IN COMMENT OF

MAN'S FOLLY IN THE SCIENCES

By Leonard Van Zanten

vanzantenleonard@outlook.com

ABSTRACT

When it comes to fundamentals in the sciences the world of physicists and scientists are in pitiful shape. How ironic that for all the many advances in the sciences man has yet to come to its fundamentals. This essay enumerates some of these to our educational welfare.

KEY WORDS

Science. Fundamentals.

Essay

FREEFALL

Quote:  "The planets are in free fall in the gravitational field of the Sun. An astronaut orbiting earth in a spacecraft experiences a condition of weightlessness because both the spacecraft and the astronaut are in free fall. Both experience the same gravitational pull from Earth, but the spacecraft does not ultimately fall to the ground, because its forward velocity keeps it in orbit around Earth."

How wrong can one be when he has the facts at his fingertips?  To freefall is to fall with nothing holding you back, like one who jumps out a plane until his chute opens up when he has a force holding him back. The moon or a satellite in orbit is in no way whatsoever free, nor falling.

Lets use a bit of common sense.  In all the universe nothing ever falls.  By figure 1 the satellite for its mass and velocity in inertia is bound to proceed by a straight line unless it is acted upon by a force to the contrary.  These mind you are simple laws of physics, how can anyone, miss that? It is a force driving the object in the linear, and it is a force of gravity in the linear pulling on it with equal proportions for which cause it instead is forced into a orbital path, and appears weightless. Appearances indeed since its weight by its velocity having been multiplied.

Figure 1

Conclusively, without doubt this satellite is under the duress of two forces as are all planets and even stars. And even jumping out of an airplane is only so by figure of speech, since he in fact is being pulled down, a force pulling on him.  And that force with the precessionally intrigue of what we have come to call gravity will only draw him at the specific rate of torque at his specific altitude irrelevant of his weight or mass.

When for example the torque rate is 32 at sea level while a mile up it is 29, the rate of force upon him will be at a speed no faster than 29/sec/sec increasing as he nears sea level. For that torque rate may be compared to a treaded bolt having 29 turns per inch, while at sea level there are 32 threads per inch. That is why all weights fall at the same rate, no matter how bulky or how light, since it is pulled, or better said coerced downward to a center by a force (magnetic) in league with a linear torque upon the angular movement of all atoms. The combination of which is best known as gravity. That by law is found to be limited for distance.

That is the reason why I likened gravity unto a nut turning on a bolt. Nor are we pulled to the surface of the earth, but to its center. If not so we would not be walking upright.  I am as they say of the old school to look at things as they are and judge according to reality and the law of nature by which things operate. And so lets judge things after truth and reality.

Newton’s first law: the law of inertia

Quote: "Newton’s first law states that if a body is at rest or moving at a constant speed in a straight line, it will remain at rest or keep moving in a straight line at constant speed unless it is acted upon by a force."

There is nothing wrong in this law, and how then did we come to that so-called "free-fall?"  It clearly states: "Unless it is acted upon by a force."

Then for the remainder of the quotation: "Gravitational forces are never uniform, and therefore only the centre of mass is in free fall. All other points of a body are subject to tidal forces because they move in a slightly different gravitational field. Earth is in free fall, but the pull of the Moon is not the same at Earth’s surface as at its centre; the rise and fall of ocean tides occur because the oceans are not in perfect free fall."

This kind of nonsense does not warrant any comment. How is it of some of us to speak of gravity when he or she has not the faintest idea of what it is, or how it works? Gravity is always uniform everywhere, and earth's gravity by our own law is but limited to some 3200 miles from its surface while the moon is more than 200.000 miles removed. Gravity cannot raise the waters but rather it restrains the tides.

EXAMPLE

Newton's accepted law: "The gravitational force of a particle in uniform circular motion is proportional to the square of its speed and inversely proportional to the radius of its path”. Accordingly for an object in earth's orbit, weight 24500-lb, speed 17500-m/hr, radius 360-miles. That is - speed at 25,666-ft/s. Radius 4,360-miles. (24,500 x 25,666 x 25,666 = 16,139,217,122,000 : 23,020,800 = 701,071 : 24,500 = 28.6/g

And how much g/force from the sun might there be on earth or on such an object? The sun is 93.000,000 miles away with 423,500 to its center = 493,276,080,000-ft radius. The velocity of earth in orbit at 9.3-m/s = 49212.59-ft/s. That comes to 24,500 x 49,212.59 /2 : r =120 : w = 0.004/g.

The g/force of the sun on an object like the Hubble space telescope, and no doubt the earth as well is far into the minus. Even at a half distance from the sun, the g/factor would be in the minus.

Gravity in our universe

Quote: "Gravity is what holds the planets in orbit around the sun and what keeps the moon in orbit around Earth. The gravitational pull of the moon pulls the seas towards it, causing the ocean tides. Gravity creates stars and planets by pulling together the material from which they are made." Unquote.

How can one possibly proclaim that a tug-of-war is won by the weakest? The gravity on the moon as we know is but 1/6th that of the earth, and it should win against a force six times over? With the moon 12 inches from the surface of the ocean it could not pull a single drop, let alone 240.000 miles removed. Here again, come to admit that you are at a loss rather than acting irrational.

Next quotation: "Gravity not only pulls on mass but also on light. Albert Einstein discovered this principle. If you shine a flashlight upwards, the light will grow imperceptibly redder as gravity pulls it. You can't see the change with your eyes, but scientists can measure it."

Light for its being as well as its movement has no relation at all to gravity in any way whatsoever. Einstein was much too blind and ignorant to know what either light nor gravity was, or anything else for that matter.  How then do we make fools of ourselves to even listen to such nonsense, let alone glorify the man?  But then that is a habit for people to glorify the most cruel, and most ignorant on the earth.

We now ought to know as too why a flame is more red as it flares out.  A match is hotter at its base showing the shorter wavelengths. Then going outwards it cools, (velocity tapering down) the longer ones take hold turning more reddish.   In the light from a flashlight no single wavelength changes length. The longer red ones do travel faster but who is to notice that in such distance at the speed of light? Heating a bar first produces the long wavelengths, then as we continue to heat it - we in effect are increasing the rate of movement, that in turn will come to produce the shorter waves.

The fundamentals of wave production is like placing boxes on a conveyer belt, the faster one places those on that moving belt the higher the frequency and the shorter the wavelength will be. Moving at a slower rate lengthens the waves that for reality are not waves at all; but only so by sight deception appearing to be waves.

With all atoms having angular momentum the imposition upon natures fundamental movement with its all time constant at 300,000-km/s can only be in the angular wherefore the impulse will be a rotational one, and at that a segment of movement in the circumference, being driven by the constant in a rotational format.

Light nor any other so-called wave is of any collateral substance, it is nothing more than a coordinate of movement that shows up as codes, nor ever continues as man erroneously has it.  Just as hearing is no more than a movement upon the eardrum, or our eyesight that we in our spiritual being interpret from simple movements into a beholding, and minute angular differences for the color of.

All so-called waves are oblivious to any pull of gravity. Even as the constant at its 300.000-km/s velocity is oblivious to any density. It will go through any density at full constant.

Figure 2

By illustration figure 2, as the path of the wave passes from one density to another, the atoms of the greater density being spaced closer together the segments of light or any wave by their movement around the circumference are forced to travel more turns in the same spacing - that of course curtails their speed for distance in time.

The change in relative velocity between densities thus is a byproduct affected by the angular movement of the wave. The real velocity by which all waves are driven never at all changes maintaining the constant.  If not so then there would be no relative velocity of any wave, nor would we be able to compute it as illustrated by Figure 3.  The two velocities for all waves thus in conjunction with the constant as the first, adds its speed for distance in time, properly termed - its Relative Velocity.

Figure 3      (300.000:7004.8399= 42.82 X 7000 = 299.792-km/s)

By figure 3; A/B/C is longer than the A/C. As then A/B/C is always at 300.000-km/s, A/C as the nominal length is curtailed. The velocity of any wave then is easily obtained by dividing the constant into the A/B/C length with that times the nominal (A/C) length.  The frequency of any wave then is a mister Dunsel, meaning "Part of something that serves no useful purpose."

No wave is ever at its full frequency, which we obtain mathematically. When talking on a phone sending out your voice impulses on a wavelength of 137-meters that will come to some 2115 possible frequencies in any one second, its relative velocity at 289,763-km/s.

Who now can pronounce 2,115 letters or events in any one second in time? If you can manage 18 events in one second there will be 12 opening between codes. I used a large number (137-m) for the example while our phones are on a much smaller wavelength. If it be 800.000.000 in possible frequencies, that leaves more than 444 million opening between codes.

Take it as an absolute fact that waves are never continues. Not any light from the Sun, or from any atomic explosion by which one can be burned. Nor is anyone, or anything capable to produce the full number of events that can be placed upon a line of light. Even one in a million is more than enough.

And it is ludicrous of government agencies to issue one a highway in the sky at frequencies rather than wavelength. First because frequency is a mister Dunsel. Secondly, every radio or broadcast company can only - and must - transmit their data at the same frequency.

How many events can one get to in one second playing music, talking or portraying a video? 15.000 in one second is quite a feat, that on 800-Mhz, comes to nearly an empty wave. 800-million with only 15,000 on line in any one second leaves 53,333 openings between any two events.

So it is that waves are never continues. Nor is anyone able to prove otherwise. The only continues wave formations are found with magnetic, like electricity that for its existence must be a full circuit.  As thus all waves of that kind travel by segments and by a circumference its mode like the flutes on a drill bit, or threads on a bolt.  That when viewed at its side appears to move up and down. So it is that we came to the term "wave," namely by sight deception, and lack of wisdom and insight.

The object in science whereby to explain it, should foremost be to simplify things. As then man has his atrrocious ways to define this as shown in the quotation here below, one must agree that my way in the above calculation (figure 3) is far superior seeing how I simplefied things after the reality of it.

Man's atrocity Quote: "The distance the wave traveled from time t=0.00s�=0.00s to time t=3.00s�=3.00s c distance  is 8.00cm2.00cm=6.00cm.8.00cm−2.00cm=6.00cm. The velocity is  v=ΔxΔt=8.00cm2.00cm3.00s0.00s=2.00cm/s.�=Δ�Δ�=8.00cm−2.00cm3.00s−0.00s=2.00cm/s  The period is T=λv=8.00cm2.00cm/s=4.00s�=��=8.00cm2.00cm/s=4.00s and the frequency is f=1T=14.00s=0.25Hz.�=1�=14.00s=0.25Hz.

Gravity

Quote: "Newton’s law of gravitation, that any particle of matter in the universe attracts any other with a force varying directly as the product of the masses and inversely as the square of the distance between them." unquote.

Newton was correct in his law by which to calculate gravity, but wrong in his means to gravity.  Thank God he was or else he would be the death of all of us (Jer 31:37)  But why then Mr. Newton did you not make a computation of your own law to establish just how far gravity would extend outward from the earth? What is wrong with you to make a proper law yet not utilize it? Had you done so you would have discovered that gravity is but a local force, and not come to your error in mass to mass.  And now more than 3 centuries later I have to correct the man, and even reprove him?

Or was it perhaps he had no satellites orbiting earth to get to a realistic measure? I utilized the data from the Hubble space telescope, which did not exist in his days. I asked others on line what the g/factor would be some 3000 miles up utilizing that data. But even these lacked common sense that such cannot be calculated. How poor indeed when it is so simple, for to know it at one altitude provides the means to know it at any altitude.

Quote: "Every object that has mass exerts a gravitational pull or force on every other mass. The strength of this pull depends on the masses of objects at play. Gravity keeps the planets in orbit around the sun and the moon around the Earth. Hence, we define gravity as: Gravity is a force that attracts a body towards the centre of the earth or any other physical body having mass." unquote

We could not be more wrong could we, while the nonsense from Einstein is atrocious. With gravity being a local phenamenon, and no more than an inclination, it is not a force, the force in gravity is the magnetic field of all pheres.  The evidence to that effect is clearly upon the flares of the sun (illustrations figure 4 and 5). The loops are the circulars of magnetic, for as the substance of the suns surface is shot upwards by pressure are are the magnetic lines of movement that keep it down. There are multiple magnetic center on the sun in addition to its overall magnetic field. As the substance flares out it is by the embrace of all atoms in and by the magnetic fabric that they are held and coerced down to the  particular center of that field.

These illustrations alone provide clear evidence that the power in gravity is none other than the magnetic field. I of course knew it all along in different ways with other forms of evidence, but these illustration should convince us, the former being more diffucult to substantiate.

Figure 4                                                                       Figure 5

MR. DUNSEL

Quote: "Two or more disturbances of small amplitude may be superimposed without modifying one another. Conversely, a complicated disturbance may be analyzed into several simple components. In radio transmission, for example, a high-frequency signal can be superimposed on a low-frequency carrier-wave and then filtered out intact on reception." unquote.

Have we never heard of the speed of light, and how that comes to its velocity for distance in time? That fact in nature makes hogwash out of our ideal in transmission, to rate it as mere fantasy, and at that willful fantasy, simply because we know better. Each separate wavelength has its own speed. How therefore when you mail a letter transported by a vehicle moving at 60-MPH you expect it to reach its destination at 100-mph, or visa versa? 2 plus 2 does add up to 4, and reality is never fantasy.  Waves can be joined or even placed on the same line of movement, but never can two or more vehicles at different speeds be joined together. Need I say more?

For all practical purposes frequency is a mister Dunsel, meaning part of something that serves no useful purpose. No wave is ever continues wherefore its frequency to the full of it never exists, these all come in segments like unto a code, and we use them as codes. In the production of waves it are segments of coordinates imposed upon natures fundamental movement.

As then a vibrational mode like unto a back and forth movement is required, a stop and go does not and cannot produce a continues format with natures constant passing at 300.000-km/s. So it is that full frequency is a crock.  The light from the sun at full frequency would burn us in an instant.

LIGHT'S NATURE

Quote: "The propagation of a wave through a medium will depend on the properties of the medium. For example, waves of different frequencies may travel at different speeds, an effect known as dispersion. In the case of light, dispersion leads to the unscrambling of colors and is the mechanism whereby a prism of glass can produce a spectrum." unquote.

It is not that waves at different frequencies "may" travel at different speeds, since they "must" and always "do" so. And should the term "dispersion" not rather be "refraction'?  The quotation seems to suggest that the cause in the rainbow of colors is by dispersion rather than by the angular difference in each different length, whereby the shorter ones must and can only turn by a shorter degree. That then yes comes to dispersion.

Nor is it the so-called mechanism of a prism to produce the spectrum, any drop of water will do the same, as will slanted reflective surfaces.  How poor indeed many among us are in knowledge and vocabulary, in dire need of going back to basics, the first rule of which is - to bear with truth.

PHOTON

Quote: "A photon is a quantum of electromagnetic radiation. Its energy is directly proportional to the photon’s electromagnetic frequency and thus, equivalently, is inversely proportional to the wavelength. The higher the photon’s frequency, the higher its energy."

In the first place by simple common sense light is not a radiation, but simple movement. We of course are only speaking of the mechanical innovation that leads to light, since light itself is a factor by interpretation.  Anything that moves can be called radiation since it goes from one place to another. But since an axle cannot rotate when it is welded to a stationary frame, so the term electromagnetic is ludicrous.

Everything in the nature of that term is magnetic, the term electro, or electric has been formulated by ignorance in sight deception for a typical pattern of magnetic, for the rotating formation of magnetic. As then that

which is rotating cannot be called stationary, or visa versa; these must always be separate, either electro (rotating) or magnetic for its stationary formation. We must accept education; to refuse it brings one to his own loss.

Quote:  A particle representing a quantum of light or other electromagnetic radiation. A photon carries energy proportional to the radiation frequency but has zero rest mass.."

What the scientists call a photon, I call "angular momentum." Man's scientists have no conception as to the nature or movement of light, whereas thanks to God I do, therefore my term depicts reality, its true nature of being.The fact that it has zero mass is correct in that it is no more than a coordinate of movement. It therefore is not any particle, whereby the above quotation in itself is contradictory.

And that it has something to do with frequency holds a truth. The greater the number of events the greater the load or energy. When a greater number of events are concentrated on a single spot, like a magnifying lens, we can start a fire. The summer heat verses the cold polar regions are likewise by how much light can be brought to bear on any one spot or square area. The fact that we speak of frequencies rather than lengths illustrates our ignorance in the nature of waves of thespectrum.

Quote:"Photon an elementary particle that is a quantum of the electromagnetic field, including electromagnetic radiation such as light and radio waves, and the force carrier for the electromagnetic force."

The force carrier for the electromagnetic force????  Have we any iodea what magnetic force is or the electro? A mere coordinate of movement driven around the atoms in the air is hardly anything like what a magnet shows for its power of. Or even compared to the rotating type of magnetic called electricity. That minute quantity of light is only able to increase the angular momentum upon the atoms it strikes upon that we interpret bfor warmth. Otherwise serving as a code to our beholding it is completely annihilated, erased as one might say the instant it strikes upon the connecting point of any two atoms, as it does in water and glass

If those angular momentums (quantums) cannot circumvent any atom as it dooes in air, it will be erased or absorbed by the greater atoms that in turn will remit that movement restructured to a length after their specific coordinate interpreted by us for the color of. The codes of light carry or present no force other than as stated, and has nothing to do with what man calls electric and/or magnetiv for their coordinates or power of.

The way in which physicists explain the norm of science is at best atrocious, like one editor of a newspaper said: "Talking to them is like communicating with a cow."  Sadly these poor fellows in graduating from their schooling become rigged with the stigma of ignorance; like a disease or a virus; the antidote having been securely buried by their teachers

Similar to the Roman Catholic church that do not want their victims to read the Scriptures, on the chance for them to discover the truth against their obvious lies and deception. But then how else is the Satan to keep the sons of man from entering into God's rest?

"Resist the devil," so the Lord said, and he will depart from you." But once one is brainwashed he is not likely to find the right path again, obvious from Hitler how much of the German public stayed with him for so long. Or Donald trump for his followers.

All these will come to stand very ashamed of themselves and suffer in dire regret for the thoughts of their mind and words of their lips. They will bear the dishonor due to the atrocity of their education, like the Lord said He would do:  "To dishonor and make fools out of all of them."

CHARGE

Quote: "Charge is a physical property that causes matter to experience a force within an electromagnetic field. Electric charges may be positive or negative in nature. If no net electric charge is present, the matter is considered to be neutral or uncharged. Like charges (e.g., two positive charges or two negative charges) repel each other. Dissimilar charges (positive and negative) attract each other."

A charge as man speaks of in reality is never a physical property, unless movement itself is rated physical. And to be positive - or - negative is utterly impossible and contrary to all laws in nature. No single sided coin or sheet of paper has ever been found, nor will it be found. Any movement like that of an arrow has a coming and going, always two sides to any story, line, dot, or movement. Pos. and Neg. therefore are always simultaneous, the two sides of any one entity. And what thus is a charge or force if not the movement of or by it? With magnets the linear as well as the angular present themselves in and by movement. A standard magnet comes to attract and repel. The rotating magnetic as electricity also comes to attract and repel at its sides. While at its ends facing Pos to Neg comes as counter rotating movements that by contact are bound to destroy each other, both of them attempting to convert the other to its direction in movement

WAVE

Quote: "Electromagnetic waves are produced by moving electric charges and varying currents, and they can travel through a vacuum."

EM waves as they are erroneously called are neither magnetic nor electric. As then I have at times labeled the spectrum, as the "magnetic" spectrum instead of EM even that is wrong. In these things I was merely humoring man for their ignorance. The spectrum is nothing more than the listing of all the different lengths that are found driven by the constant in velocity, that for its nomenclature is none other than that single entity best known or termed as "fundamental movement."It as an entity is however more than just movement it is a power as well, an entity that the Almighty Creator called forth to exist as the prefix to his manifold handiwork.

No doubt this is difficult for the mind of man to comprehend, how movement all in itself can be an entity. But then it is not just any kind of movement, not like unto what is mostly seen as movementFor this particular entity that I labeled "fundamental" - and to us appears as movement - wherefore I said; "fundamental movement," is not your average movement since it for one thing - is conductive, and at that directionally conductive.

