Chapter 23 Chapter 23 INDEX TO OTHER PAGES
As much as may
have been said of light in its nature and operation of being - we have only
begun to define light for its nature and being. The realm to the fundamentals of
nature is for all its appearance endless, and how shall a mortal such as I come
to know such a realm?
Light, in the nature of waves, does not only go forth from their source, but as the once generated wave leaves the source, it implements new waves. The evidence to this effect is in the illumination of the air surrounding us, and for the illumination in the interior of our dwellings.
For the light of the sun does not pass through our roof, nor through the
walls of the house, and yet these confines are illuminated, and not only from
reflections so it seems.
Light is known to travel in perfectly straight lines, as then the rays next to our house strike the ground, and the ground absorb these rays, how is it that we see the ground and the air above the ground? Our eyesight is tuned to wavelengths, if then such wavelengths are not received by us, how are we to see?
we see the ground by reflected waves, and the air between the ground and our
eyes seems also illuminated, it is because the air is transparent, and that
which is transparent only seems clear as were it illuminated.
Yet then if we look straight before us and observe the blue sky and a few
white clouds, how may these be visible unto us by the light of the sun?
Correlating the factors essential to our beholding.
a) It is imperative that we receive wavelengths directly into our eyes which pass only in straight lines.
b) The sun's rays are only downward, while reflected rays reveal only the surface from which they are reflected.
The air itself is transparent, which therefore can not show itself to us, nor
show itself transparent, lest it were for reflected waves showing their last
point of contact. Which by
consequence in passing to our eyes through the air made it to us as were it
How then shall we see the blue sky, or the transparency to continue on for such a distance with no reflected wave from any real surface? The question thus becomes if the air truly is transparent, or if this might not rather be an illusion?
again, when we see a tree up ahead, the tree is visible - for the waves
reflected from it picture the form and color of that tree into our sense of
But what about the air, does the air really have to be transparent to us in order for us to see that tree? The answer of course is; no, it does not, but the air must be transparent, as in "conductive" to the wave in order that it may come to us.
And this being so, how then does the air appear so transparent to us as
if we were also beholding every inch of the air itself in the distance between
the tree and ourselves?
To come to some conclusion, let us look at another example. Let either the light of the-sun or from some artificial source - pass upon a prism to delight us with a rainbow of colors as it refracts into its separate wavelengths, (Figure 23-1).
But now speaking of a rainbow of colors, how did we get to observe these colors - or, any part of that light at all points A, B, and C?
For does not light
travel only in straight paths, in which case we would have to position ourselves
at point E, directly in line with the
waves in order to receive them into our eyes?
The point is well taken, we could not possible observe that light if it
were not for identical wavelengths to pass at ninety degree angle, and in all
directions from it, so that by a copy we may behold the totem of the original.
It stands to reason that the waves within the prism must either turn at ninety degree to us or in some way produce separate secondary wavelengths as carbon copies of themselves at right angles. For in no other way by the laws of nature will we be able to behold that light passing through the prism.
can eliminate the first suggestion since it would terminate the wave from
passing any further through the prism. And
if by some trick only part of the waves turned ninety degree, the light should
diminish rather quickly as it passes on.
But perhaps I am all wrong, that it is not in new secondary waves
generated by the first wherein the sky may be seen, - and the air is so clear,
and the colors in the prism come out to display themselves within our eyes.
That instead, it is as suggested by an experiment of Thomas Young in
1801, to comes about by diffraction. (Figure
Diffraction now means; to break, to bend from a straight line, and yes, such exist with light, but only when the wave of light passes from one density into another. And as it is in the air around us, as well as in the experiment of Thomas Young - there is no change in density.
Wherefore I must acclaim; the area's between the screens are not lit by diffraction but by secondary waves that are reflected back and forth in perfectly straight lines until they reached your eyes."
Light does not behave as frontal waves, nor as circular expanding wave formations like as is found with water when a pebble is cast in it.
The pebble in contact with the water will activate the source by a
360-degree, and as the wave moves outward, the parts of the water stimulate a
formation by the whole 180-degree of its frontal area.
Consequently, the formation of the wave is an ever-expanding circle, and
moves forward on that basis.
Sound by comparison appears to move in the same way. And yes, there is something to be said for it, namely, that once a point has been struck - to cause the compression, the sound will flare out in all of 360 degrees in all of the three dimensions.
But the waves themselves that flare out into all those directions are not
circular - but longtitudal, wherefore the further they get from the source - the
more they will be separated. For
again, sound, like light, travels in straight lines.
