If only the subject would leave my mind I could be finished, and in the words of one “It seems like torture to me.”
And perhaps it is; only my determination does not recognize that.
CHAPTER 32 INDEX TO OTHER PAGES
By figure 32-14 the curve X for the index of refraction of flint glass is incorrect, it should be line Y, the index of refraction being the same for all these wavelength. This small notation is of prime importance, since that curve destroys the spectra, and the whole ideal in wave-shift.
If this graph with curve X were correct then the next graph illustration
figure 32-15 is none existent, and how that is will become evident as we dig deeper into the fundamentals of wave nature.
My next complaint is with figure 32-15, and the explanation that goes with it. The caption for this graph states:
red-shift (z) is the fractional shift in wavelength, as measured on a spectroscopic plate. For example, if all of the wavelengths of the spectral lines of a galaxy are lengthened by 25%, then z = 0.25. This graph shows the relationship between z and speed. The highest possible speed is c, the speed of light.”
So all right if 25% is 0.25, then 100 % is 1.0, and with no speed greater than the speed of light being possible, why does the graph go to 3.0? I presume the author is still hung up on relativity. My next question is; why, if something moves at the speed of light to give the wave its 100% expansion - which is 1.0 - does the line intersect at little more than ˝ the speed of light?
I know it is correct, but how did you know this to be correct? For you also drew graph figure 32-14, which implies that while you correctly drew the curve in figure 32-15, you did not know how or why that curve was a curve.
And then again, while your conviction is for transverse wave propagation, which in effect destroys both of your graphs, you seem un-concerned, or unaware.
Seeing thus how the curve does not come as far as the speed of light, why are we saying that the highest possible speed is the speed of light? If the wave may be stretched by more than 100 %, taking the speed of light together with the source at the speed of light, how does that come to something greater than 100%?
Perhaps my drift is not realized, how nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. And so to add speed to speed how do we get anything greater than two times speed of light? If this is in relativity, don’t bother, my interest is more realistic.
In reciting what was said for the graph
in figure 32-15, it reads.
“For low velocities z is equal to the speed of the galaxy expressed as a fraction of the speed of light. Thus, for example, a galaxy whose spectrum shows a 12 percent shift in wavelength is therefore receding from us at 12 percent of the speed of light and is said to have a red shift of z = 0.12". And that for greater than about a third of the speed of light the relation between z and velocity must be modified."
The answer to these inconsistencies lies in the wave how it acts verses our notation of it, and in the compound relationship of length verses angular component and circumference, the x, y, z, (Figures 32-17) relation whereby waves are expanded and contracted. And whereby also line z in our graphs of shift verses speed in figures 32-15, and 32-16, comes to a curve rather than a straight line.
If waves were transverse, the relationship between shift and speed would be a straight line, wherein the shift would come no further than a half measure, and speed no further than a quarter thereof.
Since however waves are circular acting by the typical hand-rule for
magnetic phenomena, z comes by a curve. We could therefore say that Slipher’s graph (if
it is his) confirms or serves as evidence towards the circular or tubular propagation of waves.
Figure 32-17 illustrates wave PQ (solid line) as it moves around the circumference of the tube, and wave PR (dotted line) the same in an expanded condition wherein factor Z has been reduced.
Thus to reiterate how we read a wave, our reading upon a spectrograph, is upon factor Y, the angular component that presents the incidence upon our prism (figures 32-19 and 31-4) whereby in refraction the individual waves are dispersed each according to their own angle of incidence.
As therefore wave PQ by its factor, or angle Y records (registers) itself upon a certain numerical value on the spectrum, the expansion (PR) of the wave comes to register itself to a higher numerical value, a red-shift.
The angular component (Y) of the wave is thus “the angle of incidence to the angle of registry". And also note that this angle of incidence is “by one half” of the wave, that consequently comes to register itself upon
our spectra by these halves.
This is further demonstrated by figure 32-18. Let us consider a 6000-angstrom wave, noted AF that by the tubular formation proceeds ABF. Note therefore how the angle of incidence is AB upon which our refractive separation is based, recorded on the spectra.
And while 6000 is at F, with B at 3000, we upon our spectra do not record B as being 3000 but rather as being 6000, since it is the angle of the 6000 wave.
Then note how in an expansion of this wave, maintaining the full circumference, the new version coming to ACG, there is a 2000-angstrom expansion in wavelength. But this 2000-angstrom expansion records itself as a 1000 shift noted BC, which is now at 4000 that we read as 8000 upon our spectra.
Accordingly, a 12 percent shift means a 24 percent increase in wavelength. The difference in our reading - in doubling the actual values of the angular shift (such as BC) upon our spectra.
This however holds true at lower velocities wherein factor Z (Z factor of the hand-rule, not shift, it being z) remains unchanged, the diameter of the tube remaining fixed, C being at the same circumference with B.
At higher velocities, meaning; at a greater expansion of the wave, as by example in pulling a coiled spring out further than its normal tension, to stretch it, it is then that we begin to pull the diameter, or circumference down upon itself to any appreciable amount. Here is where shift verses speed is compounded into its curve.
Taking the same wave ACG by figure 32-18, and adding a factor of Z into it so that the wave becomes AEG (z/2 redshift) - what will our reading be? The half wave measure remains still at the line of our previous reading, the incidence at C, the 4000 line as 8000 on our spectra, yet the angle AE is not quite as sharp as the previous angle AC.
This angle then - being an angle of incidence - will record itself at the 4500 mark, noted D, and as 9000 upon our spectra.
And so we have lost our straight line for while the expansion by speed from F to G is still at 2000, and the actual half-wave shift also remains at 1000 (BC or BE) it records itself (BD) as a half-wave shift at 1500 Angstroms.
And to place an extreme reduction of Z into the wave, let us expand the wave by 3000 angstroms (z/3 red-shift - AHM), half the original length of the wave, that presumably could be caused by a speed equal to one half the speed of light.
The half-wave measure comes to D; the 4500 line that is 9000 on our spectra, while the angle of incidence AH will give us a reading of 14000+ angstroms on our spectra.
This is a measure far out of the visible range, and yet is but a half-wave shift to a little more than the 7000 mark, or the 4500 mark, however we wish to look
It now is to be remembered or considered how with the tubular diameter reduced to marking H, that the wave for its incidence will contact itself upon the prism by point H, and accordingly refract and disperse itself thereby. And while that may be upon the 9000-mark line D, the angle AH will refract to disperse itself to point K.
Accordingly, with the XYZ coordinates of the tubular wave placing a curve into the relation of shift verses speed, in the higher velocities exceeding the 25 percent mark, we are bound to obtain some high
red-shift reading that may not be anywhere near proportional to the expansion of the wave. Nor to speed if the expansion is interpreted into a cause thereof.
Another factor to consider is how we read red shifts - not directly from the spectra but from comparisons, which of course were taken at normal with the circumference at normal, neither expanded nor contracted.
For here is still another factor to consider - how waves when initiated in their specific magnitude are so at one and the same tubular width, all holding to the same circumference.
The essence of
this was discussed in our previous chapter by figure
30-5A. How, if each of all of the individual wavelengths of the visible spectrum did not travel, and as such were initiated by one and the same tubular width - there would be no separation of wavelengths nor therefore a spectrum for us to read upon.
WAVE EXPANSION & CONTRACTION
By figure 32-19,
let us reiterate once that spectra reading is by the angle of incidence that the waves pose in their half-wave measure. And
by figure 32-20 let us take a 5400 angstrom wave the normal position is DEF, and expand it by 20 percent to a length of 6480 angstroms maintaining a fixed circumference since we are still below the 25 percent mark.
A 1080 angstrom increase in length is however a measure that must be stretched upon the line. For if we presumed that a wave could not be stretched, and we pulled all of the angular component out of it the additional length would be no more than a fraction of its length not exceeding 5 percent thereof. Or perhaps no more than 1 or 2 percent depending on what the actual tubular width, or amplitude is.
And since I have yet to determine this for any real accuracy we are speaking in general, and for clarity sake the tubular width presented by most all of our illustrations are greatly exaggerated.
And so, now we have measure DKG expanded by either a radial velocity or a number of changes in density. From here let us bring a blue shift upon the wave, by either passing it into water or into a prism wherein the question becomes - how does the wave compress?
If we reason that, for as much as the wave can expand within itself, why not compressed upon itself? Then DKG becomes DEF again. And so let us assume that in passing it into our prism the wave became DEF how will that be read upon the spectra when before it entered the prism it had a record upon it of some 60,000-km/sec radial velocity?
The answer is simple; the light is not read within the prism but must come out again. And as it does, it must
red-shift, and since it came from air, and red-shifts back into the same air - it simply expands back into its former 6480 measure.
And now presuming it cannot compress upon itself, but has a tendency to that of a coiled spring which when stretched out upon itself will compress back into a larger diameter the new scenario would be DHF.
If then this blue shift could somehow be read (as it can in water) it would record itself upon the 1750 line, or a length of 3500 on our spectra, and not the
5400 wave the half-measure of which lies on the 2700 line.
And for a third alternative supposing it cannot exceed its circumference, nor be compressed upon itself, and instead simply wraps itself more around the circumference depicted by D to K (broken heavy line), then the angle of registry remains the same as the former.
And so, which of the three is it? If we consider the first, DEF, then the relative velocity by which the wave blue shifted through the water would be the same velocity as any 5400 wave passing through air.
This may be demonstrated
by figure 32-21, showing three waves, by their wavelength (wl), their wave identity (W’id) and the circumference at a fixed measure for the three. Accordingly:
A 6800 wave Vr = 299,691 km/sec
A 6480 wave Vr = 299.676 km/sec
A 5400 wave Vr = 299,500 km/sec
But the Vr for a 6480 wave that is blue shifted to 5400 is known from factual readings to have a Vr of 249,730 km/sec.
The 6480 wave in figure 32-20-S1 cannot therefore become DEF, but must either be DHF, or DK, with DHF as the most likely. The only real evidence here that velocity serves us with, is merely the fact that waves (once expanded) do not compress upon themselves. It does not however distinguish between either of the two alternates illustrated in figure 32-20
We could make an experiment illustrated by figure 32-22 to blue shift a wave by water, then into a prism to refract it into a dispersion back into water in order to maintain the blue shift.
To determine if - as by figure 32-20 a 6480 wave down to 5400 will disperse by E the 2700 mark, or by the 1750 mark. It should of course be the 1750 mark, the mark for the larger diameter.
If we consider an incidence such as K by figure 32-22 at 25 degrees to normal, the sine for 25 is 4226 by an index of 1.33 for water would be 12 degrees, and for glass by 1.50 at 16.5 degrees.
There is thus a 4.5 degree difference in the angle of refraction between that of glass and of water. A blue shifted wave then in which the length can not be compressed, but which must express itself in a greater circumference should then refract to a greater degree.
By comparison, the sine of 4226 by an index of 0.17 = 3611 = 21 degrees for a normal refraction. The same wave, blue shifted may then come to near 18% or 18 degrees away (near 3 degrees).
This is approximate taking a shift from the 2700 mark to the 1750 mark, or 950 angstroms, while 18% of 5400 is 972. Or, taking incidence L, at 6800 into water is 5113, in the prism 4533, and back into water is 5113.
coming from the prism into air should come to an angle at 6800, with a blue shift into water at no increase in circumference to 5113. But with an increase in circumference the shift into water should be at an angle greater to 5113.
Experiment thus should bear out that (for our example) a 6480 wave blue shifted to 5400 in length should show itself as a 3500 wave on the spectra. From which it appears that magnetic waves do behave mechanically like unto a coiled spring, which if expanded without stretching it - will return within its diameter.
But when expanded beyond a certain distance so as to stretch the spring, it will no longer return within its diameter.
In that case, the diameter is first to expand, or becomes a major factor to expand in compression rather than the minor part as it was with expansion. The relation xyz for the case of expansion is in that order. X for the greatest with Z being minor, which in compression is altered, - Z taking
a far greater role just as a coiled spring will.
VELOCITY INTO WAVE EXPANSION
By figure 32-23 let us debate shift into velocity, or velocity into shift. Assume the media on the right of point B at rest, with the density of its part at a given measure of 22. And on the left of A we have a star at rest with the density of the media surrounding the star and wherein the light passing AB was formed at a measure of 20.
The light is thus to have a transition A to B from a density of 20 to one of 22, and it will at all times maintain that velocity of constant (Vc) having a relative velocity proportional to its wavelength in the quantitative measure of the density.
As therefore from atom A to atom 1 the spacing increased by 0.3, we shall account that as a percentage of the velocity of light, for our example utilizing the figure of the constant. As therefore from atom to atom the length of the wave increases by these given values, and its relative velocity increases proportionally thereto.
Then the wave at the right of B is moving slightly faster than within the media of the star - and having a
red-shift by density that is equal to a receding or radial velocity of 6000 km/sec
Now taking the same transition area by CD, the density before C and after D remaining as before, let us set the star in motion to the tune of 60,000 km/sec, or at least so we thought it was receding from us by our reading of the
red-shift upon our spectra.
And doing this step by step, in the transition area the increments are by 10.000 km/sec, and at each successive atom the measure of the wavelength is given. And between the atoms the percentages are noted wherein each atom must be spaced (presumably) in order to effect an 18 percent increase in wavelength.
That together with the 2 percent of our previous expansion will come to a sum total of 20% change -
that by the speed of light is equal to 60,000 km/sec. Noting then that the space velocity of the light before point C is at 240,000 km/sec while the light itself being un-aware thereof proceeds at Vc from atom to atom.
The light is thus to increase its space velocity by 60,000 km/sec at point D. In other words, while the light moves from C to D it increases velocity relative to the media, which is at rest with space by 60,000 km/sec.
As therefore it is being drawn back with the star at 60,000 km/sec. shall it then be 120,000 km/sec which the light must overcome, or merely the 60,000?
Our answer is; That it is merely the 60,000, for since the light is already moving at 240,000 right up to point C, it requires only 60,000 more once it arrives at D.
The question then becomes how much the atoms between C and D will be spaced, or must be spaced to effect the increase in wavelength. For again we must remember that wavelength is never as such affected by speed but by density, by the spacing of atoms, the atoms as their propellant and propagation forcing an expansion or contraction of wavelength.
As therefore between atom 8 and atom 9 we placed an increment of 3% for an approximate value near 10,000 km/sec, must these atoms truly be pulled apart by that increment to effect our wave expansion? The answer must be No, they need not be, but remain rather as between A and B in their gradual spacing effecting the normal decrease in density from 20 to 22.
For if we consider atoms 8 and 9 in the wake of the star having an original spacing of 20 and atom 8 is pulled away from atom 9. Here the instant this occurs the light is also passing from 8 to 9 at 300,000 km/sec, while atom 8 is pulled back from 9 by 60,000 km/sec. The draw upon the wavelength is thus one fifth as great as the speed by which the wave
maintains its length.
And so we could say that between atoms 8 and 9 the wave drew a 20% expansion, as indeed it did. If then the wave were of a length no greater than what the normal or average spacing between atoms is, yes we would be finished with the wave, only it would not be the 1080 angstroms in expansion that we are looking for.
If we had placed no atoms at all between C and D taking our counts from the atoms at C and D the effect would be the full effect. But we choose to do this a bit more realistic placing at least five atoms in the transition area out of the billions of atoms along which the real effect takes place, each one effecting a minute measure of the expansion.
We therefore choose to place the full length of the wave CD over just six increments, each one an increment of 3 times 6 is 18 percent. The 20 % increase in wavelength between any of two atoms in the transition area is a 20% of one/sixth of the wave.
And the reason I said 20% rather than the 18% by which the star in its velocity is effecting wave expansion, is because, I am adding that change due to density alone which is effected simultaneously with the effect of the receding velocity.
The factual spacing of the atoms in the transition area CD, is according to the dimensions shown between A and B. For again, going back to atoms 8 and 9 with the light moving to the right and atom 8 going from a spacing of 20 into a spacing of 20.3 - the 3.0 (26) that it shows greater to the previous at 23, is to be accredited to velocity.
Or at least 1.7 is not a spacing of atoms but of wavelength by two movements, one in one direction at 18% the speed of light, the other in the opposite direction at the speed of light, perfectly effecting a wavelength expansion of 18%. All this while the atoms by a real spacing added or effected 2%
more to the expansion of the wave.
And so, the summary at E and F shows red-shift a combination of speed and density, 54,000 km/sec for the velocity of the star to the sum of 18% wave expansion, and 2% density. The wave then having arrived at F (or D) has a length of 6480 angstroms and will continue to pass upon the media - the atomic spacing of which is at a mere 2% greater to that from their source at 20.
If the star had not been moving as by AB the wavelength at the right of B would be 5580 and as such continue to move upon the atomic spacing of 22.
Shall then our universe be expanding when for nearly any expansion the wave will be extended and not return except by a blue shift - which when the wave exits from that denser media will again return to its former extended length?
In my judgment there is sufficient evidence here to blow out that candle.
We had said that, for the speed of those galaxies which appear to be moving faster as they are distant
- there must be a logical explanation if only we knew what that explanation was.
When for example we take our reading of Ursa Major, who can tell how often that light-wave passed from a denser media into a lighter media?
Assuming it did so 300 times at an average of 1/100 percent to that of the speed of the light, this would come to 300 times 30 = 9,000 km/sec. This would reduce the radial velocity between Ursa Major and us to 6,000 km/sec.
how often did the light pass upon a transition, the media of any star or galaxy wherein the movement of said media was opposite in movement to that of the light to add more and more
red-shift into it? Consequently, to interpret
red-shift into velocity radial or otherwise for distant objects is a shot in the dark.
What is typical for our circular wave is that it is difficult - if not impossible - to pull the angular component out of it. It requires a great deal of expansion to come to a straight line wherefore the wave will continue to behave and register itself as a wave, refracting, and diverging itself upon our spectra like a wave.
This evidence in favor of the circular mode along with drafting a curve in our graph of the redshift
verses speed - effectively disqualifies the transverse version as illustrated by
figure 32-24, wherein angles 1, 2, and 3 follow a straight line to zero. Or how would we go about it to pull an expansion in that wave if not the angular component is first to come out?
When I saw the curve in graph figure 32-15, I surmised that the authors drew this curve based upon experimental data, wherefore I duly considered the same.
Which is not so with the graph of figure 32-14 the curve therein having been entered by the illogic of all wavelengths to have an identical incidence, whereby the index of refraction became the scapegoat as were it different for different wavelengths.
x, y, z,
relation then of the magnetic wave in its tubular form produces the variants whereby shift verses wavelength (or speed) come to a curve.
And that curve being demonstrated to me, surmising it was from factual experience, it gave me added evidence
to conclude upon the circular wave formation.
We of course could have this all wrong, wherefore we should test our conception, if indeed that which we conceive is rightly conceived.
figure 31-8 we saw how when the light of a star is to come upon our solar system that at the entry thereof it will be blue shifted, and when it exists our solar system that the red shift thereof is equal to the blue.
We placed it in these words; that the red shift takes out or corrects whatever the blue shift put into it.
Thus, even if the wave passed through a thousand star systems with all of them at a radial velocity to us - red shifting each time it left one of these system on its way to our eyes. There is no question but that in order to come upon any of these star systems it must first shift to the blue, and that the same blue shift for most, if not all cases, will be equal to the red.
We could devise a means to show
how by refraction or by a change in direction that there may be a difference, but that is splitting hairs, and of no real consequence. Since therefore the light on its journey to us received only one lasting red shift, the one from its source receding from us, the universe is back in its expansion.
Let us then take a still closer look at this contraction and expansion of waves. There are two means by which a wave may be expanded, both of which come to a single effect. The single effect is the change in density, the relative spacing of atoms, with velocity as a cause to that effect.
By figure 32-25
therefore, suppose there were a radial velocity between atom P, Q and N, but in the wake of that radial movement the atoms kept their relative spacing, - would it then be correct to state that there would be no expansion of the wave?
Next proposition, suppose each of these atoms P, Q, and N, with N in the N2 position were perfectly at rest, we would then have a change in density between PQ, and N2, and the wave would automatically expand a distance N to N2. Then suppose with atoms P and Q still at rest we placed N into motion towards N2, while the wave was moving over them.
The wave would thus again expand the distance N\N2, just the same as it had when the wave found N at the N2 position. (And we shall assume that distance N/N2 is equal to 2 km/sec). This time there is a change namely, a velocity at which N moved towards N2 while the wave passed upon it. Thus V is added to N/N2
If then N moved away from Q at a rate of 1000 km/sec (the assumed radial velocity), what would be the sum of the expansion of the wave, and why?
We are apt to say an expansion equal to 1000 km/sec. But Why? If the wave were stationary affixed to Q and N, and N moved to N2 it would be irrelevant as to how fast N moved to N2 - since the expansion at any rate of
velocity would be no more than distance N/N2. So thus the “why” remains how velocity may be recorded into a length of the wave.
There is however this aspect that while N moves to N2 the wave passes upon N and Q, over P and onwards, a wave the length of which spans numerous atoms and their spacing. The expansion thus becomes a relevance of the movement of N verses the velocity of the light-wave.
If then we say, okay, the velocity of N at 1000 km/sec is recorded on the wave, with the additional 2 km/sec of the factual increase in spacing. But how can this be correct? For with the wave moving 300,000 km/sec and N at 1000 km/sec there is a net difference of 301,000 km/sec by which the wave should be expanded, which comes to an expansion to put a light-wave somewhere in the neighborhood of a radio-wave.
Moreover, what difference does it make as to how fast N is moving to N2, because for N to move 3 angstroms at 1 km/sec, or to move 1 angstrom at 3 km/sec is all the same. Accordingly, radial velocity appears to become a none relevant factor.
The only logical explanation here is that; the factor in wave expansion is the movement of N verses the movement of the wave. And the factor into the length of the expansion is the time frame of N, from N, to N2 verses the velocity of the wave.
The velocity of the wave then being presumed constant at Vc, it is irrelevant as to at what velocity N might move, but the time-frame is relevant.
If N takes one minute to move 3 Angstroms, the wave will be expanded by that particular frame
into Vc. If then N moved 3 angstroms in 1/10th of a minute, it would be pulling on the wave and expanding it ten times as fast for the same distance. But the same is true for a time frame that is ten times as short in duration, wherefore the effect and net result will be the same.
The immediate factor therefore in this scenario of wave expansion is a small movement of N verses the high velocity of the wave. If therefore we know the velocity of the wave, and the degree in expansion we can also determine the time frame in which N moved N/N2.
A time frame is nothing more than how far something moved at what velocity. If we know distance by density, and timing from the spectral shift, it should give us the velocity.
I am not going to say that for an object with a radial or receding velocity, N will move by that velocity, but rather that the time-frame will be proportional to that radial or receding velocity and consequent change in density.
For it is not possible to record a radial velocity if there is no radial movement of the components (atoms).
These two factors must always go hand in hand, wherefore any
and all radial or receding velocities must be compensated for by the change in density that accompanies them, and by which their record was engraved upon the wave.
Thus it becomes more realistic how a wave can be expanded by a 20% or any percentage of its length, taking a factor of 300,000 km/sec verses a minute distance at some velocity into a time frame. Something that would not be realistic as with Ursa Major to take 15,000 km/sec verses a distance or timing factor that is way out of proportion for N.
The two combined Vc, and Ursa Major is as two agents holding the ends of a rubber band at a radial velocity of 315,000 km/sec. If this were to endure for 1/1000 of a second, the rubber band would be 315 km long.
The next thing to ask ourselves is how we can be so certain that the movements of the components in their time-frame's in the wake of that star plowing through that vast sea of thinly distributed substance - is in fact proportional to the speed at which that star is moving. This seems acceptable unless of course experimental data should prove differently.
One thing we should clearly understand from all
this is that wave expansion is in two ways. (1) How waves are expanded by an increase in component spacing on the one hand while moving. (2) With on the other hand, while being at rest, that there is a difference between the two in the after effect as it was in the effect itself.
For if we look at an expanded wave at figure 32-25A. and it is to be blue shifted passing into a much denser media, the wave expands greatly into its circumference.
The same thing would occur if the wave at A, were not an expanded wave, knowing from experience that any wave passing from a light media into a very dense media, (like from air to water) greatly expands its circumference.
But when leaving the denser media of B,
into C, with C being the same density as A, the wave will retract its circumference back into its former shape.
In this scenario the atomic or component spacing is existing and fixed, an expansion and/or contraction upon none moving components. If then a light-wave having left the core of D travels through a media with very little change in density in the area surrounding D, as also in the area surrounding the core of F, and the areas between these systems - and the wave came upon system F as a none moving system, there would be little change in its waveform (the angular component thereof).
But if system F were moving as indicated, a blue shift would have to impose a greater circumference upon the wave, which for the greater part will be taken out again as the light leaves system F.
But at the same
time the wave will be expanded to a greater length as when it entered system F, in that in leaving the system, the receding or radial velocity of F was engraved upon it.
The question then becomes how much in the radial velocity of system F will the engraving be verses the decrease in the angular component of the wave as it entered and passed through system F. For there is a difference here between A/B/C, and E/F/G.
I however consider this sufficient data for others to complete upon, and as food for thought, leaving only one more item to look into, namely:
We have as yet to determine “wave identity". I though to place an identity by utilizing the full length of the wave plus its angular component to remain effective as long as the wave is not stretched. That particular identity worked well with amplitude and the changing relative velocity of each wavelength verses the constant.
But this also limited any radial velocity, or change in density to a speed not exceeding the velocity by which it was reduced in coming into its sine formation.
For in the initiation of the wave we in effect placed a dent into what was a straight line, and so the relative velocity slowed proportional to the amplitude of the dent. And to take it back out would bring the velocity back to the constant, also implying that the velocity into the expansion was proportional to the angular component, with any excess meaning to stretch it.
An identity or signature must be a constant of sort, a fixed ideal. Since therefore wavelength as well as frequency are variable components it cannot be these.
And yet we say; look at sodium it has a specific wavelength, at a specific frequency when it emits a brilliant light and these very same wavelengths or frequencies are again absorbed when passing through the gas at lower temperature.
But there is something wrong here. For we may be correct in saying that the heated sodium produced these wavelengths, but when we took the light of a star wherein these same wavelengths were expanded to something greater, having a frequency lower than what is supposed to be typical for sodium.
How did the sodium recognize its typical waves when they were neither at their length nor at their frequency?
Accordingly, there must be a better solution.
Process of elimination. We eliminated wavelength and frequency by branding them variable factors. And the same must be true for the angular component as also the diameter and the rate of revolutions of the wave, each one a variable factor. This leaves nothing to question, or perhaps to have a second look at frequency.
How do we obtain frequency, or what is frequency? The term implies ‘how often’ and that really is the question, to which still another question is tagged - whether or not a single light-wave is a continuous sine formation or not. A frequency that is equal to a crest to crest measure divided by the speed, is of course a variable product.
brings us to, - if wavelets or quantities of wavelets may be spaced by a certain distance passing by any point at a certain fixed rate of occurrences per unit of time. We know that our house-current produces something similar at a rate of 60 cycles per second
The question we are attempting to answer is; how with all the variables altered did the element of Sodium know which wavelengths were such as it would have been generated by its coordinate? And by the same token, how does a freshly grown leaf recognize the wavelengths that correspond to what we call a green color, even when these wavelengths are altered?
I suppose we need another under-water experiment to see if green remains green. And when the leaf dies, to turn brown, in what way the changes were so as no longer to remit the green wavelengths?