And by that feat in nature all things have their binding capacity as well as repulsive capacity. If then wethink to be smarter than our Creator who taught me, not believing in any such motion or movement. Attempt to explain how a mere block of metal presents a movement to pull a nail to itself, while it itself is not moving.

And so be realistic, do not discount the endless ability of our Creator, for in that case you are making Him out for liar, while it is impossible for him to speak any untruth. And in doing so it will be your own loss, and that as I know will be very painful.

In any instant God can form a billion human beings by the power of His word alone. To whom therefore will you compare Him? Did He not construct the whole of the universe as merely a tent for Him to dwell in? And what are we in comparison? In effect nothing more than a spec of dust. And how will a spec of dust overlooked on a scale come to correct the scale for its operation?

He did call forth that power and/or force if you will as the one and only force in nature, by which all other movements, powers, or forces are derivatives. So it is that there is but one real force in nature, one real power, one real charge. And no particle of any kind or size is competent to produce or effect anything - all because they in the first place do not exist, and as a form of anything like appearing unto us as substance, they are so by that one power of movement having formed it as well as maintaining it.

That is how atoms came into being, a subject not as yet suited for the sons of the earth. Let us first come to be educated in reality, and give honor where honor is due; then let us speak again. I may be a pushover, and much too generous and compassioned, but not a fool as some may come to think of me

WAVES OR PARTICLES?

Quote: "Light is made of discrete packets of energy called photons. Photons carry momentum, have no mass, and travel at the speed of light. All light has both particle-like and wave-like properties. How an instrument is designed to sense the light influences which of these properties are observed. An instrument that diffracts light into a spectrum for analysis is an example of observing the wave-like property of light. The particle-like nature of light is observed by detectors used in digital cameras—individual photons liberate electrons that are used for the detection and storage of the image data."

The last part here hoping that light would be like particles being convenient to explain how that may be applied as data, like unto a picture. But as always man is wrong in his assumptions since he lacks insight.  It are the coordinate segments of light that imbed upon a photographic plate that makes for the picture, In other words - simple coordinates of movement, no substance, no particle of any kind. And it are also coordinates of movement magnetically stored on a disk or hard drive.

Man seems to be married to electrons, to single sided coins while they have never even seen one, or detected one simply because these do not exist. Man's marriage is very one-sided with nothing to show for himself.

Quote: "Light slows as it travels through a medium other than vacuum (such as air, glass or water). This is not because of scattering or absorption. Rather it is because, as an electromagnetic oscillation,  light itself causes other electrical charged particles such as electrons to oscillate. The oscillating electrons emit their own electromagnetic waves, which interact with the original light. The resulting"combined" wave has wave packets that pass an observer at a slower rate. The light has effectively been slowed. When light returns to a vacuum and there are no electrons nearby, this slowing effect ends and its speed returns to c."

No comment here for what is mere fantasy, other than in space (vacuum as they erroneously call it) light travel the same as in any medium and is curtailed in its relative velocity the same as anywhere. No light-wave of any kind ever came to us at its constant of velocity. From far distances it may have a dozen or a hundred shifts blue and red.

Too bad that man is in that shape; being wrongly educated by his peers he is literally without education in fundamentals.

TRANSMISSION

How does light gets to its velocity, and by what? The correct answer is the fundamental movement, and power of  that God called forth, which in essence can be looked upon as a magnetic fabric that will move whatever it collects upon will drive it by its constant of velocity as we discovered is at 300.000-km/s. when therefore an impulse is forced upon that movement it is taken away by that speed. Light thus as all waves are driven. since then these impulses are always driven in the circular, these are like short segments of angular movement riding over and upon the media. That of course then is like unto the threads on a bolt, passing around all atoms small enough to circumvent.

Figure 6                                                                    Figure 6a

When therefore we look at man's ideal of tranmission illustrated by figure 6, how can that possibly come to the speed of light, for as the wave must flollow its contour, the length or distance thereof is longer than the nominal length. As then it is the nominal length comes to the speed of light, its wavy part is curtailed. Moreover there are no magnetic nor electric fields in the air or space to drive a wave as a photon to a stop/go scenario whereby the wave as a wavy part may be produced.