And the same is true for light, to flare out from their source in all
directions, but each of these in all of these directions is a separate
independent wave formation. As then
sound causes sidekicks - producing a greatly diminished right angle compression
to its main track, light on the other hand is not a compression, nor does it
have the collateral to produce sidekicks, but must implement new independent
But let us look at the scenario of light once again to prove to ourselves that light waves always reveal their source. And if this shall be correct - then how shall sunlight be reflected from just about anything?
If for example, the molecules of the air reflected the
sunlight through our windows into the confines of our homes, should we not
behold the sun itself - rather than the transparent haze that we factually
Or by looking at a green leaf - shall these wavelengths of the sun's light that correspond to the green - be reflected to us? If in fact they were the rays of the sun reflected should we not again observe the sun itself?
For when we take a mirror, or a piece of thin-foil, and we
"reflect" the wave originating from the sun, we do not
then behold the
black of the mirror, nor the shiny silver of the thin-foil, but we behold the
very source of the wave, namely the sun in its fiery roundness.
What this demonstrates is that all light waves reveal their source, or point of origin. The waves from the sun can only go straight down and terminate at the earth's surface, with the exception when they are truly deflected.
notion therefore which we have held for a long time, that all objects in their
color absorb all wavelengths except those which define their color to be
reflected, has to be mistaken.
Looking at a green leaf, we see only the leaf in its form and color, since quite correctly, only the wavelengths that correspond to - what we interpret as green - are radiated from it.
This however cannot be in the rays of the sun, but in newly formed waves whose point of origin is the green of the leaf, which is to say the wavelength, or lengths corresponding thereto.
It thus has become obvious that there is more to light than the light we are wont to perceive. And as for the apparent axiom that all waves reveal their source, perhaps we should reconsider the word "all", or add to say; and/or last point of contact. But then we are right back at the green of the leaf by reflection instead of a newly formed wave.
Which then shall it be? If presuming a green wavelength is reflected from the leaf - and strikes a red surface before it comes to our eyes - does it then alter the red somewhat to our eyes, or are the green waves absorbed by the red surface?
In all this confusion there is however one undeniable fact, the interior of our confines could not become bright without alternate secondary waves. Nor could the air be bathed in its brilliance in the absence of such secondary wave formations to come by the implementation of the first and original waves of the sun setting forth secondary waves.
Nor shall it be as concluded from the experiment of Thomas Young - in
diffraction, since that entails a diminishing quantity of the light as it
And yes there is a diminishing value in the production of secondary
waves, which is not founded on diffraction or dispersion, but on the
availability of molecules suitable to re-generate. Or as we might more properly state, implement secondary
waves, which of course finds its value in density.
Conclusively, there is light born of light as there is light born of light. There are what we might call the primary or source waves, and the secondary waves. The primary waves find their origin by a star or some artificial source.
are new wave formations implemented by the primary wave as it passes through a
media that is conductive to it, able to transmit light by conducting the same
and regenerated by the greater molecules that are either transparent or opaque.
The term "conductance", is quite appropriate if we are to gather how secondary light waves may be formed. For how shall light in passing through a media in passing "independently" through it find any cause or reason to implement its copy at every point along its way to all directions at right angles from its path? The wave assuredly requires to be more than just susceptible to the media, it must move by interaction with it.
Reference figure 23-3: This of course raises another quest, to discover just how something - which itself is considered nothing other than a waveform - implements its copy at various angles to its line of travel?
If nothing else, we found at least a basis for it on which to operate, namely, the atoms and molecules such as of glass, water, and a few others.
As therefore we illustrate such a wave by figure 23-3 -- to pass along the
perimeters of the molecules, these in some manner together with the passing wave
- implements a carbon copy at essentially a ninety degree angle.
I however do not have for you the exact answer as to how, and in what manner they accomplish this feat, but that in fact secondary waves are thus implemented is evident. Moreover, there seems to be a difference in the essence of the waves primary from secondary.
The first is able to produce an unlimited number of copies, while the secondary appears limited. Yet the secondary seem to be reflected more easily than the first, nor are they as lasting as the first. Both however appear identical in form and nature, and serve to implement vision alike.
And by closer inspection, the first appear far more potent as if by some means there is a collateral essence to their formation, while the second is found mainly as a coordinate, a sine formation at best.
secondary can be found to reflect again and again from many surfaces, while
primary waves are more selective in what type of surface shall reflect them.
When a primary wave strikes a leaf, its wavelengths are absorbed,
and all but those wavelengths which correspond to the green implement secondary
copies. For again I say, that if
this were not so, ought we not behold the sun itself in them, just as we behold
the very filament of the lamp when we look into their reflected light?
