Light

[hgjf2]

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.

[jehovajah]

I pray your country fulfills your hope and altruism, and your hope is not disappointed. . May they make you proud.

[jehovajah]

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.

[jehovajah]

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!

[jehovajah]

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

[jehovajah]

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.

[jehovajah]

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 .

[jehovajah]

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.

[Sockratease]

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.

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  

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.

[jehovajah]

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 .

[jehovajah]

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 .

[jehovajah]

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 .

[jehovajah]

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OepN2usmocw
Bio photonics , materials produce light materials are light absorbers( destructive interference) and emitters ( constructive interference)

[jehovajah]

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/HbijQzkJFAo&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/HbijQzkJFAo&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1</a>
Some thoughts on light

[youhn]

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