In the first place the magnetic fabric in air and space is linear at full constant, there are no sidekicks in it. Secondly electric is a rotating magnetic field that in air can only exist and be seen as lightning. Accordingly man's conception of wave transmission is very much in error, completely none existent.  As I have drawn by figure 6a so it is that wave transmission takes place. The constant at 300.000-km/s passing from A over B to C, in other words passing around the circumference. As then that additional distance is added to the nominal and put into the calculation it reveals the true velocity for distance in time.

James Clerk Maxwell thus was very wrong with no understanding of fundamentals, nor is there any particle like property in any wave, they are pure movements, or as such alterations in movement.

DESCRIBING ELECTROMAGNETIC ENERGY

Quote: "The terms light, electromagnetic waves, and radiation all refer to the same physical phenomenon:electromagnetic energy. This energy can be described by frequency, wavelength, or energy.All three are related mathematically such that if you know one, you can calculate the other twoRadio and microwaves are usually described in terms of frequency (Hertz), infrared and visible light in terms of wavelength (meters), and x-rays and gamma rays in terms of energy (electron volts).This is a scientific convention that allows the convenient use of units that have numbers that are neither too large nor too small.

The energy of any wavelength is its movement, as all energy is movement. And so why call a pig an animal, and not rather what type of animal? To utilize the term of energy by way of a figure of speech is one thing, while for its nature of or fundamentals, we by all means ought to name it more realistic.

REALITY

The Holy Spirit in whom the whole universe is contained said: "He who corrects a scoffer gets himself abuse, and he who reproves a wicked man incurs injury.  Do not reprove a scoffer, or he will hate you; reprove a wise man, and he will love you."And so indeed speaking in general I will incur injury, but I will also be loved and find thanks. I then have broad shoulders, and for the good of many I will bear the insults;  for the wise as well as for the unwise, that it may not come to their fall, and regret.

Also it is not wise to ignore sound teaching. The Almighty One again said: "Give heed to my reproof; behold, I will pour out my thoughts to you; I will make my words known to you. Because I have called and you refused to listen, have stretched out my hand and no one has heeded, and you have ignored all my counsel and would have none of my reproof, I also will laugh at your calamity;I will mock when panic strikes you, when panic strikes you like a storm, and your calamity comes like a whirlwind, when distress and anguish come upon you. Then they will call upon me, but I will not answer; they will seek me diligently but will not find me."

And how is it for me to know?

Quote: "For the Lord gives wisdom; from his mouth come knowledge and understanding.   He stores up sound wisdom for the upright;  He is a shield to those who walk in integrity, guarding the paths of justice and preserving the way of his saints. Then you will understand righteousness and justice and equity, every good path."

I know very well that in the centuries to come my name will be known in all the sciences while those that are in honor now will come to disgrace. It is not my doings but that of our Creator. For it is He who grants honor to whoever He wills and takes away honor from whomever He wills.

WORDS OF WISDOM.

How is it to understand fundamentals, to have wisdom at your side? In a nutshell it is the fear of the Lord, for as He fashioned our bodies and gave us a spirit to dwell therein, He also gave us a law of life to abide by. And why not seeing we are not only His property, but every step we take is by His grace. Our food, our water, our clothing, our joy, and our labors at every moment are of Him. We owe Him our gratitude.

And so He said: "Keep hold of instruction, do not let go; guard her, for she is your life. Do not enter the path of the wicked, and do not walk in the way of evil men. Avoid it; do not go on it; turn away from it and pass on. For the commandment is a lamp and the teaching of it a light, and the reproofs of discipline are the way of life.

All the words of my mouth are righteous; there is nothing twisted or crooked in them. They are all straight to him who understands and right to those who findknowledge. I love those who love me, and those who seek me diligently find me. Whoever loves discipline loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

A scoffer does not like to be reproved; he will not go to the wise.  A whip for the horse, a bridle for the ass, and a rod for the back of fools. Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes."

CONCLUSION

I appear to be like no other man as nearly everyone tells me, even claiming me to be an alien for the knowledge and understanding and even the stamina within me. As then my birth was indeed not of the earth I nonetheless came into it by the womb of a woman. The Almighty One then took pleasure in me granting me an awesome store of knowledge, that I in turn might teach the sons of the earth. And this is the conclusion having done my duty, likens or no likens.