Just the Facts Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 I believe I'm in the correct forum for this thread. It is Modern, Theoretical about the Physics of light. So... I believe light is a plasma phenomenon. The light travels through stimulated plasma and travels as far as the source will sustain. It is the overall strength from the source that determines how far… and how fast the light travels. There is no “Speed Limit” to light. It is a reaction process. Like a child on a swing. The harder you push, the faster they go. The brightness, distance and speed light travels is variable depending on this factor. The reaction is to the heat created by the source. The more heat, the more light it makes. It is only plasma after all. It doesn’t have any restrictions on how fast it can react. We are limited in our physical ability to measure light at such great speeds. BTW… most unexplained light phenomenon seen in the sky is plasma light effect from varying atmospheric conditions. Not a UFO. That's why sometimes it is said to move so fast. Light travels similar to ripples in water. They go out in all directions unless something blocks it and then it reflect off and changes direction. Like water, it is not the exact same particles that travel the distance, it is particles being push along like a domino effect. It all is dependent on the source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyMcC Posted January 6, 2011 Share Posted January 6, 2011 (edited) There is a unit of time called "The radar mile". It is the time an EM wave takes to travel 2 miles. Easily found on google. EM waves travel at the speed of light. The radar mile is the same for radar transmitters of any power. Typical radar powers could be 1 MW to 10 MW, but this does not change the radar mile and therefore does not change the speed of EM waves (or light). Edited January 6, 2011 by TonyMcC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 I believe I'm in the correct forum for this thread. It is Modern, Theoretical about the Physics of light. So... I believe light is a plasma phenomenon. The light travels through stimulated plasma and travels as far as the source will sustain. It is the overall strength from the source that determines how far… and how fast the light travels. There is no “Speed Limit” to light. ! Moderator Note Is this the accepted model of light? No. So it doesn't belong here, it belongs in speculations. And ONLY in speculations. And you will be expected to provide evidence to back up your assertions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klaynos Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Please answer: But you answered the "what do you mean by plasma" as I expected, therefore we have an ionised gas, we have charges, some of these would be accelerating, they would radiate. We would certainly be able to measure if we were in a plasma very very easily, charges are staggeringly easy to detect. We do not. You are disproved by observable evidence, reality wins, again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mississippichem Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Just the Facts, Give one example. Do you have any quantitative evidence or proofs to back this? I'll even settle for a phenomena indirectly caused by a varying speed of light. Do you even have any weak anecdotal evidence? That would be an improvement. Can you read English? If so, read your last couple of posts in speculations. You've yet to answer one criticism brought to you by myself, other posters, mods, and or experts. Don't try to link that website either, I've read through the links you've posted to the "thunder bolts" website and their defense of these outlandish theories is about on par with yours, somewhere between hilariously bad and profoundly stupid. Don't start that persecuted scientist rant either. Some of the guys you are debating here on this forum have "-D-R's-" in front of their names, and you should respect their expert opinions as such. Not as an appeal to authority, but because the chances of you being right where they're wrong are about the same order of magnitude as the chances of observing light propagating faster than c; slim to none. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just the Facts Posted January 7, 2011 Author Share Posted January 7, 2011 Debunking the critics http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhyHCj_cVKk&feature=related The difference between a Creationist and a believer in the Big Bang is that the Creationists admit they are operating on blind faith... Big Bang believers call their blind faith "theoretical mathematical variables" and claim to be scientists rather than the theologists they really are. http://www.thunderbolts.info/online_videos.htm “From the smallest particle, to the largest galactic formation, a web of circuitry and the electric force connects and unifies all of nature. Organizing galaxies, energizing stars, giving birth to planets, and on our world, controlling weather and animating biological organisms. There are no isolated islands in space” -- Wallace Thornhill Plasma Physicist. Speaking about the LHC… “They don’t know what they’re doing, but I wouldn’t be too worried. It’s just a total waste of money really” -- Wallace Thornhill “really it comes back to commonsense. You don’t have