No doubt the coordinate of the components of the leaf changed. But how and in what way may that be - so that we may deduce from it “why” any wavelength, altered or not altered is arrested or passed on.
is nothing more than a suggestion or illustration towards a principal means, it is a long way from a nomenclature, like stating; how wheels turn upon a roadbed and that is how the car moves. Since that in itself does not show the pistons turning the crankshaft, which in turn by intermediate gears cause the wheels to turn.
An rpm counter shows how an incandescent lamp turns off and on by a rate of 60 times each second. This proved one thing that light-waves need not be continues in order for us to behold light as were it continues.
And how do we establish frequencies such as a possible 70 trillion within one second upon a single line of light?
Do we have a means to count that high, or did we establish that figure mathematically as I did?
We are able to generate resonance at high rate, simply by taking something like an electrical current that we can boost to high rpm, and breaking the cycle into pieces and multiply it by those relevant factors. Or simply the current to drive atomic components to resonate at a high rate of recurrences.
For since these components are so small, and therefore require only minute distances to make for an
occasion, with their inherent velocity upon them already being at the speed of light, it becomes a simple matter to connect two wires to a tungsten element and presto we have minute alterations traveling into our eyes - called light.
So, how do we obtain frequencies, an accurate count, and not a mathematically established number? We need to establish for an absolute fact whether light-waves are continues or not.
We need to take an accurate reading from the wavelengths of Sodium or some other element if the frequency thereof factually corresponds to wavelength divided by its relative velocity. If
it does, then frequency is not an identity, since upon a continues wave formation the frequency varies along with wavelength.
But frequency need not vary upon a none-continues wave formation. And so if that is the case, like as in Sodium holding up both hands and counting upon its fingers how many wavelengths are passing per unit of time, and finding its specific numerical rate, it acclaims, Ho, there, here is mine, arrest it.
My drift is that Sodium would have to let some of the wave pass for it to know whether it is his or not. This is a bit radical perhaps, for if the coordinate of Sodium is such to clip anything coming at a certain interval, it will clip that frequency the instant it arrives.
My real drift is to say that each element has its specific coordinate, with coordinate being a broad spectrum, not only meaning the number of parts and their specific design, but their specific movement within that structure, and with the design thereof, such as magnetic force in its figure of eight as one example.
And it includes specific movement between components; movement being more than just something of one direction, the coordinate of which
is as manifold as there are elements.
Shall it then be as we illustrated by figure 31-12 and 32-15 depicting oscillation and/or rotation generating wavelengths on a continues basis? Or, more like figures 31-13, and 32-14, where although the principle remains the same the occasions per unit of time need not be at a rate to produce a full line.
For seeing how the line is passing at 300,000,000 meters per second, and we place half-meter lengths at a rate of 100,000,000 times per second, the occasions will be spaced by 2.5 meters, or one/sixth of the line.
If then a specific element in its coordinate peaks at the rate of 100 million times each second, it may either arrest or conduct the same. And if the rate were boosted by one percent, the element would no longer recognize it since it does not arrive in tune with its coordinate.
But why should our oscillation or rotation by figures 31-12 and 32-15 not be possible on a none continues basis? By illustration figure 32-26, by D, in radio transmission, we put a clamp on the line and draw a spike or a bow into it the length which is directly proportional to the speed of the line (Vc) verses the speed at which we move the clamp in the distance thereof.
If then we move our clamp at such a rate that each successive dent will come with its head upon the tail of the foregoing we will have a continues sine formation. But if our rate verses the speed of the line (a line which cannot slow down) is lower, the dents or wavelets will be spaced as illustrated by E.
And if we contend that such a dent is but a half-wave, this is not necessarily so. A disturbance (dent) on the line can be a full turn around the circumference, or a half turn, or any part of one turn, or even more than a single turn depending on what the media in its coordinate in the magnitude thereof dictates for a tubular width.
For we know that while a tungsten element will generate light-waves at nearly all lengths, each one of them is set forth at identical tubular width
And to rehearse a much shorter than radio wave-length by figure 32-26, at A let there be an oscillation which immediately draws back to form a lower curve (B) to the upper curve end on end. Then let it be so that this was accomplished by the combined efforts of three parts, two gorilla’s holding the line while a third sneaks in the punch.
But now in C to accomplish the next punch our driver decides to cycle by a rotation in a clockwise manner, and also the two gorilla’s decide to cycle, wherefore in these instances no wave-form can be generated until again all three come on line for the next punch. Meanwhile the line continues at full speed Vc, and has taken the first set of two punches end on end down the line.
And here too, instead of end to end the apparent half-wave formations could be separated, in which case the gorilla’s are mere gingerbread, since then the atom
delivering the punch could simple oscillate at a lower rate, at a rate specific for its coordinate.
It seems quite simple for a red flower to return the long waves, and for a blue swimming pool to return mainly the shorter waves. Yet what is in the molecules of the water to withhold or arrest these other waves, and likewise in the flowers to return to us only such selective waves which correspond to their specific flavor?
We may marvel at Sodium to absorb the same certain waves, which it will emit when
heated, but all the elements in the world around us perform the same feat for which reason the world is so full of color unto us.
These are some considerations to entertain while looking for a fixed something that may account for the identity, the signature of the wave. If I had the answer I would have given it. And yes, I would like to know, but lack data. Moreover it is high time for me to turn my attention to other matters, less interesting to be sure, but necessary.
And perhaps that craving within me will subside so I may put the matter and myself to rest. I however know I will never come to an end, nor are my pains likely to cease, for as I said some years ago, how matter in motion by coordination
is a marvelous thing to search out and comprehend - and so indeed it is.
In finishing this my final chapter, allow me to state that the red shift is not to be taken as an indication of an expanding universe. Moreover I think we have quite well shown that it is not.
And secondly, that frequency may be the identity of the wave, its signature in the coordinate of things. It shall not however be that frequency we mathematically establish granting a wave to be continues.
Then of course there are those realities which I have not mentioned, simply because these are a radical change in the normal thought for man, and would have brought us too close to the boundaries which I am determined not to pass.
And thirdly, I do not go along with our idea of microwave radiation as if that permeates space everywhere, for it must be generated from somewhere even as we speak. And there may be an altogether different conclusion for this considering how heat or temperature, as I explained previously, is by a change in relative positioning of components one to the other.
That such radiation is in fact the temperature - as in the disturbance that is the temperature. Which therefore is always existing but also always continually generated, and cease or decrease as the temperature is brought down.
A Doppler shift in these would thus be the same no matter where we are in space, since as long as there are stars there is temperature, and these being everywhere so their results.
One more item to go. I wish to portray something for the humble and for the proud to each their own. Consider the Sun up in the sky and the Light that it sends out day and night without ceasing. And the warmth and the life that it gives to all that is upon the earth simultaneously to each according to their needs, the plants, the trees, the animals, the
insects, and to all humans.
Then consider the earth as a tiny ball comparable to our Sun, and that at the distance of 93 million miles - how we in fact receive but a tiny fraction of that light, both in the way of light, and of warmth.
And as you look out over the terrain in front of you to see the whole area illuminated with the brilliance of the Sun, consider how all that illumination is but a fraction of that first fraction which is over the whole earth.
Then consider how within each square inch of that space before you - there are millions of light waves to grant you your beholding. And be amazed at that infinite number of light-waves in that small section of the space before you.
And again be infinitely amazed at the inconceivable number of them the whole earth must receive simultaneously, and how all this is still only a fraction of the light of the Sun.
Then know and consider how great He must be who made that Sun and billions more like it in who knows how many galaxies, the Almighty Lord and Creator of this whole great universe only knowing the number thereof.
Know then that just as the quantity of those infinite many light-waves that the sun produces and sends out simultaneously, so also in that great quantity and more the Almighty Lord provides His orders and wishes to all His creatures great and small in the infinite number thereof simultaneously.
And knowing also the thoughts - of not only man - but of all His creatures throughout all these galaxies, and their words and deeds before they even occurred.
For He is the Creator thereof, not only of the stars, but of the infinite number of planets belonging to them, and of their times, and their footsteps in the grand order of His great being.
Who then is the man that is so bold as to compare himself to his Creator, to a being as infinitely great and mighty as He is? Man shall be less than a child to even begin to compare himself. For man is nothing but the dust on the scale.
He then that is humble, having understood his nature and his being in the universe, the same is one having acquired right knowledge. Knowing also that his being is not for the mere rotations around the sun, but into everlasting, and that for all his words and deeds he will have to face all the race of man everlastingly.
Should he not therefore guard himself in the way of knowledge? For this one thing came upon us when we took of the tree of the knowledge of good and bad, that in taking thereof - we became in the image of our Creator to know good and to know evil, and to distinguish between them.
How foolish then of him who denies such a Great Almighty being by whose great might and wisdom he is to endure forever. And what will he come to say in days hence, when before his very eyes the whole of the heavens are renewed?
And the same shows how - when I first wrote this book - that my instructions, and my consequent understanding of these instructions towards the fundamentals of things were not in error, nor taken in error. For the Almighty Lord giving me understanding, certain things were revealed that cannot otherwise be known.
Then there is to gather in wisdom as Solomon said,
“To conceive rightly according to the
gift of wisdom".
Is there then any man able to show how a small thing like a blade of grass grows forth out of the ground?
Now finally I hope my labors on these matters may have come to a conclusion, except I better not hold my breath.