CHAPTER 30B 
INDEX
TO OTHER PAGES
POLARIZATION
The rule, never to trust man’s interpretation of his experiments is to be applied here. In the case of polarized light man's interpretations does not make sense. In an explanation of polarized light in stress analysis there was talk about color.
For so one definition goes, “A vertical polarizer will transmit more of the color which is nearest to the vertical polarization, thus more blue light than red gets through".
My question is; how can you have color separation with polarization? Diverging beams of light are effected by refraction and diffraction, not by polarization. Thus the vertical polarizer is doing some refracting along with polarizing.
Then again if a vertically graded Dichroic material is to
block half the light, and the second set horizontally as by Figure
30-10, A/B, to block the other half. How is it the experiments with Dichroic does not attest to this?
For taking a single sheet of this polarizing material and looking at it by number 1, 90% of the light is coming through. But when a second sheet is placed in front of it, the two grains set perpendicular to one another (by number 2), then only 10% of the light will be seen if held at approximately 12 inches from the eye.
And if held 36 inches (#4) from the eye, it will appear fully black, but if brought within two inches (#3) from the eye then 40% of the light will be seen.
This polarizing material therefore does not seem to be performing much polarizing. And it gets worse when the sheets are held at an angle to the eye, for while number 1 or 5 make little difference, there is a great difference between 2 and 6, where instead of 10% the amount of light seen increases to 45%.
And even at a distance of 36 inches (#8) 20% of the light may be seen. How therefore is this to be explained?
It is often explained that if a slit is made as by M, one half the light is blocked and a second, N, blocks the remaining half of the light. This is probably meant for the area of the slit alone. Since a single slit must reduce the light by 364 out of 366 degrees, or 98% of the light, with the second slit set perpendicular to the first cutting out 2%
If then this is what is meant why is it not taught that way? The funny part of all this is how in our experiment - the opposite occurred, the second grading blocking eight times as much light as the first.
In looking for an answer to the curious results of our experiment that does not conform with what is explained under polarization, I surmise there is more refraction here than polarization.
And that some of the angles of refraction appear more like angles the result of a combination of the refraction and reflection to occur within the composition.
The fact that more light can be seen at close distance than at far tells us that much of the light is refracted at acute angles. (Part G, #9). So acute in fact that at no more than 12 to 24 inches most of these waves for their angle can not strike the eye. But when brought near to within a few inches many of these will strike the eye allowing us to see more light.
And the sheet turned to an angle giving us still more light to see, means that the light striking at an angle is more readily passed into the eye than from the normal.
Aside of this, the reduction of the light seen or passing through - is by reflection on the face of it. And at a distance from the rear as well, and by diffraction, as well as terminal functions, the light being absorbed by the composition.
Accounting all these factors, refraction being the greatest of these, how much is by polarization? We may don ourselves with polarized sunglasses which for the greater part may do no more than refract much of the light away from our eye, but who is to know the difference be it cut out one way or another.
In the polarization of circular to transverse waves there is little difference, for as long as the locomotive passes through the hole the rest of the train will follow. And this is one thing many seem to have forgotten in devising a slit instead of a hole for the wave to pass.
Unless they are suggesting that the transverse wave passes through our media by no more than the linear direction as we discussed by Figure 30-6, which we rejected on the word of the scientist that they recorded blue light to travel slower through a media than its red cousin.
If then they were in error, we shall be in error, we however for now will take their word as factual, consequential to which the slit instead of a round hole will allow that many more waves to pass.
There is of course this snag with the transverse theory that electrons must be summoned not only to produce the wave but also to transmit the same at any and all of the amplitudes by which magnetic waves are known to travel some of which span 20 or more meters.
THE WAY WE SEE
Beholding is by a spiritual nature, but there is this mechanical innovation by which the form of things are brought unto us. As therefore we look out over the valley and behold the mountains rise before us, how is it that we can see right through all that substance which is between us and the mountains?
For like the fish in water we are surrounded by a media pressing upon us from all sides. And we utilize this media for our movements as well as breathing it, and to see right on through it as if it were not there.
But even more amazing are the eyes of our minds to behold what cannot be seen with the eyes of flesh. For example, place your hands twelve inches apart in front of you and look at the air between your hands.
Then consider what expires in that small section of air, how many light-wave, radio waves, television waves, micro-waves, and what all other waves pass through it simultaneously. Together with how many telephone conversations, a whole realm of different wavelengths at different magnitudes in different directions, all passing through that little space of air.
And as if that is not enough, the sound of a hi-fi, will make the atoms of that little space vibrate with sound. Meanwhile you breathe in that very air, taking from it the Oxygen atoms and putting carbon monoxide back out.
