CHAPTER 56 INDEX TO OTHER PAGES
My intend was to place this on a "forum" for debate, not that I would be surprised at the replies, but the moderators did not seem too eager about anyone placing illustrations, and without them how is one to pose the question?
Accordingly, I placed it here, to do so in three steps, not utilizing speculation, but simple questions, utilizing such phenomena that is well known, if perhaps I might reach a few with better knowledge.
By the illustration let us assume two lights at A and B and that they are in motion to the left at 50km/sec. This is in reference to a stationary point of reference as indicated at the top of the illustration. Then there is point C at which we are located with our device to read velocity and spectral shift. And we are moving at 20 km/sec in reference to the stationary vector.
As therefore we read the light from B it has a blue shift, knowing that it is coming towards us, and the velocity was 3000 km/sec. Then finding a spectral shift to the red from light A we know it is moving away from us, and in reading its velocity it also showed to be 3000 km/sec.
Question: What therefore may the relevant velocity be of the light emanating from B in reference to the stationary vector? This should come to 3020 km/sec since we at point C know ourselves to be moving to the left at 20 km/sec.
And for the light emanating from point A it should be 2080 km/sec. This of course is so in reference to the stationary vector, since the light at 3000 km/sec will continue to move at that speed regardless of our movement into direction A and the same goes for the light from B.
The only way we came with the velocities of 3020, and 2080, respectively was mathematically by knowing our own direction and velocity of movement relevant to some point suitable as a stationary vector. (our stationary reference)
Then comes the next question; How and why these light waves each showing the correct spectral shifts refused to show our mathematical velocities? The answer to which is: Because, light travels at a fixed momentum in any specific media relevant to the density thereof. And for us to utilize light in a reading of its velocity we are in effect reading our own movement.
This by consequence comes to the quest as to how and why the momentum of light is so fixed on the density of all media?
By illustration figure 2, the light from a star at point A is heading for earth, and as it travels through what we term empty space, it has a known velocity of 299.792 km/sec, This is from point A to point B, since at B it enters our atmosphere, and since the index for our air is at 1.0003, the light slows down to 299.702 km/sec.
If then we adhere to some standard that light has a constant of velocity, it certainly does not seem so, since light slows down in any media as it becomes more dense, like for example in glass where the reduction in velocity is by an index of 1.5. Then comes the real quest, namely; WHY light alters it velocity for density in the first place?
What is the affection of any media, for the light in its happy go lucky movement? Or; what does the light have in common with our media whereby its velocity is so altered? What it really comes down to is; How and why are light and the media so susceptible to one another to effect these known changes in velocity?
I am trying to make us think!!! For does it not make sense that from point B to point C in the illustration, the light conformed its velocity relevant to our media, the density of our atmosphere? It did after all slow down in coming out from space into our air, the air we breathe.
If then from the other direction, the opposite direction of A another light wave came, it would be irrelevant as to how fast or how slow it were moving before it came upon our atmosphere, since the instant it did come upon our air, it conformed its velocity relevant to our media, our air.
We therefore at point C in the midst of our atmosphere, we can never at all read any difference in the velocity of light no matter where it came from.
If then we frown upon my words where I said (irrelevant how fast or how slow), its just an expression to make us think, to put our minds to work, realizing that from glass as the light exits a prism it again speeds up to the velocity of air again.
My drift being that no matter what the velocity of light may be anywhere, glass, space, diamond, water, or whatever, it travels with one the same velocity in air for its specific density.
(That includes of course, a bit slower close to Earth and a bit faster higher up where the air is thinner, as is also evident from the appearance of a wet roadbed on a hot summer day.)
The speed of light thus is in fact relevant to the observer; which in effect is saying; - it is relevant to a vector, and always so relevant whatever we choose for a point of reference.
If therefore we at point C joined the crew in the space shuttle, the velocity of light from any and all directions to be read would be the velocity of 299.972 km/sec. All because light - for its velocity - conforms itself to the media at hand.
Now however our pursuit of lights velocity becomes a bit more complicated, we must in our minds coordinate or correlate more than one or two factors at once.
