The Unified Spectrum & The Hyperbolic Sphere

[swansont]

The experiments are happening now. The nature of gravity already exists. How well it is defined is what might be.

 

But only the completion of the experiments can confirm that the models are right. Until that happens you can't say with any certainty that they are correct.

[photon propeller]

White light is periodic in nature.pdf

[Strange]

Why didn't you post that text here where it could be quoted?

 

Anyway, pretty much every statement is wrong. I'll just pick a couple at random:

 

Light made of seven "pure tones" - nonsense. There is a continuum of frequencies in the visible part of the spectrum. Newton split the extreme blue end into blue, indigo and violet because he wanted there to be seven colours for mystical reasons. So don't go there.

 

You don't seem to know the meanings of the words "cycle" and "octave"; the phrase "one cycle or octave is the fundamental wave" is totally meaningless.

 

Violet light has 7 times the frequency of red? Nope. Red is centred on about 440 THz while violet is centred at about 730 THz. Not even one octave, never mind 7.

 

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

 

I gave up at that point as it is all obviously ignorant twaddle.

[photon propeller]

Disperse any white light wave and see the repetative spectral pattern. The seven pure color tones are median points occuring every 15 degrees of the cycle. It starts red and ends violet, everything in between pure tones are color mixtures. One cycle is one full photon oscillation. The pattern is repeated 4 times in one wavelength, red to violet, violet to red, red to violet, violet to red. Axis to peak, peak to trough, trough to axis. The reasons arent mystical, they are intrinsic.

Edited November 10, 2013 by photon propeller

[Strange]

Unfortunately, the facts contradict you. If you don't care about that, why should anyone else care about your mistaken beliefs?

 

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visible_spectrum

 

Newton divided the spectrum into seven named colors: red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, and violet. He chose seven colors out of a belief, derived from the ancient Greek sophists, that there was a connection between the colors, the musical notes, the known objects in the solar system, and the days of the week.^[7][8]

Sounds pretty mystical to me.

 

From the same source:

 

violet 668–789 THz

red 400–484 THz

So obviously not seven octaves apart.

Edited November 10, 2013 by Strange

[photon propeller]

Newton didnt divide the colors, nature did. So can any other mortal man with a prism. The distance between each pure color is proportional to its its angle to the photon axis when viewed in a straight line spectrum. The actual distance between pure tones is equal and is 15 degrees of the circumference of a circle. red is split on the photon axis and violet at the peak and trough. 15x6=90, 90x4 = 360, 360 = one photon oscillation. I did not say the visible spectrum, I said white light. The fundemental wave begins in the infrared and ends in the ultraviolet. This is the dark band between repetitions. Its boundries lie partially beyond the visible spectrum. 1351 thz/193 thz = 7/1. green is the median at 576thz

Edited November 10, 2013 by photon propeller

[Strange]

It is still wrong however many times you repeat it.

<shrug> No reason for me to care.

[John Cuthber]

" So can any other mortal man with a prism. "

Other cultures divide the rainbow differently.

 

"The actual distance between pure tones is equal and is 15 degrees of the circumference of a circle"

The angles depend on the nature of the prism.

 

You are wrong in essentially every way.

Why carry on?

Why not try to counter our points?

[photon propeller]

The nature of light does not depend on who divides it, It depends only on its cause, and the proper interpretation of that cause. Clues to that cause can be found in the dispersion of it, and the architecture of that division. I offer an interpretation that works. What do you offer? Nature divides light on its own, what can you contrive from a rainbow? With one image I can represent pages of analytical geometry. Images simplify the subject. The terms are in the image just as they are in reality. Give me a point to counter and i shall counter it to the best of my ability.

[John Cuthber]

"The nature of light does not depend on who divides it,"

But the way it is divided depends on who divides it and how they choose to do so.

". I offer an interpretation that works,"

No it doesn't.

Some of the things it gets wrong have been pointed out earlier in this thread: the stuff about octaves for example.

[photon propeller]

disregard the term "octave" . It was simply an attempt to describe the repititious tonal range throughout the cycle, red to violet, do to ti. Harmonic series is a better term. An accurate description of light accounts for sound. Frequency establishes tone and amplitude establishes volume. Pure tones have a sinusoidal waveform. That is why they are points of equilibrium, and host the inert gases.

Edited November 10, 2013 by photon propeller

[Strange]

Harmonic series is a better term.

I assume you don't know what "harmonic series" means either.

 

An accurate description of light accounts for sound.

How does that work? Actually, don't answer that. As you are both ignorant of the nature of light and refuse to acknowledge corrections, there is little point.

 

That is why they are points of equilibrium, and host the inert gases.

This is just getting even more ridiculous.

I offer an interpretation that works.

 

It doesn't work (whatever that means).

 

Read that Wikipedia page: the frequencies of the colours do not have the relationship you claim. You are wrong. What do you have to say about that?

[swansont]

White light is a continuum. Any periodicity you find is arbitrary.

[GiantEvil]

My understanding is that EM radiation is quantized according to the Planck constant. Which Plancks constant is really tiny, so considered macroscopically the EM spectrum might as well be a continuum.

[hypervalent_iodine]

!

Moderator Note

photon propeller,

I have merged your recent thread with a similar one you posted earlier this year. Please do not post multiple threads on the same topic.

Additionally, I would like to remind you of the following:

!

Moderator Note

Can we tone down the rhetoric on both sides please .

And more importantly: Photon Propeller, in this forum you do not get to dodge questions and it is to be expected that members will challenge you on your ideas, wording, and eventually maths.

!

Moderator Note

Finally, this thread will be closed if you can't relate your hypothesis to something with a basis in reality.

[photon propeller]

This topic focuses clearly on the fundamental wave and interference dynamics. It is not a repeat of my earlier post and I object to this merge. Second, the fundamental wave is a harmonic series, ever heard of the fourier series? How about the work of Helmholtz on sound and light. White light is a periodic waveform, why else does the pattern repeat itself. The median of each spectral color is the pure tone, all others are mixtures. "really small," the images are obviously a magnified version that can be viewed and perceived, any image no matter how small can be scaled up. I ask that this be separated at least, if you keep it in speculations so be it, but give it a chance to be viewed and absorbed.

!

Moderator Note

photon propeller,

I have merged your recent thread with a similar one you posted earlier this year. Please do not post multiple threads on the same topic.

Additionally, I would like to remind you of the following:

!

Moderator Note

Finally, this thread will be closed if you can't relate your hypothesis to something with a basis in reality.

Neither the text or images are the same as my previous post. Light is a vast topic for discussion. This should not be merged. Give it a fair shake. I have responded politely to each question though some posers of those questions have been quite rude. The nature of light is reality. Do you really believe you know it fully?

White light is a continuum. Any periodicity you find is arbitrary.

Periodicity arbitrary? Is elemental frequency arbitrary? Of course not. It is as distinct as one element is from another. It is a measurement of energy. It begins at the inertial line of equilibrium and extends to the maximum potential difference and returns to that line. It is harmonic oscillation. When we define the dynamic scale of energy correctly, the transmutation of elements will be simplified. The true dynamic architecture of the PERIODIC chart of elements will be revealed and the inner relationship of all the properties of those elements will be correlated. I propose this fundamental wave is the key to unlock this sacred geometry. I only ask for a fair shake and intelligent response. Please separate this post and lets speculate on the topic.

Edited November 11, 2013 by photon propeller

[Strange]

The median of each spectral color is the pure tone, all others are mixtures.

 

That just isn't true. You can have light of any single frequency within the range. Passing it through a spectrometer will not split that into two components.

 

And how does the rest of the electromagnetic spectrum relate to your ideas? Why should it just be the tiny visible range that is split into seven?

[photon propeller]

 

That just isn't true. You can have light of any single frequency within the range. Passing it through a spectrometer will not split that into two components.

 

And how does the rest of the electromagnetic spectrum relate to your ideas? Why should it just be the tiny visible range that is split into seven?

It is a mixture of color, a shade, not a mixture of frequencies, each frequency is a unique color, median points are pure color tones. The distance between those median frequencies dictates the shade, just as green lies between yellow and blue, and orange between yellow and red. I ve already stated that it is not just the visible range, it scales up or down but maintains the same proportions. These questions are self explanatory in the images.

[swansont]

 

Periodicity arbitrary? Is elemental frequency arbitrary? Of course not. It is as distinct as one element is from another. It is a measurement of energy. It begins at the inertial line of equilibrium and extends to the maximum potential difference and returns to that line. It is harmonic oscillation. When we define the dynamic scale of energy correctly, the transmutation of elements will be simplified. The true dynamic architecture of the PERIODIC chart of elements will be revealed and the inner relationship of all the properties of those elements will be correlated. I propose this fundamental wave is the key to unlock this sacred geometry. I only ask for a fair shake and intelligent response. Please separate this post and lets speculate on the topic.

 

What is this so-called elemental frequency, and how is it determined?

[Strange]

It is a mixture of color, a shade, not a mixture of frequencies, each frequency is a unique color, median points are pure color tones. The distance between those median frequencies dictates the shade, just as green lies between yellow and blue, and orange between yellow and red. I ve already stated that it is not just the visible range, it scales up or down but maintains the same proportions. These questions are self explanatory in the images.

 

You still haven't explained the fact that actual, measured frequencies do not have the relationship you claim.

 

As someone said, everyone is entitled to their own opinion but not their own facts. In this case, the facts prove you wrong.

[photon propeller]

 

What is this so-called elemental frequency, and how is it determined?

It is the resonant frequency. It is found by maximum amplitude. Like striking two identical tuning forks simultaneously. Specific energy fields manifest through individual frequencies assuming distinct material form.

Edited November 12, 2013 by photon propeller

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

It is a mixture of ..................................................................................................................................images.

 

Photon !

 

So I can try to get my head round this theory of yours,

 

What are your 3 to 6 best points of your theory in 3 to 6 short phrases or short sentences ?

say :

 

1........ Light is...........

2..... Photons are............

3.....

:

:

6....

 

Say you were going to die in 3 minutes time and you wanted to leave your theory to posterity!

 

Mike

Edited November 11, 2013 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[photon propeller]

 

You still haven't explained the fact that actual, measured frequencies do not have the relationship you claim.

 

As someone said, everyone is entitled to their own opinion but not their own facts. In this case, the facts prove you wrong.

It begins in infrared at 140thz and ends ultraviolet 980thz, that equals 1 / 7. green is the median at 560thz. It is 100% consistent with actual measured frequency.

Edited November 12, 2013 by photon propeller

[swansont]

It is the resonate frequency. It is found by maximum amplitude. Like striking two identical tuning forks simultaneously. Specific energy fields manifest through individual frequencies assuming distinct material form.

 

That's not an answer, it's word salad. Resonant with what? Maximum amplitude of what? What material form?

[photon propeller]

All matter has a specific energy vibration rate, its natural frequency. Plot the wave amplitude vs. excitation frequency and it will peak at the resonant frequency. The peak is the spectral line.