Are we game for a little speculation in what is not altogether unreasonable as to in what principle fashion the implementation of secondary waves might proceed? We know that waves interact closely with the atoms and molecules of the space in which they are transposed.
So closely in fact
that they find not only their forward momentum in and by them, but their very
wavelength and relative velocity is accurately determined by the spacing of
these atoms and/or molecules.
By illustration figure 23-4, the diameter of the molecule sets the amplitude of the wave, and the circumference - the circular movement by which the wave must proceed in each and every wavelength noted: AC.
This therefore is the measured length, while ABC is the real length. The
wave (ABC) then as it comes upon the
molecule will strike first at point 6 with its most forward edge, point (A).
But now what happens? Shall
it be the wave that latches on to the molecule?
Or shall it be the molecule latching onto the wave?
For here comes a most difficult question, namely, if it are the atoms (or
molecules) that tune the wave for its progression, or, does the wave tune the
atoms to its progression?
Frankly I was hoping you would give me the right answer, for I am not
quite sure of one nor the other. But
in either event let us make a connection so that the wave, as a firm string,
beginning with point A, pierces
through point 6 as were it through a
slot, so that as the wave passes the essence of the molecule in its angular
momentum is taken into rotation.
The wave therefore as it takes the molecular moment into a clockwise rotation, proceeds from point A/6 to point 7, 8, 9, and so on, the numbers set on the clockwise rotation, and on the parts of the wave as they pass these points.
The whole wave of course, as we must realize, passes only through the slot at point 6, wherefore in a half rotation point 6 will be where now point 12 is shown, with the wave as illustrated.
next half, the points 1 through 6
on the wave will correspond with like numbers on the molecule, and the tail-end
(C) of the wavelet will be at point 6
The secondary wave formation then is into the page at point 6, the coordinate of which will be a copy of the passing wave. For as point A of the primary wave struck point 6, the coordinate began to form at right angle in precisely the same length and amplitude.
The broken line from point 6 to 3,
to 12 0-clock, to 9 0-clock, and
back to 6 0-Clock, notes the
succession along which the new coordinate is formed.
The square (broken line) thus is in effect the circumference and
amplitude of the wave in and by AC,
the length of the wave. The result
of which cannot be anything but a coordinate a carbon copy of the first wave.
Almost all molecules now are able to perform this feat in this or
similar fashion, but as their compositions be, so they are selective to
wavelength. It is for that reason
that the leaf on the tree appeared green and every other thing their specific
color. And by the same we can read
the composition of the various substances on their spectra.
Another way of looking at it is that for every element there is a certain angular window by which the waves of light may pass on. Any wavelength too large or too small cannot pass through that window, wherefore the green of a leaf will always be by what is able to pass through the window.
As then color is by a mixture of lengths, there may be more than one window in such compositions to allow for the escape of various lengths. Fanciful as this to some may seem, it bears out more reality than one might realize.
I am of course going over this quite in general, for again it is not always so that a primary wave passes on through as it forms new ones along the way. This in fact only occurs within substances that to us appear transparent. For again, it is so that whatever appears transparent to us, is in fact transparent, as in - conductive - to the wave.
The water molecules in a
green leaf may pass the wave through the leaf showing it slightly transparent,
but the molecules, which account for the composition of its green, do not allow
it to pass through.
Accordingly we might reason that all of the wavelengths are stopped except for those corresponding to the green to be reflected. I now cannot for the moment prove that sentiment in error, but I do not believe that such is the case. I reason that if one is reflected why should not all of them be reflected?
And that instead the primary wave on its encounter with an object
implements secondary coordinates in only those lengths after the particular
coordinate of the composition, which can also be said as; owing to the frequency
of the oscillation.
Most compositions draw new waveform at a ninety degree angle, the opposite direction being canceled out by the composition itself. This then is not so for certain molecules which allow the new wave to go both directions simultaneously.
molecules then or that composition as we might say, becomes invisible, or
transparent for that very reason.
Picture yourself to be standing outside in full sunlight and you behold a mountain in the near or far distance. The light from the sun then as it passes straight down through the air before you, and creates alternate secondary waves and reflected waves from every molecule able thereto.
The mixture of these
various lengths leaves us with the impression of a white color, then why is not
the air white before us? ... Thus we
gather there is more to learn.
The light then that is generated by the sun, or some artificial means,
is one thing, while those found in the illumination of our television tubes,
watches, and other digital toys are secondary wave formations, a magnitude
removed from the primary.