The Redshift

[swansont]

A bulb does not release colors as. a candle. because a bulb is not burning atoms.

Trivially shown to be false. Incandescent bulbs give a blackbody spectrum.

[Victor Elias Espinoza G.]

Trivially shown to be false. Incandescent bulbs give a blackbody spectrum.

 

 

Yes I was wrong, the light from the bulb has colours or they are the colors of the Prism.

[John Cuthber]

Victor, you are missing the point.

First, this experiment does not use a prism. It uses a diffraction grating- that's just dark parallel lines ruled very close together on a clear piece of glass. (you can make on from scratches on a bit of metal and the effect that you see with light reflected from a CD is also the same sort of thing).

The central image in the picture is just a view of the lamp (It has nothing to do with any candles, so please don't waste time talking about candles. I assure you it works just fine with a candle as the light source).

 

There are two spread out images of the lamp labelled as m=+1 and m=-1

 

If the picture had been taken slightly differently, there would be another pair of "rainbow" pictures of the lamp, even further out. (There might be others too, even further out)

 

Please explain these four images (as I asked before).

I'd like to know why they are spread out into spectra, why there are 4 of them and why they are where they are?

The reason I ask is that I can explain it perfectly well using conventional physics.

If your ideas don't explain it then your "theory" simply isn't as good as the conventional one.

Edited July 31, 2011 by John Cuthber

[Victor Elias Espinoza G.]

Victor, you are missing the point.

First, this experiment does not use a prism. It uses a diffraction grating- that's just dark parallel lines ruled very close together on a clear piece of glass. (you can make on from scratches on a bit of metal and the effect that you see with light reflected from a CD is also the same sort of thing).

The central image in the picture is just a view of the lamp (It has nothing to do with any candles, so please don't waste time talking about candles. I assure you it works just fine with a candle as the light source).

 

There are two spread out images of the lamp labelled as m=+1 and m=-1

 

If the picture had been taken slightly differently, there would be another pair of "rainbow" pictures of the lamp, even further out. (There might be others too, even further out)

 

Please explain these four images (as I asked before).

I'd like to know why they are spread out into spectra, why there are 4 of them and why they are where they are?

The reason I ask is that I can explain it perfectly well using conventional physics.

If your ideas don't explain it then your "theory" simply isn't as good as the conventional one.

 

With what little I understood the question and the data that give me the image, I came to this conclusion.

 

A mirror tells you the truth of the colors.

 

For example the white light, a Prism tells you that it is not white.

 

The same applies to the image: thou sees the origin of white light, but the mirror tells you that it is not white.

[mooeypoo]

We're not talking about mirrors, Victor. There are no mirrors in this picture. You need to answer the question.

[Victor Elias Espinoza G.]

We're not talking about mirrors, Victor. There are no mirrors in this picture. You need to answer the question.

 

What there are in the image please and what it means to m.

[mooeypoo]

Re-quoting. You really should read people's posts, Victor, we are very patiently explaining, and you seem to ASSUME what we ask, instead of reading what we explain to you.

There are two spread out images of the lamp labelled as m=+1 and m=-1

 

If the picture had been taken slightly differently, there would be another pair of "rainbow" pictures of the lamp, even further out. (There might be others too, even further out)

 

Please explain these four images (as I asked before).

I'd like to know why they are spread out into spectra, why there are 4 of them and why they are where they are?

The reason I ask is that I can explain it perfectly well using conventional physics.

If your ideas don't explain it then your "theory" simply isn't as good as the conventional one.

 

There is ONE light source in that picture. In front of it, there is a diffraction grating. It splits the original light into "rainbows" -- one to the left, one to the right. Notice that the left one is opposite of the right one.

 

Explain why this happens.

 

Here's a nice VIDEO showing what "Diffraction Grating" is, and what it looks like in different sources of light.

 

 

Now explain it using your theory, Victor.

[Victor Elias Espinoza G.]

These are three EQUAL sources of light. And yet, we see different types of "color" smear on all three.