to be a mathematician to understand the electric universe. It’s based on observation, it’s based on electrical engineering principles and experiment. All these things that science is supposed to be based on. Not on theoretical mathematics” - Wallace Thornhill Speaking on the Big Bang…“In the mainstream science community, you set up your narrative, which is not to be questioned. Otherwise you’re excommunicated or dealt with by those who look after the story” - Wallace Thornhill The critical thing in understanding the electric universe is to understand that we are connected electrically. There are electric currents flying through everything, through the universe. I think we have to really reexamine Einstein’s work, and practically those who followed him, without question. Because I think they’ve bequeved us a Alice In Wonderland Universe” How, light travels through space is simple. Neutrinos are the either, they are the substrate , they’re the material that waves when a light wave travels through so called empty space. Or when radio waves travel through space. Therefore the speed of light is a characteristic of the medium. It’s a characteristic of the neutrinos. Light travels at different speeds in different mediums. So that’s all it is. Light is a disturbance in the medium. it’s as simple as that. You need a medium for a wave to pass through. You can not have a perfect vacuum. It’s not a particle. You don’t have to invoke particles in an electric universe model, because then you run into this crazy situation in physics where one experiment you talk about light as being a photon, a particle, and in another one it has to be a wave. You can’t have it both ways. A photon is a so called virtual particle. In other words it’s one invented to try to explain what is observed. And that is the transfer of energy from one atom to another at a distance, but only in packets of just the right amount. It can’t be more or less, it has to be just the right amount. It’s an invention based on quantum theory. And quantum theory is virtually a mathematical recipe book, with no explanation in physics, in reality, so they invent particles where necessary to explain things, but these particles have no real existence. The physicist don’t know what it is. Neither do the people who talk confidently about it. When you look at Einstein work, it doesn’t make sense. It’s as simple as that. There’s been thousands of books written trying to explain Einstein’s theories. Einstein took appearances and postulated them as real. As a result we ended up with science fiction. Einstein’s theories are wrong and quantum theories are based on a non physical model. The universe is plasma To ignore plasma characteristics when you pass electricity through it is a huge mistake and a huge mistake currently in astrophysics. Astronomers look at things they see with telescopes and they have no idea what they’re looking at. So we get really strange and impossible explanations. Which are publish in the papers and magazines and it’s just science fiction. We have to get rid of all the myth’s and legends and fairytale stories that underpin our present science. I now know and understand the answers to the most important questions man has ever asked. I always ask these ten questions when considering any issue. Who, What, Where, When, Why, How, Is it True?, Is it Real?, Is it Possible in the laws of physics as we know them? Does it exist anywhere other than just the Human Imagination? Sometimes questions are more important than answers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Care to cite an experiment showing that different sources have different light speeds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just the Facts Posted January 7, 2011 Author Share Posted January 7, 2011 Care to cite an experiment showing that different sources have different light speeds? Hi The entire universe is a display of this principle in action. All light is/does the same thing. Light is nothing more than a reaction in the substance (ether/plasma/space) when stimulated by an energy source, such as the sun. Light waves have physical properties and moves at variable speeds depending on the strength of the source, and the density of the medium it is moving through. If it got any easier to understand, third graders would be teaching it. There is nothing bazaar about light physics, only Einstein’s ideas about it. Einstein did a Whack Job on physics that has lasted for nearly 100 years. What a shame. Light is NOT Photon Particles moving at a fixed rate of speed. That idea becomes absurd when you understand the true physics and nature of light and energy. -2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 “From the smallest particle, to the largest galactic formation, a web of circuitry and the electric force connects and unifies all of nature. Organizing galaxies, energizing stars, giving birth to planets, and on our world, controlling weather and animating biological organisms. There are no isolated islands in space” -- Wallace Thornhill Plasma Physicist. Speaking about the LHC… “They don’t know what they’re doing, but I wouldn’t be too worried. It’s just a total waste of money really” -- Wallace Thornhill “really it comes back to commonsense. You don’t have to be a mathematician to understand the electric universe. It’s