men navigated the wide world by such procedures while the faithful relied on their expertise to transport them to distant lands for missionary work!

It is no wonder that Newton desired new principles for Astrologers, based on pragmatic mechanical philosophy not flights of fantasy or fancy.

So from Galileo and others the alternative method of natural Philoophy began to take shape.: the scientific method. Despite Newtons groundbreaking principles Hypothesis came to be included in that method.

The positing of a corpuscular basis to light indicates a pragmatic alchemists approach to materiality . This notion of corpuscle is based on observation of cells within blood by microscopy. The mechanical view of billiard balls or atoms was derived from the greek atomists . The notion of a wave in the plenum was derived by observations of water waves, principally by Huygen's and Grimaldi's ideas, but supporting Descartes "hypothetical"  approach.

The observation of a wave as a rolling cylinder of water had to wait until Lord Rayleigh, so from Newton to De Brogelie the idea of an undulation, a swing  took precedence . In point of fact Newton experimentally explored sound waves in terms of air pressur/ water vapour density, but sea waves or harbour waves he described by variations in radial" vector" densities. It was The French, principally LaGrange who linked waves and tides to sinusoidal height displacement.

Hermann Grassmann demonstrated that a geometrical model of greater generality but more symmetry is always possible, and that involved Rotation . However only Bill Clifford seriously saw the potential in Grassmanns method. On the other hand Hamiltons students were pioneering his Quaternion method into new area of rotating twisting models . Because of the Irish mathematical tradition not only did the knot become a topic of interest , but also a theoretical description of particles moving through the plenum!

However it took Helmholtz, Hertz and Kelvin and Heaviside to use quaternion derived concepts to redact the Maxwellian fluid mechanical description of electro magnetism. Clifford died too young to make the biquaternion description of undulation of any real significance , but his championing of Hermann Grassmanns ideas has lead to a major revision of theoretical model making for natural philosophers.


So  what is a corpuscle ! To the alchemists they were deformable even transformable lumps of matter. They were undefined but observable. Billiard balls as models of corpuscles went through several transformations theoretically as far as the Mechanical philosophers were concerned.Leibniz in particular considered versions in which elasticity was stretched to its limit! Later fluid mechanics added the material point concept in which the ' cube" was subject to all forms of deformation including rotational shear stress .

And yet a natural form called a vortex was observable in fluids which presented all the properties of corpuscles and more. In addition the observation of a wave as a rolling cylinder of fluid was yet to be added into the descriptive toolbox .

The quaternion rotation is a cone of rotation . The natural wave is not a cylinder but an elongated cone or ellipsoidal form. These geometrical forms are ideals of the natural vortex forms found in the more complex physical behaviours. These forms in particular obscure thr surface dynamics of the natural formed vortices. Observations of these surface dynamics are often discounted! Thus finer research into materal behaviours often finds substantive differences due to boundary conditions /actions on these ideal forms.

The concept of a corpuscle was superseded by the vortex concept long ago. But the ability of theorists to describe this behaviour has taken centuries to develop. The crucial change was the study area called Topology. Thr concepts of topology allow a more fundamental revision of the combinatorial basis of Astrology. The concepts of topology are not new. The naive descriptions of the Pythagorean mosaic constructions are good motivational discourses on topological ideas. The Ganitas describing altar construction and positioning are fundamental topological ideals.

To this we must add Benoit Mandelbrots discourses on fractal topology . He drew together what other researchers were demonstrating on the fringes: inductive repetition is key to any model of natural behaviours! We need a dynamic topology that deals with Fractals, that is with odd collections of misshaped pieces of space.

With that in place our models can describe natural forms by inductive topological forms of different scales combined together. Further we can describe dynamical forms by this approach.
Computational technologies and displays have now made this possible to visualise directly and dynamically .

A corpuscle and a wave are no longer mutually exclusive But on fact are regional observations of an underlying phenomenon : rotation in space of space of a roulette or trochoidal nature when described mathematically..