For with us in the space shuttle moving at some 18.000 km/h reading those space velocities of light from any direction at all one and the same speed, -- the same being relevant to our own person or device as the vector, how may these be of a difference to another point of reference, like the person we left behind on Earth to keep tabs on us to utilize him as the point of reference?
Here is more to consider, for one thing we are moving better than 17 times as fast as the man on Earth, and while we remain at a fairly fixed distance from the axis of the Earth traveling in a uniform circular movement, we additionally are in orbit around our Sun at a speed of 15 km/sec.
Question: What therefore may we ask, does the speed of light that comes from behind our direction of movement shows to be to our man on Earth from his perspective? Would he not look up to us and add our 18.000 km/h -- to the 299.972 km/sec -- speed of light that we informed him of to be moving with us?
Is it not correct that to him this is in fact the speed at which the light of necessity must be passing him? This of course as we know is the mathematically deduced velocity while the light with us in the space shuttle never for real went any faster but remained at its velocity of 299.792 km/sec.
Then by illustration figure 3 let us take our Sun for a fixed reference. Here the earth is moving at 15 km/sec at a uniform circular movement into the direction indicated. We are at point C within the atmosphere of the Earth that moves along at the same 15 km/sec.
And we are reading the light for its velocity from two stars on opposing ends, points A and B, both of which -- as they must ---riding on our atmosphere -- are read at 299.702 Km/sec, (speed of light in air).
If then for the example we assume the Sun to be standing still in space, and we consider space as simply a fixed room to move within, the Sun in that case being a fixed reference in space. What, to that reference, would be the space velocity of the light from the two opposing stars ("A' and "B") at point location C were we are taking our readings?
The true actual question being; --- how fast is the light really moving through space?
The answer is as it must be; its fundamental velocity whereby it always moves through air plus the 15 km/sec velocity by which our air moves through space along with us. The total being 299.702 + 15 = 299.717 km/sec, for the light from "B", and 299.702 - 15 = 299.687 km/sec, for the light from "A".
These are the true "space" velocities even though internally to our reference within our own atmosphere the velocity is 299.702 km/sec. for both alike.
Meanwhile, the light heading for Earth from the Sun outside of our atmosphere is traveling the normal 299.792 km/sec. velocity of light in free space. And the same being true of the light from the stars A and B, outside of our atmosphere not going for the 15 km/sec circular movement.
Evidently and conclusively light in space does not move with the same velocity everywhere, it can be greater as well as smaller. And let's not now get our hairs up, or ruffle our feathers, for I said, in space and the reference for it was space taking the Sun as the vector in and of space.
If we are not devoid of rational thought, we will agree our atmosphere to be going along with us in our yearly turn around the Sun. And, how it is an experimental fact that light within our atmosphere from any direction is always found to be traveling at that index of 1.0002526.
And that by realizing these two factors, and correlating the same -- the velocity of light in space cannot possibly travel everywhere at a single constant. And while c may be regarded as the constant of the velocity of light, as in fact it is, -- erroneous to call it a space velocity, and in error to pin it to space in any way.
In our next step by illustration Figure 4, we are using the Sun for our fixed reference, and we are in a spaceship orbiting the Earth at the speed of 30.000 km/h, which comes to 8.33 km/sec.
At point location "G" our velocity meter reads 299.800.33 km/sec, while at "H" it went down to 299.792 km/sec, and still lower at point location "E" to 299.783.67 km/sec.
This of course is simple logic as well as common knowledge. The very same thing is observed on other stars and planets, or moons. At "G" our speed imputes a blue spectral shift, with no shift at "H" and a red spectral shift at "E" to the tune of our velocity in orbit.
Meanwhile all three of the beams of light from the Sun traveled at the relative velocity of 299.792 km/sec, the standard for light's velocity in free space.
This simply is not to be contested, it being a proven fact that time and again has been observed and measured. My drift then being, seeing how we know this so well, and likewise with the foregoing where the space velocity of a star read within our atmosphere moved through space at a 15 km/sec greater velocity effected by Earth's orbit around the Sun, how can we still conclude that the velocity of light in space is the same for all?