And moving your hand through it you feel nothing, nor are your eyes able to behold that marvelous miracle of all these things taking place simultaneously one over and around the other right before you.
How amazing indeed for all this to endlessly pass and take place with such perfect harmony, the manner of which we are searching out, and of which we have learned much, and yet barely begun to understand the same.
And so let us speak and search out these marvelous things, taking the pains that come with it, for knowledge is indeed beautiful, and worth the pains in having her.
The term transparent can also be stated as “no terminal", since that specifies the cause as to why the air is not seen, and why glass is so transparent. It is commonly taught that we behold all that we behold by reflected light striking into our eye.
This is only partially true, since by reflected waves we behold the source, not the terminal, and the terminal being anything by which the light entering the composition was returned unto us.
Thus there is a difference illustrated by Figure 30-11, the circle being an atom or molecule of a green leaf on a tree. If then the light is reflected from it, the wavelengths did not enter the molecule, and we would not see the green of the leaf, but rather a haze, or a glare.
Since only those wavelengths which having entered the composition - and are put through it and returned from it to our eye - will present us with the color.
By the illustration the 5500a waves pass on through as if newly created, or simply allowed to pass or reflect within the interior. The 4500a wave comes and is arrested since it does not correspond with the coordinate of the composition in either format or dimension to be passed on through.
Instead however the 4500a wave serves the composition with a most needed function, to warm or to heat the composition so that growth may take place.
On the other hand it could also be that the molecules of the green leaf absorb all wavelengths except those, which account for its green color the same being reflected instead.
But I hardly think so since no surface in reflecting light seems to be selective to length, the reflection of light being a condition of the surface and of incidence rather than of the composition.
Moreover if we project only green wavelengths at a green leaf, the color becomes more brilliant, - which I surmise is not only in the greater quantity of the waves, but much of it by reflection as well - as if not every part of the surface is suitable for a wave to enter.
And if we project it with red light the green becomes reddish. Thus it neither absorbed the red - as it is supposed to, - nor did it reflect only green lengths - as it is supposed to. (Thus there is more to this)
In beholding the air, the molecules of the air do not posses the coordinate to arrest a wave, nor even to regenerate or reflect them as water molecules and/or glass molecules may wherefore the air becomes transparent.
The clouds are visible since these are made up of water molecules, and even the rainbow is seen because water droplets refract and reflect the waves into diverging paths.
And a glass pane may be seen for the glare of reflecting waves or for the dust upon it.
WAVE PRODUCTION
The transverse theory on wave propagation has this that it touches upon the principle whereby waves are produced. But with the spectrum ranging from the single and unique wave formation of magnetic force to the minute lengths of x-rays, there are different levels and variations whereby the waves are initiated, and perhaps propagated as well.
Enumerating these levels; the smallest is found on the sub-atomic level. Next comes the atomic level, roughly from the ultra violet to the infrared with visible light in between.
Then comes what may be called the molecular level in the range of radar waves. After this comes a level for which I have no name, and shall call it the free level, wherein radio waves are found.
The level after that may be called the magnetic level in the production of electricity. And all the way down comes the source bearing up the whole of the spectrum, the magnetic force that for its appearance provides straight yet curvaceous lines in a single wave formation the design of a figure eight.
Each of these orders vary from one to the other not only in size, but having their own means to wave production, while the principle thereto remains the same from the level of radio waves on up. Below this level a principally different means becomes necessary, as we shall see.
The transverse wave version calls for electrons to oscillate, (Figure 30-12 / SWL), but when it comes to waves on the order of visible light it must be whole atom to move (figure 30-12-AWL). For the electron lacks the mass to make for the potential of the wave of light, nor for its confines is it suitable in the time-frame thereof.
On the order of radar waves, the oscillation (atomic movement), is replaced with (simply said) a dent-maker, where an electrical current is used to resonate, or string a magnetic line, creating a variant by an on/off, or reverse switching in movements of directions (polarities) (Figure 30-13 / MWL)
And in much the same way radio waves are initiated, like an arrow shot from a bow, or like taking a rubber band and letting it go after having pulled back on it. (figure 30-13-ASCF)
The fundamentals to the initiation of a waveform, is first to have a line of movement, such as the 3M line (Figures 30-12, 30-13, & 30-14) (3M, the abbreviation for magnetic force, or line of).
These are most everywhere in nature since they are the coordinates of the stars and of the planets that operate on the first fundamental movements (atomic angular momentum) by which lines, and consequently waves come about, are propagated, and sustained.
For how is one to have a sine formation that is without collateral, that does not depend upon a physical media, whose coordinate is not directly relevant as also an integral part of the physical media?