We may consider this inductively as a fractal topological structure and this may well be an adequate model to which one might attach the term Aether/Ether.

Light has always driven our conception of matter! Currently the concept of a field undeins our terminology , but this concept is not well defined . The concept of spheres of influence originally posited by Faraday is more specific due to it being a sphere! But the spherical structure of domains of influence is quite classical . Such structures are seen on mechanical astrolabes .

The introduction of terms like geodesic obscure the classical, even Euclidean decomposition of the sphere topologically into surface structures like hexagons and pentagons and squares. We know Kepler tried to describe the solar system or geocentric proportions in terms of the platonic solids.

So what a fied is has changed over time . Space-time is a geometrical sescription of a dynamic space where the model of Dynamics can be given a characteristic topology! so instead of a field being a platonic solid the "picture" looked for will be a spacetime diagram! Innuchna diagram curvature represents force . Thus gravity, electromagnetism both have a singularity " cone" shape whose curvature describes the relative strengths of these forces. Thus now force fields are distributed on space time manifolds and the shapes typically are presented as cones, and sheets undulating !

So now gravitational waves are said to undulate space time. But these waves are Shown dynamically, that is spacetime is itself changing in time! This then is in fact spacetime-time.

Space-time itself displays a  vortex as a curvature that persists . Thus space-time manifolds should display dynamic aethers as curvaceous ! The typical gravitational cone is a picture of a simple vortex. Gravitational waves must therefore be a stream of vortices . In fact the spacetime picture of a radio wave is a curvaceous form. It is " static" but essentially the same as the Dynamic gravitational waves ,but the curvature is so much more intense!

One of the many techniques Newton used to construct a combinatorial topology for quantification was uniformity. This dramatic simplification hides scale variation initially, but of corse Newton was well aware of inductive iteration!

Thus uniformity does not exclude the patent fractal structure of the vorticular space-time manifold, or aether model . It means that all measurement are in fact relative , as Newton explained . The doctrine of absolute space and time are as much simplifications as uniformity in measuring systems.
Buried within a measuring system is an endless fractal . We call them scales .

The most important contribution Newton made is the principle of rotation measure for a unit diameter sphere! These scales are clearly fractal , but we call them non uniform or even trigonometric!
The complexity they introduce was only really explained by Hermann Grassmann. Sir Robert Cotes may have presented on this topic had he lived long enough  nevertheless these are highly technical measurement issues not reality as is. Arrabahyatt measured the period of Jupiter using a flat earth centred measuring tool, others measured it using an oblate spheroid . The tool or technique used gives approximately the same counted result.
Neither relies on a vorticular aether as a fundamental combinatorial structure! In fact when Newton attempted to model this structure he ran into measurement and observation difficulties. The more complex computation was beyond him, but not modern computational tools using fractal software!

The advantage of this structure is on the extremely large scale and on the nano scale . On the pragmatic scale we use other less complex assessments of measure counting and ratio x

When Newton moved into investigating fluid dynamics he promised fluids as resistive media.
Thus fluids( liquids and gases) were characterised by their resistive effect on solid definite bodies . He coined the notion of Lubricity ( or rather defined it by a differential expression) . As you can guess it was avrathernslippery notion! Today we turn the notion tomitsbinverse and use the idea of viscosity, that is how sticky or resistive to translationl shearing or rotational shearing a material form is.
You will note that this is Newtons expressed idea of resistance and it is assigned to the medium . The idea of lubricity was assigned to the progress of the solid object passing through the medium, a crucial change in thought patterning!

Newton experimented with rotational lubricity by spinning a bucket by a twist in a ope, and further by pulling that spinning bucket inna circular( rather elliptical) trajectory around his body .  However he also did experiments where he spun a long cylinder in a pool of liquid to determin how the liquid responded.

In all cases he noted a differential velocity normal to the moving solid . For. Liquid it is particularly observable in the spinning bucket that liquids tended to climb up the bucket wall when spun indicating a radial or centrifugal force was generated.

Most fluid Dynmics courses start with the differential force equation ascribed to Newtonin fluids( incompressible! That the shear force is proportional to the differential velocity profile.
Thus in an orthogonal reference plane
f_x=constant*dv/dy
This isvn expression, but it is often called a differential equation. Asbnnequation it makes little sense . It makes so little sense that no one bothers to explain it! It cannot be explained physically as an equation because clearly the measures are Not physically EQUAL.
It is a proportional Expressiom, like most differential "equations" derived from physical phenomena are.
If like me you were trained in lassical mathemantics you were introduced to proportions as. Kind of fractional process, and you may have wondered why the different approach to numbers. .i have dealt with the long answer to that question in the fractal foundation thread, but the hort newer is that fractions came out of performing proportions , and performing proportions is what we fundamentally hav to do to interact with our material world. More often than not a proportion captures an analogous link between non homogenous phenomena and it is this link that  has.a detetminsble( sometimes irrational) quantity.

The shear force proportion holds within certain boundary conditions , and Newton then used his differential calculus approach to sum these differential proportions for the rotational hear round a cylinder. However this was not a Mathematical manipulation, but an experimental one. He measured the  velocity of the fluid assumed to move circularly in bands  whose lubricity was such that the circular bands slipped past each other with reducing effect . The assymptotic inverse power laws thus found and plotted are very striking and iewable in the latter part of the second book in the Prinipals for Astrologers .

So whatever the mathematical proportion was for a liquid in shear, when applied to circular or orbital motion the sum of these differential proportions was proportional to an inverse power law.

Using these experimental results Newtonntried to fit the observed orbital behaviours of planets to this mathematical fluid dynmic model. The results were disappointing. In fact his point mass model could be made to produce highly accurate and reliable results! So Newton  said to following generations of Astrologers "Go Figure!"

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=x1SgmFa0r04

So D'Alembert,LaGrange, Bernoulli's,Euler all worked on the problem of using the differential proportion expressions to capture fluid dynamics, with some noteable contributions. However a paradox arose between the mathematical proportion model and the experimental results. D'Alembert showed that the models could not resolve the flow around a cylinder! That is the mathematical models were missing an essential factor. And yet the models were rigorously checked and no mistake was found in design!

So Navier and Stokes separately developed careful experimental data to check the differential proportion expressions and to complexity them not to leave anything out . In the meantime Helmholtz was applying the Lagrangian analytical method to some noteable fluid structures namely vortices and getting good results. So much so that Lord Kelvin teamed up with him to further advance the implications of their results. Both hoped that vortices would provide the answer to the Knotty mathematical problem of describing molecules .
Also at this time Maxwell was intrigued by the vorticular nature of many phenomena in space and the results of Navier and Stoked( not a great deal mathematically but experimental results were abundant) and Helmholtz , and the experimental results of Faraday.
What he hoped was a fluid dynamic breakthrough would link magnetism and electricism together and explain how strain could be passed through seemingly empty space! .
He had contributed to Boltzmann and Gauss statistical approach to gas behaviours by developing the root mean square path distance between interactions of presumably solid or elastic corpuscles . This was vital to Kelvins Kinetic theory of Gases and contributed in no small way to its adoption into the scientific mythic records!  But it was inadequate to explain magnetic snd Electra magnetic behaviours.
Maxwell's plenum was filled with vortices . However he could not grasp the tru nature of fluids because he was brought up in the mechanical gears and pulleys era. His model of a fluid had to be based on gear structures! Therefore in his plenum each vortex had to be surrounded by counter rotating bearings or idler wheels . He could not rid himself of the many difficulties that model produced.
Surely a liquid could not go in two directions at once? What about the frictional. Inertial and body forces!