Are we ever going to be wiser to the folly and ignorance of that person called Einstein? If anyone wishes to bring up the scenario with the trains, - get real will you!!! There is no excuse for such ignorance, appearances are not to be taken for facts, wherefore I said; get real will you, and I do mean; -- get real!!!
I am putting things the way they are, and if that comes to the shame of some, it's deserved. I can abide with ignorance, innocent ignorance, but not with ignorance by gross neglect, or willful ignorance.
For again as to the varied velocity of light moving through space, the foregoing are but the minor ones, there being amply more when we move out of our backyard, outside our solar system.
This comprises the elementary grade in the how and why towards the nature and movement of light. And with what should I follow up herein that I have not said already in so many other pages?
God's marvelous creation.
What we really need is a device to measure the velocity of light, a means to measure it more directly rather than by mathematical estimates. Too many approaches are however self defeating, for example we could allow light to pass through a long fiber optic coil, and record the time lapse with a high speed camera, but the speed obtained would be after the index of the fiber and not be that which we aimed to measure.
We could pass light upon a plate to create an angular magnetic wave (electricity) but how will we read the electrical induced for the velocity of the light. If we use the pressure of a light wave to bring about any other angular momentum, an rpm to read, it would account for intensity more than velocity.
And to bounce off a wave for a Doppler shift, like the radar gun, that also is self defeating. And to read velocity by spectral shifts serves to read our own velocity rather than that of the light itself.
What we really need is a device like a spirit, like our own self, our own spirit. Our bodies are nothing more than a house to live within, for we, each and everyone of us, is an individual spirit, an entity living within an assortment of atoms and molecules by a fantastic coordinate placed upon it in the great wisdom of our Creator.
Cathedrals do not raise themselves, they are constructed with wisdom and understanding, by those endlessly greater than the stones themselves. By themselves cathedrals only crumble into dust. If then one is competent enough to comprehend the wisdom of these words his name will not be listed with the stupid ones.
How did these 185.000 Assyrian soldiers die during the night in their tents in the time of Hezekiah? Or are the facts of history a legend to us? If so, we are the legend. It is the Lord, the Mighty all powerful One who made everything, that ordered it done.
All the people of the earth are less than the dust on the scale, to Him we are less than nothing, and yet he feeds us every day, and upholds us, yet many refuse to honor Him. So thus, if for once in your life you take learning and cast away your idol worship, He might not cause you to burn in hell.
If now one has eyes consider what I am about to say, and the marvel of it. Consider how much trouble we have attempting to make a device to read light for its velocity, as well as its amplitude.
Then consider our own spirit, our very own self, how we can not only read light's wavelengths right down to the fractions thereof, but to read many billions of them all at the same instant of time.
Just take a look outside at a pretty outdoor scene, you are receiving many billions of light waves simultaneously focused at the back of your eyes. And you are interpreting each and everyone of them for their precise length to present you with the color of the outdoors.
And if you think that is a feat as astonishing as traveling to the end of the universe, consider how you are not only reading these many wave lengths so accurately, but you are pinpointing each and everyone of them right down to their source.
If then you do not conclude your very own eyesight as a most inconceivable marvel of creation, the phenomena of it being endlessly greater than anything and everything we could possibly attain to with any of our devices, you have yet to learn anything.
Our Lord now in placing upon us those beautifully designed lenses, called eyes, He placed mechanical receptors at the back of the eye, capable to transpose all these billions of light waves instantly, and most perfectly.
More capable and more perfect than a million computers all at once, from where that enormous information proceeds to what we might call the transponders in our brain. And these transponders likewise are no more than mechanical innovations.
How very perfect, and how very marvelous and astonishing now these small elements are to transpose such an enormous amount of date so correctly and so faithfully, at every instant of time, without ever tiring or growing weary, or overheating.