The second factor of the criteria to wave formation is the movement in timing and in magnitude to produce (as to say) a spike, an instant at variance. Such as may be produced by oscillation, which by Figure 30-12, would be the atom in AW, or SW, in the sub-atomic level.
And the third factor is a reference, such as point L, which is that point in distance from A, or S, where there is a connection, or a hold upon the line.
This is like the wire on power poles, if one of these is cut off near a pole and we lift up on that end, the reference point would be the next pole down the line where it is still connected. And I call it a “reference” since it is just that - the reference in relation to point W in the range and the rate of the oscillation - providing, and establishing the angle by which the waveform will be produced.
Tangent E therefore, by Vc of 3M is into the length of the wave, since in fact it is the angle of the wave in the formation thereof. (Drawing not to scale)
Now comes the question; what shall be the AL length? Since the distance, and consequently the velocity, and diameter of the wave depend on that first measure, and likewise for the AW measure.
And not knowing either of these measures, having no more than the wavelength and the relative velocity of the light to go by, everything else must be calculated. And like Mr. Spock I had to make a calculated guess at both lengths to get the formula going.
Accordingly I set length (AL) at one quarter of the wavelength, and AW at one half of the diameter. The scenario thus is that in the time-frame wherein A reaches W, the head of the wave beginning at point L
will be at L1, from where the newly formed wavelet is transported down the line driven by the wheels of nature.
For the particulars, we know that the wave travels by a circular fashion around the tube, but in order to calculate its particulars it is advantageous to lay the tube out in a flat triangular plane.
And taking the red wave in air from Figure 30-5, the width of the plane, or right leg of the triangle, will be its diameter 54.56a times 3.14, = 171.3184a, and the length W/W1 at 7000a, with W/L1 at 7002.096a.
As therefore A moves to W by 27.28a, the head of the wave must travel 5251,8834a to come to L1. That last figure being correct since distance WL is already existing the instant when atom A starts for point W. If then we divide that distance into frequencies, the frequency is also a measure of that fraction of the second in which it took one of these lengths.
Accordingly, 27.28 times frequencies (too many numbers) would give us the AW velocity in the sum
of 1558 km/sec. This was not all as simple as it now appears in these few sentences since I tried in many ways to come to a correct outcome, and still I am not convinced of my figures.
Thus we conceive the atom to oscillate at a velocity of 1558 Km/sec, or at half that measure by the full distance in oscillation, to make for a red wavelength. Meaning also that its velocity at point A in Figure 30-12, would have to be much greater, since the atom is to accelerate and decelerate at each end of the swing.
If then we realize it or not, this plays havoc with our calculations, there being a lingering period at point W, while the velocity of constant upon the line never lingers. In which case the wave for its length and identity would be different according to the variants in the acceleration and deceleration of the pendulum. The rate of 1558km/sec thus is not a constant but an average.
Looking at the birth of the wave in the time frame, which contributed to its full-length measure, the velocity at which the same came forth was factually instantaneous.
For there is no acceleration for the wave to come to its forward movement, the line of movements with or without its modulation being at full velocity before, during, and after the incident. Thus it can never be said, “to accelerate a wave", nor for that matter can they be decelerated.
These fundamentals are the same for both the atomic and the molecular order, in all four of the levels thereof illustrated by figures 30-12 & 13 The inset in figure 30-12, in size, is thus but a millionth of a cm on the wire in the incandescent lamp shown below it.
As therefore the atoms do indeed have a rapid movement within the radiant hot tungsten filament of the lamp, this serves only to initiate, or produce the waves. The atoms outside of the lamp, or even those within the lamp not of the tungsten wire, do not oscillate, nor move by an angular momentum.
For suppose that according to the transverse theory of waves, the atoms outside of the lamp did oscillate to set forth the wave, would not everything outside of the lamp also be radiantly hot to accomplish that feat?
Experience tells us a different story that the atoms of the air barely (or not at all) increase in temperature for the light passing upon it.
MOLECULAR ORDER WAVES
In reference to Figure 30-13, I drew a rectangle, and a string pulled at tension, to represent the order wherein the relationship of the momentum drives the spike M and C. That is of course also the distance in the time-frame MW and FC verses the point of reference L and B not bound to atoms, but to a magnitude on the order ranging from molecules to what is greater thereto.
But that “greater thereto” is not in the physical sense of structures, but rather to something narrow and long, namely the 3M line.
The computations here are the same, with only the means to the initiation being different, and the point of reference bound to a greater than atomic realm. In the example of a radar or microwave, at the length of 100 mm the identity of the wave comes to .07 mm greater assuming the relative velocity that was gained in our experiment thereto is indeed at 299,792.456 km/sec.