He learned to bury these difficulties in the constants of any proportion, and is often cited as discovering thatb2 of these constants are linked by the speed of light . In fact this is a facile observation .

The bulk properties of a material determine the wave/ deformation speed within that material . For the assumed wave nature of light and associated magnetic behaviours the speed of light in a material is the only bulk property that characterises the material , especially true when determining a material spectroscopic ally by its wavelength/ frequency spectrum'

The main point here is that from Newton onwards the behaviour of fluids has not been sufficiently described in terms of fluid characteristics: namely pressure per unit volume, unit area unit arc or line segment . Nor has this lineal approach been usefully characterised in data. That is until now and the implementation of satellite technology and lineal algebra.

The fluid paradigm means that solids no longer predominate but rather viscous material " points" or rather. Elements .
Using these viscous finite elements and a lineal algebraic approach computational models of fluids have now been made in which the fractal structure of the computation plays a key role( iteration of smaller and smaller scales of measurements) and the lineal displacements or arc segment displacements are recognised .

Thus a fluid element can translate or rotate or shear against a neighbouring fluid element without the need for lubricated intermedaries or idler wheels, and a fluid surface can move in several  "directions" or modes at once!
Claes Johnson has taken this method and run with it. He has resolved D'Alemberts paradox and corrected Helmholtz and Kelvins Vortex Kinematics assumptions and eliminated Maxwells reliance on mechanical gear analogies.
Of course the finite element method relies on fractal computations something even Newton could not devote time to! Both Wallis and Newton and many noteable astrologers were phenomenal calculators of proportions often doing them in their sleep or meditation time. What they could see as they calculated and what they could express in words were often beyond the ken of men like Bishop Berkely or other critics of Leibnitz differential Geometry or Newtons Fluxions .

Today computers do the work even for the most phenomenal human calculators, and because of that our mathematical models can deal with the complexity and give us proportional results.

At a more mathematical level this discussion bears on light through Hamiltons differential expressions governing light and pencil rays.

The solutions to these differential proportions explained many observed phenomena and corrected some false assumptions. Hamilton was justifiably viewed as a "Newyon" of his times. He hoped thatbWuaternions would help the physicists better handle the immense calculations involved in a more structured way, and indeed Maxwell was the main proponent of Quaternion algebra in Electromagnetic theory.

We might now simply understand that Grassmanns lineal Algrbra generalises Hamiltons applications and really enabled us to describe fluid behaviour by rotational forms. The importance of this is that rotation indeed can have points that move in many directions at once ! At it simplest we call this wave form interference bith constructive and destructive , but fundamentally it is rotational frequency suppe positioning .

Thus superposition in Quantum Mrchanics is really about how rotations super pose on each other by frequency and phase differences. This really gives a material point a rotational potential to move in many " directions" or modes . In fluids we tended to call this chaotic or turbulent behaviour . Now we see it as complex behaviour . It is trochoidal in nature and Fourier in description by a mathematical analyss. It can be modelled by a finite element mesh and we can display data of actual behaviours as recorded in this way.

What we cannot do is forecast the future! Rather we can identify the rotational patterns and statistically analyse the cyclical behaviours to develop some confidence that we understand any periodic behaviours , but thats it! A random superposition will always be possible and unpredictable, but we can live in the moment with greater knowledge that what is cyclical is better u nderstood and identified .

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nEncoHs6ads
The Second "Law" of Thermodynamics has quietly been changed! The reason is because non linear chemical  dynamic reactions exist! It will need to be changed again when it is fully realised that Thermodynamics is a stage within a much broader Magneto Sono Thermo Electro dynamic. This complex of observable behaviours is completely depictable in terms of trochoidal dynamic surfaces , Grassmann Twistors being one way of formally measuring them.

I don't think they actually changed The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics over this.  So "changing it again" is possibly deceptive wording.

In fact, I have "Faith" that Thermodynamics will emerge from this challenge unimpeded.  Just like every other challenge it has faced.

They used to say that Life is a violation of The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics because it is so complex and for things to go from simple and unorganized molecules to self replicating DNA  is not moving Entropy in the correct direction.  This was even used as "proof" of the "divine" nature of all life.

However, it has since been discovered that organic life forms are far better at dissipating heat than anything inorganic!  Therefore life is not only in complete agreement with The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics - one can go so far as to say that wherever conditions permit it, The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics Demands that Life will arise!

As for the "divine" nature of all life, well  ...  This makes it clear that there is indeed a "Meaning" and "Purpose" to existence!

The Meaning of Life is to dissipate heat   :surf:

With a track record like that, I personally have no doubt that these oscillating reactions will be proven to conform with The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics after the right people put their attentions to the matter.

The power of an explanatory principle is its morphability in the hands of the right people! The application of it to seemingly novel situations is due to the bad habits that grow up around the interpretation of the word sequence expressing the principle.
I am sure the 2nd law will survive, but what is changing as it must is the universal application of it.
Non lineal chemistry is really a focus on th complexity of reactions in situ as opposed to viewing reactions through the chemical notation.
We can "see" more with modern recording technology and as we record reactions in progress we learn that our assumptions are inaccurate and the settled reaction products are in a more complex arrangment than we allow.
The idea that the universe wii run down due to this law is what I am confident will never be proven!
At the same time this research shows we can expect unexpected order to appear out of chaos, within. General background of chaos and heat equilibrium .

So I return to Nasdim Haramein after many years ( since 2005) when I first found his work, communicated with him over my insights , critiqued his papers on spin and the Schwarzchild proton , and prophesied his success.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tbE5bVl8r2g
Here spacetime is described as quantised in Nasdim's presentation.
The essential concept of quantum is boundarisation. The simplest boundarisation concept is rotation . It is the conception of trochoidal rotation that unifies the complexity of our perception of Spaciometry .

http://magneticuniverse.com/discussion/129/a-sound-magnetic-base/p31
Here I give the magnetic equation format for gravitational centripetal or centrifugal firce in a rotating / orbital system of matter in which trochoidal forces are I herent.
That is magnetic behaviour is fundamental to gravity .

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OepN2usmocw
Bio photonics , materials produce light materials are light absorbers( destructive interference) and emitters ( constructive interference)

http://youtu.be/HbijQzkJFAo
Some thoughts on light

Really enjoyed those last thoughts on light (Fundamental SECRET OF LIGHT), thanks for sharing!

But that previous one ( The Anatomy and Physiology of the Human Biofield ) ...
" ... only when we pour it into a glass, does it take the life-force to make it water.  So it's inexcusable to drink out of a bottle. Our water is sacred. We need to make it in our home"
What a bullshit. Then it goes on to become even worse. This talk is semi-science, metaphysics, fiction presented as fact, or just plainly said non-sense.

Both videos have in common that they reject some common sense on various subjects, light being one of those. In this perspective a little bit of Einstein bashing is understandable, as he's the most public known physician of about all times. Saying that light does not travel, and thus has no speed is a bit cheeky. This is no secret whatsoever. Speed of light is otherwise know as maximum speed of effect (or flow of information):

"Within the theory of special relativity, the constant c is not exclusively about light; instead it is the highest possible speed for any interaction in nature"
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_gravity

Xxx everybody has a go at Einstein, because he was set up as an Aunt Sally to obscure what was really going on during the Cold war! Few no how little he had to do with the atomic bomb or even with the famous equation ascribed to him. His genius was fabricated. Hardly anyone conceives of Bohr in this way, yet Bohr was his equal in the attempt to rescue a failing and stultifying Physics that was and still is in ciss!

The constant c is a ratio ofbtwonotherbratios that numerically calculate close to a measured phenomenon of constructive and destructive interference in diffracted light.  The so called electric permittivity and magnetic permeability are constants of adjustment for proportions measured in material transmitting , propagating or transducing light which also must permit electric and magnetic signals to pass!

Few understand how these ratios are measured and what they entail. They are bulk properties for the specific material with the vacuum being assigned the perfect value 1. Basically that assignment means the vacuum is a perfect metal t crystal which can maintain perfectly transverse waves, the " preferred" depiction of light as a wave.
BothnRauleigh and the proposer of pilot wave theory were concerned about this! Young himself debated withbFresnel about this version of wave theory, free of oppression phenomena.

The "wave" is a misdirected concept. We have to think in terms of rotation in 3d space, and therefore in terms of dynamic trochoidal motions of surfaces. The polarisation of these motions plays a crucial role in the types of measurements that can be taken or expected.


The fluid nature of the aether is not properly accounted for in these types of modelling, and the Reynolds number is not figured in or discounted, as a " vacuum" is assumed to be " not fluid" .

The Reynolds number allows us to formally scale to a measurement scheme where the behaviour of a fluid can be stated as that of a perfect solid , but then the transverse and longitudinal aspects of a perturbation have to be included, along with all rotational perturbations.

The constant c then becomes only the strain energy constant for compression and rarefaction in mediums that support vorticular behaviours, as Maxwell envisaged, but Einstein did not!

No measurement of the rate of transmission of rotation was envisaged or looked for.

The Electric Universe proponents attempt to put forward a longitudinal propagation that is millions of times " faster" than transverse wave " speed" . But the speed of effect or of shock fronts has yet to be quantified in rarefied mediums! or Aethers but we can film them in translucent material and they are akin to sound speeds . For fluids they must be orders of magnitude more , and there is no reason to state that there is a limit to them, other than the limit imposed by the speed at which we can record!
For our eyes that is the speed of light, but we have evidence that things occur faster thn that, but we disbelieve it.

A happy new Year!

At the 1. January 2017 I made a walk beside the river Moosach near Freising.
A wonderful light and a fractal landscape!
Beautiful whight trees,
http://www.wackerart.de/Foto/freising/freising.html (http://www.wackerart.de/Foto/freising/freising.html)

Hermann

Happy New Year !
Let this become a year of fractal topology and a celebration of Benoit Mandelbrots signposting to the dynamic astrology and geometry of the human mind !

The great laboratory of lights at Magurele is ready.
The physicians allready created the machines for to make the greater laser of world at the basement of this laboratory.
This laser is usefull for building microscopical chip and to carving those, and for tu high surgery technology like as destroying cancer bulbs, and can be as very thin but strong light fascicle.
This great laboratory was been released in autumn 2016.
 :now: :thumbsup1:

http://magneticuniverse.com/discussion/364/a-sound-basis-to-rotational-dynamics#latest
As much as I can I have put forward my thoughts on the phrnomrnon of light and all vibrational experiences within a trochoidally dynamic materiality called aether or space-time.
My thesis is that Boscovich's force theories are most appropriately modelled by rotational dynamics which we perceive or define as magnetic behaviours. But we are not complete in our definition attempting to close out sound and heat as magnetic phenomena!

I hope this sheds light into your minds eye!

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=i6WxIblKVZI
Always dissatisfied with populist explanations of quantum entanglement . Schroedinger intended his cat to highlight the ridiculousness of superposition of particles . Superposition of waves yes, but particles: no !
So why do we in this age claim particles may be superposed? Because we accept "wave bundles" as particles. And yet we have no clear idea of what wave bundles are.

Even if we accept n aether we can not decide if aether is material, non material or both.
As the physicist pointed out, the " famed" quantum accuracy is an accuracy of probability spread of results, that is akin to saying tha one can set error bounds on a resultant measurement calculation.

So what is quantum ntanglmnt telling us? Omly that there are 2 opposing behaviours to every dynamic measurable behaviour which can not be separated analytically from each other, like a dipole cannot be separated into poles. In fact pole or polarity is a dynamic concept so their existence does not determine their static relationship.

Where a finite wave region exists or is estsbished, the ends of that region may be free or bound. If free the waves have the same amplitude but opposing screws. If bound the waves have opposite amplitudes and opposing screw. This is a basic Quantum entnglment in a wave deformation in a medium .
If the basic aether is a magnetic one then these entanglements are complex trochoidally dynamic surfaces of equipotental pressures in which curvilineal force vectors emerge as defining the equipotential surfaces.

That these may manifest as a cat in superposition is nonsense. Our perception causes any information carried by the waves to be filtered and thus we perceive a filtered view of reality. Our instruments will detect both or all reflecting surfaces of the wave dynamic , but not a live or dead cat!
It is time to kill schroedingers cat in the explanation of quantum probability distributions, and quantum wave interference.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Gvr_BcH1Cmw
A better understanding of thermodynamics sets it as a specialist study of the more general magneto dynamics

The magnetic patterning we call electromagnetic radiation is but a part of a more fundamental patterning of materiality.
Suffice it to say that  we have depicted it's dynamics by the dynamic behaviour of the sphere .

This is not to say that our model for measurement is the law of Gods or of nature, but rather our human apprehension of rational or logical behaviour which is comparabl.

The simple sphere is the oundation of allmpythagorean mosaic designs , both in part and in whole, but it is too simple for observed dynamics. The study of conics was part of the advanced  discourse of senior pythagoreans , but it was Eudoxus who epitomised the epicyclic  discourse of planetary motion.

We refer to picyclic forms as roulettes or Trochoids, and it is these little understood dynamical forms that underpin our modern theories of wave andarticle motion.

Unfortunately the language of modern maths nd physics obscures this.

We can apprehend this by circular arc  vectors.
Circular arc vectors in the geometry of the Quaternion can be thought of as corpuscles of a spring like behaviour, in fact I prefer of a presure like behaviour., for a bubble of pressure is contractive nd expansive. .Presure also naturally gives rise to circular vectors. .
It was young who proposed a rotational spheroidal light propagation model, but he was over ruled by Arago and Fresnel who won the argument for. Transverse wave. .

Lord Rayleigh in his notes on wave mechanics and De Broglie pointed out some anomalies of this position but toed the party line.
There are two basic  behaviours : expansion and contraction . The general trochoidal motion is by a patterning of expansion and contraction along all radial vectors that identify phase in the rotational surface vectors of the corpuscle.

Magnetic patterning when dynamic is expansive and contractive in every radial direction and at different scales . The phase and amplitude of the rotations with the expansion nd contraction creates regions that are fractally similar that move out or in by phase interactions. .
This is the model of a radiating source on its own .

A radiating source asymptotically decays by this process as the environment comes to some dynamic equilibrium .

The question of the origin of radiating source centres is answered by interference in the assumed trochoidally dynamic materiality. One could imagine that they appear spontaneously and unpredictably, but that would deny the actual onscious constructive and purposeful origin of many of these sources. . This is why the laws of thermodynamics are limited, and not applicable outside of the context of the more general magnetic patterning.

The interaction of many of these radiating sources creates a radiation that is both corpuscular nd undulatory , but unlike surface waves in the oceans , these are pressure waves like an invisible inaudible " wind" whose frequency we experience as heat , heat presdure( temperature or expansion in a diathermal chamber.) and light.

This kind of propagation is already diffracting, reflecting nd refracting in so called free space, the behaviour at. Single or double split characterises the materiality of the media involved. Thus absorption and retransmission contribute to the phase selection which promotes polarisation in the expanding radiation front..

The fact that we havevomcalled circular polarisation indicates that so called linear polarisation is a um od rotating , phase interacting radiation of a more omplex fom than sinusoidal transverse wave deformations.