 

EXPLAIN THE PICTURE:

 

 

 

I have analyzed the image and I got to the following conclusion:

 

Duplication is due to the magnetism of color by:

 

1.- Atoms

2.- Veegtrones (particles that move the cell phone waves)

 

In the rectangles we see that the colors were magnetizados and stretched.

 

See image below:

 

[John Cuthber]

So you say "Duplication is due to the magnetism of color by:

 

1.- Atoms

2.- Veegtrones (particles that move the cell phone waves)

 

In the rectangles we see that the colors were magnetizados and stretched."

Do you have a better answer than saying that the Pixies did it?

[mooeypoo]

So you say "Duplication is due to the magnetism of color by:

 

1.- Atoms

2.- Veegtrones (particles that move the cell phone waves)

 

In the rectangles we see that the colors were magnetizados and stretched."

Do you have a better answer than saying that the Pixies did it?

 

I think he means that since the two stretches of light seem to be smearing towards the center light, the APPEAR to be "attracted to it".

 

This might have had some.. imaginary.. basis.. if only the two "smears" weren't the product of the center light source.

 

Victor, there is only *ONE* light source in this picture. ONE lightbulb, in the center. The two side "smears" are the effect of the diffraction grating.

 

Did you even BOTHER watching the video I posted, or reading anything we posted?

 

 

If you don't want to know what reality is about, you can just stomp your feet in the ground 'till you're blue (and lighter?) and it still would make as much sense as incoherent babble.

 

You are either here to discuss science, or you're here to insist your version of reality is wrong DESPITE reality.

 

Do choose.

 

~mooey

[Victor Elias Espinoza G.]

I think he means that since the two stretches of light seem to be smearing towards the center light, the APPEAR to be "attracted to it".

 

This might have had some.. imaginary.. basis.. if only the two "smears" weren't the product of the center light source.

 

Victor, there is only *ONE* light source in this picture. ONE lightbulb, in the center. The two side "smears" are the effect of the diffraction grating.

 

Did you even BOTHER watching the video I posted, or reading anything we posted?

 

 

If you don't want to know what reality is about, you can just stomp your feet in the ground 'till you're blue (and lighter?) and it still would make as much sense as incoherent babble.

 

You are either here to discuss science, or you're here to insist your version of reality is wrong DESPITE reality.

 

Do choose.

 

~mooey

 

I stand by what I say, there is something that stretches the colors of light they are atoms or they are Veegtrones.

[mooeypoo]

I stand by what I say, there is something that stretches the colors of light they are atoms or they are Veegtrones.

What is this something? And what atoms? Do you mean that the light DUPLICATED? What caused it to duplicate? Atoms just "popped up" out of nothing?

 

 

 

 

 

You can insist until you're blue, Victor, but you're making no sense.

I can also insist that gibberish is english. Insisting won't help me make it so.

[Victor Elias Espinoza G.]

What is this something? And what atoms? Do you mean that the light DUPLICATED? What caused it to duplicate? Atoms just "popped up" out of nothing?

 

You can insist until you're blue, Victor, but you're making no sense.

I can also insist that gibberish is english. Insisting won't help me make it so.

 

The slit is made of atoms and if there is room for where it passes the light, then this space is composed of Vectrones. They stretch the colors of light. They are just in the slit.

[John Cuthber]

I thought it would be instructive to seek other opinions from the web.

I found this

http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=28571

which under the banner of "Crackpot claims New Discovery, without doing any heavy lifting" says things like

 

"and for 3 installments of $19.95, you can have a veegtron too!! Discover new universes!! Solve the Dark Matter riddle!! Impress the girls!! There's nothing that the Veegtron cannot do!! just have you're mastercard or visa ready."

 

and I have to say it's more plausible than anything from Victor.

 

I think this thread has run its course and should be left to die peacefully in obscurity.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I think I'll let Mr. Cuthber get the last word here. Also note the speculations forum rules.