And yet these things in their construction being so grandiose, are yet the simple things of Him, of our Creator, to create for us much greater entities, namely our spirits that are as much greater to these mechanical innovations as our earth is to the far reaches of the galaxy.
For here we must consider and understand that all the way to the transponders in our brain there is no color, nor sound, nor smell, nor taste, nor feeling, nor any of the things that is life and being to us. Turn on your TV or laptop without any electricity, and they are as dead as any doornail. So are you in your body without you as you the spirit residing within it.
How very marvelous now that spirit is, to decode all that data that enters your eyes, and simultaneously all the data that enters your ears, and your nose, and whatever touches upon your skin, as well as automatically regulating all the functions of your body. And additionally you are meditating, and wondering, as well as collecting to store data in memory.
How very marvelous this our spirit is which the Almighty Lord created, aside of the marvel of our bodies which He formed for us to live within as were we and our body one entity, one being. Yet we are not one but most everything is in twofold.
If then we could construct a transponder, one of those the likes of which are in our brain to read for us the velocity of light as we encounter it, the device might not be any larger than the tip of a thumb.
And while to the Almighty Lord this is but one of the least of His creations, to us it is inconceivable, and far beyond our means. And much less that we should construct a spirit, something the likes of our own selves.
Who has ever seen a spirit? There are many thousands of them daily around us, by day and by night, yet we do not observe them, they are unseen, as they are sworn to remain unseen by the eyes of flesh. Except perhaps for some apparitions that some of them are allowed to project, by which to test the minds of man for the fruit thereof.
The time that one will see a spirit is when he is divested of his body, like those wicked ones that blew themselves to bits with the aim to kill those more righteous than themselves.
These however were very sorry the instant their body died, having to behold the very fearful spirits taking them to be incarcerated in their cruel chambers to with great pain and regret await the day when the judgment of God the Righteous Judge will be enacted upon them. These would love to come back to undo their deeds, but now they know there is no return.
If someone could tell me the amplitude of a light-wave in whatever media with the absolute correct index thereof, and be absolutely correct for the length of the wavelet, I could find the absolute correct velocity of light in any and all media, the relative velocity that is, along with the single constant thereof.
For in knowing only the relative velocity with wavelength, it is a piece of cake to establish amplitude -- "if" the constant of the velocity of light were also known. But are these figures as we have them today accurate? That is my question.
It is easy to print a light-wave, all we need to do is take a picture, the many wavelengths each depositing their identity on the photographic negative. Or digitally to convert them into an electrical code that again can be printed on paper.
The latter is much the same in what occurs at the back of our eyes. Recording lengths of a wave by color thus seems easy, but at what speed did these arrive and complete themselves so we might compute a true velocity?
Counting frequencies may be defeating unless the light were of a single frequency. But what if we could use a single frequency light (like a laser) to calculate the speed of a multi frequency beam of light? In other words; to use the speed of light to measure the speed of light. With more than 400 trillion wavelengths passing per second of time we need a very fast counting device.
When two engines on my model airplanes turn at the same rpm the sound becomes a single harmony. If then two identical wavelengths turn in perfect harmony they should be free of interference, but to interpret the same into velocity is as yet an illusive story.
But why bother with a reading of the speed of light, since light will always travel with its specific velocity relative to the index of the media. If therefore by spectral shifts we know what the velocity of any object is as it moves through space, the speed of light, that is to say, the space velocity of any beam of light, it becomes a simple matter of mathematics.
This much is certain; There is a single constant in the velocity of the great force of nature, of magnetic that is, and electricity as well as light and all waves are of that one same entity, as we ourselves confirmed all of them having their listing in the e-m-spectrum.
Here then is a way to find the constant. We have two factors, number 1 we know what the relative velocity is in air. And number two, since light is not arrested by the single molecules of air, but is arrested by water molecules, the diameter of a light-wave cannot be much more than the diameter of that lighter element through which it passes unobstructed.
And it is by these factors that I came up with 300.000 km/sec. But if this is fully accurate depends on what diameter we establish for the light, be it just under an angstrom or a bit more than an angstrom.