This would give the wave a diameter of 1.19 mm, still much like a straight line, as the length of a metric yardstick with only a little more than one of its stripes in diameter. And when we compare a radio wave of 2 km (2000m) in length, which adds only 1.4 m to its real lengths (w’id), it will come to a diameter of 23.84 m.
If then there is a hole no larger than a millimeter 2 km up ahead, and the head of the wave happen to come directly upon it, it will pass through unharmed. But what are the changes of that occurring in such a large tube?
If we were to scale a light-wave upon an 8.5 x 11” sheet its amplitude would be contained within the pencil line, in appearance being nothing more than a straight line. Thus we exaggerate the amplitude in order to demonstrate the sine formation.
In most if not all textbooks however our habit is to represent these sine formation far out of proportion, much too far out of proportion, and we could do better to bring our illustration more into reality. It may give us the wrong impression when at every turn a wave is presented with its amplitude nearly as great as its length.
The means to initiate a dent or variation into a line of movement is typically by an electrical current. For since electrical current is itself a magnetic wave it is susceptible to all magnetic waves near it.
And by a switching, or alternating (oscillating - resonating) means we are in fact doing what may be likened to having a flexible string at tension, like pulling a rubber band back to shoot an arrow, depicted with the radio wave in Figure 30-13.
In this scenario there are two points of reference, point A, and point B, to C. For by means of the electrical wave we are in fact pulling on a magnetic line of force from the earth we live upon.
As therefore by way of speaking we lift up on any point thereof we are lifting both ends up, since the physical connection for anything as large as these overall lines is greater than the wavelengths we wish to produce.
Accordingly, it is simply in the timing. If we pull slowly up on the line, the waves will be long, while a rapid pulling (switching) results into shorter waves.
We should not consider the earth’s third magnitude magnetic lines to be all as free as a string that rests upon the atoms by merely its weight thereof (speaking figuratively), but bound to them in the magnitude that pertains thereto.
Thus as they are bound it does not take a great deal of force to cause them to come lose and simply roll over onto the next series of atoms.
For if this was not inherent, and unique of magnetic force to simply roll over to the next in line, it would not have the curvature that is so common with it in figure eight’s to all dimensions. It is that same curvature that brings magnetic lines to connect on end to form a closed loop.
On the molecular level, the second magnitude of nature, (Figure 30-13), the reference is more seated in the structural formation of things, rather than in the former greater order thereto. In contrast with light-waves to find an atom or a molecule to move by a circular orbit, or to oscillate, here we simply modulate the 3M string.
This in principle describes the two orders in the four levels thereof. And to clarify one more item: If a force, spike, modulation, oscillation, or whatever, is from M to W, figure 30-13, and it were a particle, or if light were particles, the result would be a movement into direction M1.
Since however there is a simultaneous force from direction X to drive to X1, the resultant for a particle would be direction Y.
Since therefore the phenomena of light and of magnetic nature is from point W into direction L, the nature thereof is a “coordinate”, a wave, or sine formation. This serves as evidence for their wave nature.
THE COMPONENT ORDER
Much of this will appear new to us, and perhaps not as explicit as we might desire, since I plan to speak no more on it than the principle fashion in order to complete my intend on wave nature. Nor will I speak on the nature of electricity more than required for my current purpose.
In regards to magnetic force it is not two separate circles but rather a figure of eight. I described three orders to the realm of nature, which in the twofold nature of things comes to six levels; each of these orders is a magnitude over the other.
While therefore atoms belong to the first magnitude, and molecules reside in the second, there is a “greater
then” in that third magnitude whereby force operates on the order of what I came to call “component” factors, the further definition of which is stated elsewhere.
Principally what that amounts to is that magnetic force within ferrous metals draws and is drawn by a factor called components. This, by and through a series of atoms and/or molecules, comes to what appears as a minute version of its own greater force (Figure 30-14), two triangles end on end resembling the figure of eight.
The 3M line then is found at the equatorial sides where the unique implementation of “curvature” is produced whereby, instead of straight lines, or movements into a straight-on direction, the magnetic force is able to curve into their typical circular loops. And as such are locked onto the media.
These lines within certain compositions are at all times structurally paired. And if utilized as such we cannot produce anything smaller or more complex than an electrical wave.
But on singular terms we utilize them for our radio broadcasts, and with finer detail for
micro-waves, after which on the atomic level, any line of movement paired or not may be utilized to produce and transport such waves as known for light.
I mentioned the words “structurally paired", to convey, that as I said, these components are found, or drawn in ferrous metals. And a similar version with the like appearance but unable to draw curvature is found with metals such as copper, and silver. Other structures may thus be represented by squares, circles, hexagons, polygons, etc.
The magnetic lines therefore having extended above the surface of the earth, are no longer upon such components as shown, and yet exist and continue in their curvature by the (so to say) grip on them within the earth.
Unlike light-waves, magnetic force is sensitive to temperature since its curvature, its format is so dearly held in these component coordinates. But there appears to be a reversing point within temperature both in the high as in the low end.
ELECTRICITY
How is one to have electricity? For a radio broadcast we simply took hold of the magnetic line, and putting tension on it, we shot an arrow to glue ourselves to the talking box as youngsters listening to the hair-raising stories.
And for electricity we spanned the lines between two stationary parts and caused another part with loops of conducting wire to rotate within it.
Therefore holding to the fundamentals that all force is motion, and that there is no energy that is not fundamentally motion, we simply look at the generator, and mentally replace the rotor and conducting wire with gears turning between the stationary interlocking teeth’s at both sides.
And thus we would see how yes, we are doing nothing more than twisting these lines, we are putting more and more turns upon them.
For since the copper has the same type of components, and is susceptible to these magnetic strings - they are wound up on it.
Perhaps not like a string on a roller, but like the loop of a rubber band that is also paired for its lines between ends to simply wind figures of eight end to end as illustrated
by Figure 30-14.
Now at last we know what electricity is, and how it is commercially produced. The twists (rotations) account for voltage; the flow (electro-motive force) is ampere. And since voltage is simply by number of turns that the generator is able to maintain upon it, the same may be increased or decreased by “turns of motion".
If you took a wire of some length and laid it out straight, connecting it to the two ends of a 120-volt outlet, the wire would burn through - because, there are no turns of motion in the wire.
But taking the same wire and winding into a coil around a steel part to give it base, then the current would flow through the wire safely, because with your turns in the coil you counteract the turns in the source (your outlet connected to the generator).
TRANSVERSE VERSES CIRCULAR
The question in the production of waves on the order of the infrared and smaller remains as to how and by what. Does the electron have the cloud for the size of a light-wave, and if not - the next in line would be the atom.
I now am not one to deny a transverse version because there is an alternate, but rather to find which is correct in the how and why. Thus far the circular version has proven itself superior, nor will polarization disqualify it.
And if we assume the atom, as illustrated by figure 30-15 to move by a circular path producing one full wavelength for each turn of its rotation, we are to justify how the atom is to stay in that circular path without a gravitational force.
There are two options here. #1 that within its rigid molecular framework (metallic structure), atom A is buffeted or balanced between its neighbors in their relative bonding force.
For while we may not know exactly how, we do know that atoms and molecules bond quite strongly. The fact that we can hear sound evidently suggests that there is a physical connection between the cores of atoms along which that sound is transmitted. For again the instant that this bond breaks by spacing the atoms too far from one another, as in space, sound is no longer transmitted.
It is therefore not far fetched that an atom is locked in, and it is evident that these bonds are flexible as well. If then by means of an electrical current, represented by the two figures of eight shown in Figure 30-15, the direction of automotive force being into the paper and its rotation counter-clockwise.
That it drives the atom (atom A) at the center thereof in a circular movement along with its own direction, to then have the same means as oscillation or resonance to produce wave formations.
This also explains how the metal becomes radiantly hot in the process of wave production. For as atom A moves about in its circle it is constantly varying its relative position to the neighboring atoms, the result of which is heat.
Oscillation or resonance does of course produce heat in the same manner and vibration as well if sufficiently violent. (Temperature discussed under “Thermodynamics".)
Option #2, was to suggest the atom bound within the confines of the electrical wave, or perhaps in reality it is a combination of both the first and second option. Which of course is fine wherever there is an electrical current in the production of light-waves, but how may this be when there is none, such as in the sun, and by simply burning which also produces light?
In making a suggestion I should state that, as any substance is heated the parts move in variance from one another, like a fluctuation, not quite the same as vibration or oscillation. This variance, or fluctuation can drive an atom such as A, in our illustration to a movement that is just as likely into a circle as into an up and down movement, or RAM.
Should it prove difficult to justify an atom to come to a circular movement, it will be no less difficult to prove the atom to oscillate. For in that case we must provide a force or action to stop the atom at each end of the line and to force it back into an opposite direction, which I deem more difficult than the former.
We could spend many more words on this, and hopefully I made it clear that I have not yet resolved this
into a positive solution. We might however go into the particulars to see what is to learn there.
The velocity which we came up with in Figure 30-11, from the center of the circle to the top was 1558 km/sec, which by the circular path is the time frame from point F over A, to point E, one half of the circle.
The time frame itself is a triangle by points OAD, and OBD placing D at the center of the tube, the center of the diameter of the wave, which is the same as any one point on the perimeter.
The timing for the wave F to E is therefore one half of the wave, as seen by section R in DAE, with the second half EF, in section R by EBF. Section BEA of the wave shown in section R is thus on the backside of the tube.
And to demonstrate that the angular movement of the wave is by a straight trajectory following the circumference line FED is identical to FBEAD when the tube is laid-out flat in a two dimensional plane.
The modulator, the atom in this case, produces one wavelength at each rotation. And in the event the atom oscillates instead of proceeding by a circular movement the same procedure in wave formation applies.
THERMODYNAMICS
Our “senses” and the words “change in” mark a relation that is found throughout nature. The Almighty Lord did not make anything that it should be idle, or come to die on a monotonous track. Let us then enumerate this relation,
Feeling, to feel, is in a change of speed or in a change of direction of movement.
To touch, also in feeling, is by a change or variant upon the coordinate of the composition converted into what are essentially electrical waves to the receptors of our brain
To see is in a change of movement, a variant by number of occasions, or by certain lengths of movement.
And color likewise is by a change, a variant in number of occasions or lengths of movement.
To hear is by a change in movement, also by lengths or numbers per unit of time.
To smell is by variants in coordinates, which is also in variations of movement.
To taste is like unto smell also by variants in coordinates, and a change in movements one from the other.
Then we come back to feeling again, the feeling of warmth, of heat, and of temperature, that like unto the above is by a change of, a change in relative position, which again is a change in movement.
And so there are variants (or, change of) in magnitudes, for while the variant movement of the atomic cores produces sound unto our ears, the variant movement of our whole body (a magnitude greater to the atoms) comes to us as acceleration or deceleration.
Then again to change into direction of movement - without a gravitational force to ounce for ounce compensate for the change - comes to impress upon the atoms again of which our bodies are constructed in the way of a torque upon the inertia resting foremost in the atoms.
To feel therefore is a sense that embodies heat along with velocity and directions. Then there are two more groups, sight and hearing that go together in wave formations, with taste and smell together in variants of coordinates.
And to explain “coordinates", nature is twofold in three magnitudes, the whole of which sums up in “matter in motion by coordinates". Matter then may be viewed as a magnitude, with motion in the second.
But neither of these shall have being if it were not for that grand magnitude I call the magnitude of coordinates, the systematic arrangement, and formation of things by matter in motion.
Heat then in the essence thereof is in and by a change in the relative positioning of the parts of nature one to the other, primarily on the atomic scale, but not to exclude the molecular scale.
By illustration thereof, figure 30-14, the two atoms that fluctuate or cycle by an X, Y relation in distance. I drew two atoms, since heat, or warmth, cannot be explained singularly, wherefore I used the word “relative” with change of.
Sound for example in taking a single atomic core, can be explained in the to and fro movement thereof (a nonetheless twofold reference).
But with temperature it is more than the reference, for by figure 30-14, we could make line Z the reference and show temperature by relative change with a single atom. But this is not heat, nor temperature; it would be a cycling.
Change in relative positioning one to the other - that is heat, which is by means of vibration, oscillation, resonance, compression, expansion, fluctuation, and or rapid cycling. In the case of resonance, which is near to vibration, sound may be heard at frequencies tuned to our hearing.
Similarly, oscillation (usually of greater distance than either vibration or resonance) could come to the tune of sound, but on the order of the frequencies, by which most magnetic waves are generated, they are too high for the tune of sound to the human ear.
Coming back to figure 30-13 where an electrical current captured an atom to use it as a flywheel in the making of light for our eyes, it equally as much forced a change in relative positioning of the atoms one to the other.
This resulted into, or was the radiant heat upon the tungsten element, as the same applies to the air by the electrical wave of the lightning arching through the sky.
A flame to light our taboo cigarettes, or my pipe, is a decomposition of the substance rearranging their structural formation or molecular coordinate. The apparent chaos here is very sophisticated to drive an atom into a wave modulator even if it is only for the long red lengths.
ELECTRONS
To recap on the idea of an electron pushing a line into a wave formation, assuming we had a line to start with. It is against law and common sense that an electron (Figure 30-17 / E) should move at great speed to make a dent, then to come to a dead-stop in mid-air with nothing in its way.
An electron is considered a particle, a part of matter in motion, while a wave a mere sine formation, which when it encounters resistance is not so immaterial as not to create heat, as well as having the ability to generate electricity.
How therefore is the electron as a particle more substantial than the collateral of a sine formation, to stop without some huge ball (Figure 30-17 / W) W) in its way to counteract its movement? And what force (F) might there exist to accelerate it back for the next dent in the line, also to consider that this must proceed at high speed (trillions of times per second).
There is this alternate where the electron is bound to the atom. But then, what is meant by bound? In our previous proposal figure 30-15, the atom moved about, either oscillating, or by a circular track bound for its movement by the surrounded atoms in the rigidity of the composite structure.
The same if said for the electron confines the electron to the atom. For I judge it prudent to think of the electron as having a marvelous function, but that said function is a very part and factor of and with the atom.
We must consider how electrons - if indeed it are particles as such moving around the core - traveling at considerable velocity, are not very likely at some instant to jump from one orbit to the next. The fact that they are particles at high velocity in circular movement does not attribute to them that extra ordinary phenomena to violate nature’s laws of motion.
But everything in nature being governed by simple rules I regard their action to coincide with the laws of motion. If we speak of an electron to oscillate illustration figure 30-17 / AB, would be more appropriate than CD.
By AB we can assume the electron to maintain its orbital momentum while an angular movement is added, that if done rapidly may be called oscillation, or otherwise it is simply called cycling.
A change in orbit by movement G is quite possible provided there is a cause, and what might that be? A change in temperature perhaps? But that can hardly be made into oscillation. I do not doubt that electrons can rapidly change their location in space, in other than their trajectory - as long as they are and remain bound to their core, as in the package.
In my judgment the only true function of the electron is within the atom. It is contrary to reason to even suggest that electrons absorb and/or emit energy, since energy is nothing more fundamental than plain movement.
And the energy of and upon the electron is its circular movement within the atom. If it emits energy, it simply slowed down, and why then do we not simply say; it lost momentum?
Its energy therefore - as its momentum - changes only in a change of its velocity. There is nothing super-natural in the atom, or in any part of physical nature, it is matter in motion by coordination. And if that rule is applied we will do well.
But to assume that the electron by a rapid cycling, or oscillation if you will shall be capable to anything greater than an X-ray, which is about the size of the atom, we are wasting our efforts. A light-wave is far too substantial for any electron, how much less shall it be attributed to a radio wave.
And as to the matter of light-waves, I do not recall how we have ever regarded light by any other standard than the octave in the wave spectrum so known for it.
If we ascribe anything that appears red unto us by a length of seven thousand Angstroms, and I were to tell you that a one thousand or an fifteen thousand length may also appear red, or show us for lights, you would think me to be mad, and deviate from the known laws of nature.
And so I will not tell, or set any such standards, but whether you will consent to it or not, there is still a lot more in the nature of light, or "of our beholding" I should say, than what at any time may have entered into your thoughts. But to forego what no doubt would become a lengthy discussion, I will keep that bucket of worms as yet sealed.
Regarding the mass of the electron, we must be mistaken, especially if as I heard it said, that it was without mass, for that violates the rule of matter in motion by coordination. A 3000-lb automobile sitting on your driveway has this figure of 3000 in lb of force attributed to it by the inertia of the atoms of which it is constructed.
We cannot say that the molecules provide the inertia since these are not the gyro’s, nor do the structures of the part move at angular momentum to provide the inertia.
It are the atoms which provide the first basic inertia, which is that inertia by angular momentum upon which gravity takes hold. If then the electron is without mass, how does it attain to inertia? Or equally how did the vehicle come to its 3000-lb gravitational force?
It is high time to learn that two plus two does equal to four, in that for as much the atom provides inertia there is mass. And for as much as there is no mass in angular movement within the atom how does one come to weigh upon a scale? Two plus two therefore is four, anything else is fantasy.
If there are 3000 million atoms in a vehicle, each atom provides 1/1 millionth of a lb of force, which is equal to the mass of the atom by the momentum of its parts - core and planets. And since the core merely spins, the greater inertia must be of its planets.
If then zero mass moves at Vc the inertia is zero, even as the velocity would be zero, since again, no mass means no movement. But if 0.1 mass moves Vc we may get the square into inertia.
Vc - HOW
By figure 30-18, for illustration, the velocity at which waves are transposed has a unique constant, it being (assumed) 300.000 km/sec, and the term “constant” is what makes it so unique. The quest then is - how and why so constant?
If by logical conclusion we attribute this velocity to the speed of the parts revolving around the nucleus of every atom, then these electrons, as they are called, must travel at that speed.
And so all right, let us assume that we can grasp the idea of an electron traveling at Vc, which for the smaller atoms is in the trillions of orbits per second and by a lesser number for the larger atoms. For after all, it is a confirmed fact that light-waves do indeed travel at a Vr near to 300.000 km/sec.
And that their revolutions per second in time is into the trillions, so why not for the nucleus to spin that fast, or for the electron to travel around the nucleus at such speed.
But then comes the most amazing part for our mind to grasp, how that speed of Vc is so constant, that it never wavers under any condition? Anyone care to answer or speculate?
If you are to ask me I will tell you that it is the stork to deliver babies - since I do not feel myself at liberty to correct upon that ideal. Or in my disdain for the silence of men I will refer to it as "inhibition" to let those so wise in themselves fetch for themselves.
If the atom is the planetary system as we claim it is, we would expect the electrons as planets to revolve at various velocities, not all of them at 300.000 km/sec, for that would mean fewer revolutions in the greater atoms.
But we cannot deny the fact that the movement passing along the atoms, and hanging on to them, as in being dependent on them is at that velocity, and that said velocity is a constant.
For if the velocity of light were different at different temperatures, we could say, yes, the electrons increased or decreased their velocity. But this does not happen. And thus how are we to contradict the facts? How to deny reality?
For to me yes it seems inconceivable that the atomic planets should revolve at that speed, let alone their constant. But then the size of our galaxy is also inconceivable to me, let alone the whole of the universe, and these also exist. Of light-waves in their speed and revolution I would say, “impossible."
It seems almost as if the existence of electrons is no more than an assumption, as if that which revolves around the nucleus are not planets, and rather than angular velocity to consist of a velocity in revolutions.
And that whatever that contents may be, is such that it can be broken up into bits and pieces, suggesting that the contents is not indivisible, and that there is something extra ordinary with it to have such a constant of velocity which seems unlike a
phenomena of physical nature.
I of course am speculating, just giving out hints, and do not quote me otherwise. I am not one to say; “O these are gravitational waves” without giving at least some idea of what they be made of, and where they originated or how they may come to their speed. And also in what or how they might be susceptible or dependent or not dependent upon the physical nature.
But now we have this baffling thing, how for most wavelengths there is but a minor expansion to come to a straight line, how this can be read into the thousands of km/sec? No doubt we need more data, and if I could investigate just how we obtained these spectra perhaps I could find the cause.
There is for example by figure 30-19, this omission, in a spectrogram where if we read the shift from a prism that is set in water and converted it into velocity by a comparison for air, it would show the shorter blue waves to have a reduction in velocity equal to the longer red waves.
This as we know is not correct, for while the red wave travels AC, the blue wave travels AB in the same unit of time. But the spectrograph does not know that, for while the red did indeed registered itself first upon the spectrogram, the shift to the blue is identical for the red effected by the index of refraction that is the same for both.
Thus if we merely read the spectrogram - the velocity for both waves would be the same, unless we took a high speed camera to record who came first. And by the same token we can certify to ourselves that the blue wave does indeed bent proportionally to its own incidence and after the same index, but for its true (relative) velocity relative to the red we must employ other means.
By figure 30-20, section A, how do the spectral lines of H and K come to some 1800a removed when for the 3.7a greater length in identity (section B) there can be no more than 54.56a readable shift? If we placed 1800a into the angular then either Vc or Vr are in error.
And if waves traveled dimensionally as shown by section C, then all waves must travel by the same velocity in space as well as through any density. And this is provided it is given room to pass - all substance in its path to stop it.
Accordingly, section D demonstrates a more probable propagation where the medium serves to transmit and propel the wave. Or if we argue that once a wave has been started it will continue to move on its own, illustrated by section E, the difference here is that this line is an actual string held rigid at one end, the wave moving by a flip of the string.
Here each individual motionless part of the string is forced into the curve, and there is nothing in its way to prevent its movement.
WAVE UPON WAVE
If as reported upon radio waves additional wave formations are superimposed, in which case the first becomes the carrier wave. Or as shown in figure 30-13, a second superimposed wave formation is placed upon the first.
The superimposed formations having their length and amplitude do not appear to travel at a velocity according to their particulars, but rather proportional to the relative velocity of the carrier wave.
Is it then according to section A, where the line of the carrier wave takes on after the particulars of the two carry-on’s, or like section B, where they are truly super-imposed leaving the carrier wave intact?
In the case of the first, if the wave must travel after the particulars of the additional wave formation imbedded upon it, the relative velocity would be proportionally lower. And is this the case - what shall the answer be?
With the best of means I can not conceive particles moving perpendicular to the propagation of the wave whereby to transmit the same. I understand how water-waves are transposed in that way, and a wave-form traveling on its own upon a string, but we are not talking about water, nor about strings, but about magnetic waves in the three main categories thereof.
Waves that proceed from star to star in straight lines. And while magnetic waves are like strings how is that when these are curvaceous while the line of transmission is straight?
As I said in the beginning the more we, or at least I have learned, the less I seem to understand of the whole of the matter.
And though I am certain of some things, there are enough uncertainties to bring the whole thing into question as if at this point we do not know much of anything in the nature of magnetic waves.
The next chapter then may show what if any I may have learned, for the subject will of course not leave my mind, but first I have other matters to attend to.