based on observation, it’s based on electrical engineering principles and experiment. All these things that science is supposed to be based on. Not on theoretical mathematics” - Wallace Thornhill Speaking on the Big Bang…“In the mainstream science community, you set up your narrative, which is not to be questioned. Otherwise you’re excommunicated or dealt with by those who look after the story” - Wallace Thornhill The critical thing in understanding the electric universe is to understand that we are connected electrically. There are electric currents flying through everything, through the universe. I think we have to really reexamine Einstein’s work, and practically those who followed him, without question. Because I think they’ve bequeved us a Alice In Wonderland Universe” Argument by quoted assertion. Not science. Also, this is a thread on the speed of light, not the electric universe. Stick to the topic. How, light travels through space is simple. Neutrinos are the either, they are the substrate , they’re the material that waves when a light wave travels through so called empty space. Or when radio waves travel through space. Therefore the speed of light is a characteristic of the medium. It’s a characteristic of the neutrinos. Light travels at different speeds in different mediums. So that’s all it is. Light is a disturbance in the medium. it’s as simple as that. You need a medium for a wave to pass through. You can not have a perfect vacuum. It’s not a particle. You don’t have to invoke particles in an electric universe model, because then you run into this crazy situation in physics where one experiment you talk about light as being a photon, a particle, and in another one it has to be a wave. You can’t have it both ways. A photon is a so called virtual particle. In other words it’s one invented to try to explain what is observed. And that is the transfer of energy from one atom to another at a distance, but only in packets of just the right amount. It can’t be more or less, it has to be just the right amount. It’s an invention based on quantum theory. And quantum theory is virtually a mathematical recipe book, with no explanation in physics, in reality, so they invent particles where necessary to explain things, but these particles have no real existence. The physicist don’t know what it is. Neither do the people who talk confidently about it. Testable, so test it. Measure the speed of light near a nuclear reactor, with a higher neutrino flux. See what you get. Virtual photons are part of the model for the electromagnetic interaction. They do not refer to the photons we see and interact with, i.e. light. When you look at Einstein work, it doesn’t make sense. It’s as simple as that. There’s been thousands of books written trying to explain Einstein’s theories. Einstein took appearances and postulated them as real. As a result we ended up with science fiction. Einstein’s theories are wrong and quantum theories are based on a non physical model. Argument from personal incredulity. Not science. Also, the constant speed of light is part and parcel of Maxwell's equations. Your thesis (if true) not only shoots down modern physics, but you toss out a chunk of classical physics as well. How do motors and transformers work? The universe is plasma To ignore plasma characteristics when you pass electricity through it is a huge mistake and a huge mistake currently in astrophysics. Astronomers look at things they see with telescopes and they have no idea what they’re looking at. So we get really strange and impossible explanations. Which are publish in the papers and magazines and it’s just science fiction. We have to get rid of all the myth’s and legends and fairytale stories that underpin our present science. I now know and understand the answers to the most important questions man has ever asked. I always ask these ten questions when considering any issue. Who, What, Where, When, Why, How, Is it True?, Is it Real?, Is it Possible in the laws of physics as we know them? Does it exist anywhere other than just the Human Imagination? Again, stick to the topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just the Facts Posted January 7, 2011 Author Share Posted January 7, 2011 Can anyone here attempt to use math equations to describe the process of way water ripples when it is stimulated? NO.. Of course not. But I’d LOVE to see you try. Math can’t explain why a Bear shits in the woods, or why it stinks. Math in Not the answer to everything. Nature is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 If this assertion "Light waves have physical properties and moves at variable speeds depending on the strength of the source," was true then Fizeau would have spotted it back in the 19th century. He didn't. It isn't. The effect would also have shown up in countless experiments since then. The speed of light (in air or a vacuum) is, experimentally, known to be constant You can stop pretending that this is science now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Can anyone here attempt to use math equations to describe the process of way water ripples when it is stimulated? NO.. Of course not. But I'd LOVE to see you try. Here you go: http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/315/Waves/node50.html That was the course I took last semester. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just the Facts Posted January 7, 2011 Author Share Posted January 7, 2011 I started this thread. I suppose I can't make any comment I feel is relevant. That's really a sad state to be in. Is this a dictatorship? The fellows at the Thunderbolts Forum make this place look like a second grade classroom. That’s where a real education can be found. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Hi The entire universe is a display of this principle in action. All light is/does the same thing. Light is nothing more than a reaction in the substance (ether/plasma/space) when stimulated by an energy source, such as the sun. Light waves have physical properties and moves at variable speeds depending on the strength of the source, and the density of the medium it is moving through. If it got any easier to understand, third graders would be teaching it. There is nothing bazaar about light physics, only Einstein's ideas about it. Einstein did a Whack Job on physics that has lasted for nearly 100 years. What a shame. Light is NOT Photon Particles moving at a fixed rate of speed. That idea becomes absurd when you understand the true physics and nature of light and energy. So, no, you don't want to cite an experiment. This discussion has no point. I started this thread. I suppose I can't make any comment I feel is relevant. That's really a sad state to be in. Is this a dictatorship? An oligarchy, yeah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Can anyone here attempt to use math equations to describe the process of way water ripples when it is stimulated? NO.. Of course not. But I’d LOVE to see you try. Math can’t explain why a Bear shits in the woods, or why it stinks. Math in Not the answer to everything. Nature is. I don't know, or care, if anyone here can mathematically model the ripples on water but I know that they guys who make computer generated graphics can. You seem to think that, just because you don't understand something, nobody else can. That's an absurd idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just the Facts Posted January 7, 2011 Author Share Posted January 7, 2011 The speed of Light and the electric universe can not be disconnected. They are basically one in the same. One wouldn’t exist without the other first being true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mississippichem Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Can anyone here attempt to use math equations to describe the process of way water ripples when it is stimulated? NO.. Of course not. But I’d LOVE to see you try. Can you attempt to use your theory [varying speed of light] to explain the way anything works? NO...of course not. But I'd love to see you try. Seriously though, math is the purest science of all. If you don't understand this, you've no business arguing about the speed of light. Every discovery science makes is somehow facilitated by math. Have you ever seen a physics textbook? Most of the prose is filler between proofs and equations, or it serves to further explain what the equations are saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just the Facts Posted January 7, 2011 Author Share Posted January 7, 2011 I don't know, or care, if anyone here can mathematically model the ripples on water but I know that they guys who make computer generated graphics can. You seem to think that, just because you don't understand something, nobody else can. That's an absurd idea. PERFECT. I say the same to you. I completely understand the Plasma Electrical physics behind the universe. Many, many others do as well. You are lost in the 19th century. Absurd.. To say the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 (edited) OK, since the speed of light is actually constant whereas the theory says it isn't then it follows from "One wouldn’t exist without the other first being true." that the electric universe of which you speak doesn't exist. Can we forget about it now? The scientists of the 19th c had the sense to believe the evidence. Like them, we will if you can provide any. What experimental evidence can you offer that the speed of light varies as a function of the intensity of the source? Trust me, that's going to work a lot better than inappropriate use of CAPS LOCK. Edited January 7, 2011 by John Cuthber Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just the Facts Posted January 7, 2011 Author Share Posted January 7, 2011 OK, since the speed of light is actually constant whereas the theory says it isn't then it follows from "One wouldn't exist without the other first being true." that the electric universe of which you speak doesn't exist. Can we forget about it now? I see your problem. it's reverse thinking syndrome. No No No... light wouldn't/couldn't exist without the plasma and electricity in the universe. You can forget it if you please. I’m totally indifferent about you. You can fly to a theoretical Black Hole and jump in. Sorry…No Offence meant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted January 7, 2011 Share Posted January 7, 2011 Since "Just the Facts" doesn't seem to be interested in providing factual evidence (i.e. experiments) in support of his theory, speculations rule #1 applies. I think we're done here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts