|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
Physics
#28620557 - 01/14/24 06:18 AM (4 months, 2 days ago) |
|
|
So like if you take the hydrogen atom. One electron around one proton. I’ve been thinking about black holes, reverse stars. And I was wondering, is that a proton? The proton is reverse light?
Even then, just take the proton as a mini quantum system. The electron is another. The electrons spin being blue and the protons spin being yellow.
That got me thinking, something I never liked about the electron. Electricity and light. I’ve been wondering if the electron manages photonic energy. As the photonic energy increases, the gravitational pull is lessened. So the electron moves up in orbit.
I don’t think electricity is the flow of electrons. Rather photonic energy either flowing through the electron or the whole atom. And when too excited and bumped, it escapes as a plasma/wave. The Tesla ladder.
The color difference makes me think they aren’t the same, tho it doesn’t tell me if the whole atom stores photonic energy.
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
|
Pscientist
KushKaptain




Registered: 11/13/09
Posts: 2,687
Loc: Sirius X1
Last seen: 1 hour, 42 minutes
|
|
I think like many aspects of nature and the universe, there are repeating themes. I think there are also considerable differences between astronomical bodies and atomic particles.
Another example: it is recently going around the internet that galaxies also look like neurons, maybe you have seen this?
Or what about the idea that embryonic development roughly recapitulates the evolutionary trajectory (recapitulation theory).
I think these are just examples of pervasive repeating natural themes. When we live in a Universe that is apparently governed by fixed laws I think it is not unexpected to see similar patterns manifested in different ways at different scales.
-------------------- Any information posted on this website from this account is hypothetical and only to be used for legal purposes.
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|
Retracted
Edited by Nillion (01/14/24 01:27 PM)
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
Quote:
Nillion said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadron
About the proton:
Quote:
Hadrons are categorized into two broad families: baryons, made of an odd number of quarks (usually three quarks) and mesons, made of an even number of quarks (usually two quarks: one quark and one antiquark).[1] Protons and neutrons (which make the majority of the mass of an atom) are examples of baryons; pions are an example of a meson.,.
Almost all "free" hadrons and antihadrons (meaning, in isolation and not bound within an atomic nucleus) are believed to be unstable and eventually decay into other particles. The only known possible exception is free protons, which appear to be stable, or at least, take immense amounts of time to decay (order of 1034+ years)...
According to the quark model, the properties of hadrons are primarily determined by their so-called valence quarks. For example, a proton is composed of two up quarks (each with electric charge +2⁄3, for a total of +4⁄3 together) and one down quark (with electric charge −1⁄3). Adding these together yields the proton charge of +1. Although quarks also carry color charge, hadrons must have zero total color charge because of a phenomenon called color confinement. That is, hadrons must be "colorless" or "white". The simplest ways for this to occur are with a quark of one color and an antiquark of the corresponding anticolor, or three quarks of different colors. Hadrons with the first arrangement are a type of meson, and those with the second arrangement are a type of baryon.
More about Baryons:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baryon
And then there are Leptons:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lepton
One type of Lepton is called the electron:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron
Though when it comes to certain subjects Wikipedia is loaded with bad info it actually has a lot of quality info on physics and chemistry.
Technically a star made of antiprotons would be an reverse star, I believe.
The photon page is decent as well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon
This area of physics seems rather well studied and we appear to know quite a lot about these particles. Of course, I am presenting it from the perspective of quantum chromodynamics. Alternative theories exist but I don't pay a lot of attention to them because the quark material is incredibly well supported.
I'm into physics to some degree because understanding the building blocks it is made of helps me understand more about the Universe.
Well, it’s more the idea of making a proton a quantum system…….and this is where things get real fun.
We live near a yellow sun. What if the sun, its gravitational field influences something like the proton? The spin, which would affect its “color”. A yellow proton for a yellow sun, a it’s quantum harmonic is also its gravitational field harmonic.
Like, I’m talking real hard science. Taking Robert Penrose idea that consciousness is reality and reality is consciousness.
Or another way, quantum mechanics is particle physics. We just forgot the math. And polarity is spectral, based of the gravitational field.
So now we aren’t just in the influence of our sun, but then the gravity of the earth….. it becomes a thing.
Ideally then, you’d find the color of a hydrogen atom in a quantum vacuum. Which would give you a yellow proton and blue electron…….
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|
Retracted
Edited by Nillion (01/14/24 01:27 PM)
|
Pscientist
KushKaptain




Registered: 11/13/09
Posts: 2,687
Loc: Sirius X1
Last seen: 1 hour, 42 minutes
|
|
Quote:
mushroomboy said: Ideally then, you’d find the color of a hydrogen atom in a quantum vacuum. Which would give you a yellow proton and blue electron…….
Take the third toke.
-------------------- Any information posted on this website from this account is hypothetical and only to be used for legal purposes.
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
Quote:
Pscientist said:
Quote:
mushroomboy said: Ideally then, you’d find the color of a hydrogen atom in a quantum vacuum. Which would give you a yellow proton and blue electron…….
Take the third toke.

Ugh I forgot Enstein was colorblind and thought it was blue. It’s purple. My bad. That’s what the Azul physics quote Enstein was obsessed about meant. And the blue dot around the sun was to describe the wobble of an electron in orbit.
So yah, that’s pretty much it. A neutron is an almost 0 frequency vibration. A proton is near 0, so instead of qbits having states. Give them spectrums.
Then make the complexity of an electron purple to represent the complexity of a purple star.
And gravity being the base component for the proton and the neutron with the electron being more electromagnetic. Or the amount of light it has, photonic energy, representing how light the particle is.
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|
Retracted
Edited by Nillion (01/14/24 01:27 PM)
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
Quote:
Nillion said: I know I said I was out, but:
Color is a function of wavelength for light. It literally doesn't exist on an atomic scale. The color in quantum chromodynamics is not actually color either.
Quote:
And gravity being the base component for the proton and the neutron
This really doesn't belong in the Science and Technology section.
The color is a metaphor for the frequency in which it vibrates. The spectrum of function of the electron itself. That’s why Enstein used variables and talked like that.
So we don’t exactly know what light is. We know it’s emitted, and when it hits a surface. It bounces back at the frequency matching the color of the surface.
So in this sense, pure light hits the color blue and reflects as a blue wavelength. With some energy diffusing out, scattering. That’s the flair around a candle so to speak.
And depending on the color source, the reflection is a combined harmonic pattern. So you’d see an off blue if the light was more yellowish than “white”.
It’s still just a construct representation of what we believe light to be. So then, is there both a light matrix that we always see, and another matrix in which a larger function appears as photon? We know there is a medium, tho what that medium is, is heavily debated.
Edit: e=mc^2 if you redefined e as a color and made it blue. The you’d understand what I’m saying, the definition of e is wrong, it should equal purple. Metaphorically. That’s what the blue dot that circles the sun was about in the famous Enstein quote. Find out what e = frequency as blue, and change that to purple. Then e=mc^2
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
Edited by mushroomboy (01/14/24 12:13 PM)
|
koraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,729
|
|
Quote:
mushroomboy said: It bounces back at the frequency matching the color of the surface.
No, it bounces back at the frequency it already is before it hits anything. The act of bouncing doesn't change the frequency / wavelength.
There are similar problems in the remainder of your argumentation. It's a house of cards, with the exception that yours doesn't actually stand.
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
Re: Physics [Re: koraks]
#28620956 - 01/14/24 12:29 PM (4 months, 1 day ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koraks said:
Quote:
mushroomboy said: It bounces back at the frequency matching the color of the surface.
No, it bounces back at the frequency it already is before it hits anything. The act of bouncing doesn't change the frequency / wavelength.
There are similar problems in the remainder of your argumentation. It's a house of cards, with the exception that yours doesn't actually stand.
It’s an opposite response, think like reverse polarity. Just like you see upside down, and cross compose both eyes to make a singular image that’s preprocessed in the brain. To cover imperfections and hide the holes, or two known blind spots in the brain.
To be honest, we actually have no clue exactly how that happens. Because the rods and cones don’t absorb light. They vibrate at a frequency to send a signal. Or they resonate to the liquid in the eye. It’s weird.
So you see an inverted light pattern, that hits the eye and lense, refracts, flips, then hits the back of the eye. Making the rods and cones resonate, or vibrate sending a signal down the ocular nerve of each eye. Both eyes are cross composed and translated into something you “see” in your head.
So yah, I have an idea of how this process works.
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|
Retracted
Edited by Nillion (01/14/24 01:28 PM)
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
Well if you follow Robert Penrose. And Stuart, the neuroscientist. The nanotubes argument, that cells might be able to communicate via other methods. Or, some process of thought itself aren’t a representation of the neural pathway in the brain.
That’s where quantum physics and things get spooky, though what if consciousness is quantum. A product of complex quantum interactions. Where at one time, we were a simple consciousness of just interaction. Monkey see monkey do, we couldn’t have abstract thought.
This work is especially important when you get into things people have to do. Mathematics that are done at the instinctual level. This would make the possibility of nanotubes and stuff being made to alter the quantum state of the brain.
What is consciousness, especially if you look at reaction times compared to neural activity or speed. Or are our machines slower than the neural activity itself making it appear slower?
That’s a good question. So it depends on your perspective. As relativity in this stance, would be the overall quantum field as a projection of the self. The overall vibrational harmonic the whole body resonates at.
Then you could say, the quantum space you exist in, is a localized field. That is also within a larger localized field and so on.
So what is the exact size of the field of relativity per conscious agent? That is a good question.
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|
Retracted
Edited by Nillion (01/14/24 01:28 PM)
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
Quote:
Nillion said:
Quote:
mushroomboy said: To be honest, we actually have no clue exactly how that happens. Because the rods and cones don’t absorb light. They vibrate at a frequency to send a signal. Or they resonate to the liquid in the eye. It’s weird.
You are mistaken.
We know exactly how this works. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photopigment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoreceptor_protein https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhodopsin There is even classified light based cryogenic computer tech that we developed in the US for our military aircraft. The data medium, being cryogenic involves proteins that denature when they reach warm temps, thus preventing our enemies from being able to obtain the data from a crashed jet or drone.
I saw some lectures, given by research scientists working on this material in 2001-2003.
I'm a person who can be considered at least slightly intelligent by several standards. I think I am dumb but that is besides the point. My point is that over the course of my life I have been mistaken about several things. Including recently. The way I correct this is through self education. One needs to be open to the idea that they have more to learn and then start learning it.
I don't know if you are the type of person who believes that taking psychedelics and thinking about the Universe can provide detailed knowledge about things like particle physics, but it can't. What it can do is make delusional assertions seem true in a very powerful way. Nearly all psychonauts learn this at some point.
The path to knowledge is paved with effort, there are no shortcuts.
That’s the organic response to light stimulation. So it essentially vibrates the retina, which can detach. It’s its own sense organ that uses vibration you could say.
And while this is all fine and dandy, how do you actually visualize. You’re missing my point entirely. When you see something, you aren’t seeing the images or even signals your eyes actually see. It’s a sense, a frequency no matter how you spin it.
So this gets translated in various centers of the brain, there are many queues that senses use to define what you understand as reality.
In fact every sense, once you get to the neurological sense is frequency or pulse. I two studied psychology, sociology, neural linguistic programming. Calculus, I’ve studied theology, history. War, sung tzu, I studied mental illness. The concept of autism, identic memory, I’ve read up on the worry of CWD in deer as a prion disorder that’s slowly becoming more human in nature, what mad cow is…..
So what I’m talking about, isn’t just the physical representation of light or the neural network. How do you actually compose the image, it’s a lot more complex than your leading on.
The language center of the brain translates language, it’s found to be almost universal. So the word love, lights up the language center of the brain almost universally identical. No matter what language love is said in.
When we got FMRI, feral magnetic resonance imaging for medical. It blew the field up.
So I’m well versed in the brain.
Edit: all I’m saying is, Enstein got the wrong spin on the e=mc^2
Edited by mushroomboy (01/14/24 01:25 PM)
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|
Good luck with that.
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
Quote:
Nillion said: Good luck with that.

Yah, I know. That’s the problem. I’m gonna have to learn physics now to understand what I figured out. Like the actual math. or somebody who’s better than me.
Cause if you look at the atom like that, a static quantum agent, of smaller agents like Penrose looks at consciousness. Then you could see a much more complex system in particle physics. Where polarity isn’t a 1, -1, 2, or 0….. it would be a much more complex variable like e, or quantum spin.
So now the spin, as a vibration representation. Where white is 0 or something, yellow is like > or <, a range for the proton right?
Where the spin the electron math is currently done with is e=blue as a frequency range. What I’m saying is that range of spin is wrong and it should be closer to something representing purple metaphorically.
What that is? Not sure. But why does a hydrogen based sun look yellow? Why is a black hole black? A white star white?
What frequencies of energy do those colors represent?
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
|
koraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,729
|
|
Quote:
mushroomboy said:
It’s an opposite response, think like reverse polarity.
No. You're just throwing random words together, making up your own meaning to them (which will turn out to be internally inconsistent) and then calling it an 'understanding'.
You could publish it as poetry or some kind of stream of consciousness. You could use it as a sort of mental amulet to get you through the day. But with science, it has fuck all to do. Sorry.
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
Re: Physics [Re: koraks]
#28621795 - 01/15/24 06:57 AM (4 months, 23 hours ago) |
|
|
No I’m not, the color gets absorbed by the pigment. The reflection is the wave without the color it reflected from.
You then detect this as color. Yup, look it up. It’s the reverse wave form of the pigment you reflect the light on.
Edit: so dark colors absorb light, hence they absorb heat. That’s the spectrum they absorb, what’s reflected is what doesn’t absorb. And you perceive that as color. Easy.
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
Edited by mushroomboy (01/15/24 07:10 AM)
|
koraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,729
|
|
Alright then, since you understand it so well, please explain a couple of things to me.
Quote:
mushroomboy said: the color gets absorbed by the pigment.
Define 'the color'. What is it, according to you?
Quote:
The reflection is the wave without the color it reflected from.
Define 'the wave'. It sounds like you're talking about it in the singular. Explain how a single wave would have 'a color' substracted from it.
Quote:
You then detect this as color. Yup, look it up. It’s the reverse wave form of the pigment you reflect the light on.
Explain how the wave form relates to color. Explain how inverting this supposed waveform would alter color.
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
Re: Physics [Re: koraks]
#28622077 - 01/15/24 11:42 AM (4 months, 18 hours ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koraks said: Alright then, since you understand it so well, please explain a couple of things to me.
Quote:
mushroomboy said: the color gets absorbed by the pigment.
Define 'the color'. What is it, according to you?
Quote:
The reflection is the wave without the color it reflected from.
Define 'the wave'. It sounds like you're talking about it in the singular. Explain how a single wave would have 'a color' substracted from it.
Quote:
You then detect this as color. Yup, look it up. It’s the reverse wave form of the pigment you reflect the light on.
Explain how the wave form relates to color. Explain how inverting this supposed waveform would alter color.
It’s the physics of pigment. Light hits a color, that color absorbs the frequency that it isnt. This is what causes things to “warm up” by the sun. The reflected light is that colors wavelength. Which your eyes interpret. They see color by sensing it.
That’s seriously how light works on the eye. The actual physics of it.
Edit: I had it right the first time. Damn it, it reflects the wave of the color absorbing everything else.
https://sciencing.com/colors-reflect-light-8398645.html
That’s a basic idea. What is light?
Edited by mushroomboy (01/15/24 11:46 AM)
|
koraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,729
|
|
You have not answered any of my questions. You say "the actual physics", but you've not touched upon the most elementary physics of color so far.
So again: what is color in terms of wavelength?
And here's another one for you to research: how do we see yellow? And given how that works, what does that mean for your earlier statements about 'yellow' sunlight?
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
Re: Physics [Re: koraks]
#28622232 - 01/15/24 02:06 PM (4 months, 16 hours ago) |
|
|
The color, it’s just a representation of a frequency range. Or? An energy state, with certain colors more excited than others.
If you think about that, then frequency is the speed in which the light vibrates. What is spin? So could you equate a certain energy range of light to the spin of an electron?
So then yellow, that’s the base spin around a yellow sun. As it’s effected by the gravity, which could also become a quantum harmonic.
I actually did answer this, you just weren’t really paying attention.
So the neutron is represented as? Green, but wasn’t that blue and yellow? So now what would be yellow and purple? That’s the energy range if you converted light frequency into an energy spectrum.
That’s somewhat what Enstein did, people just didn’t know it. Then the proton starts within the yellow spectrum, that’s the energy state where it’s spin starts well say.
Now what Enstein did was make the electron blue, however he was colorblind. It should have been purple. So then the energy range, frequency, of the color purple is where the electron resides.
So you need to know the color spectrum properly, the right order. The hint to this is the yellow sun. A hydrogen based fusion reaction. Which creates yellow light.
So the neutron is essentially the least to want change, the most indifferent. And changes based on the states of the total system of protons and electrons.
You then get to the proton, this will be less indifferent to change. So it will be willing to change more than a neutron. As it’s also effected by the total system.
Then you get the electron, this is the most unstable. It likes change, and will do this often to retain its natural color or state. It’s spin.
Does that make more sense?
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
Edited by mushroomboy (01/15/24 02:09 PM)
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|

This is pretty cool, it is a filter dimmed photograph of the actual color of the sun before it's light enters our atmosphere, taken from Wikipedia and resized to make it smaller for the forum.
This is the true color of the sun in terms of visible light.
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
Re: Physics [Re: Nillion]
#28622617 - 01/15/24 07:50 PM (4 months, 10 hours ago) |
|
|
Ugh impossible. When we first did atomic physics. We thought the color of the sun was yellow. That’s what they based the hydrogen spin off. A yellow sun, so to make the other math work. They needed to know the color or spectrum of light the electron resided in. They thought the blue spectrum.
Turns out, that was wrong. But what IS the right spectrum? If the electron is purple, you need to look at it in the ultraviolet spectrum. Like a reverse star, a black hole……
Cause it would be the opposite of a normal star, a hydrogen based star.
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|
Impossible eh?
Good times!
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
Re: Physics [Re: Nillion]
#28622633 - 01/15/24 07:59 PM (4 months, 10 hours ago) |
|
|
Just as a neutron based star is a brown dwarf. It’s in the astrophysics itself. That’s why it’s funny. The quote Enstein made:
Azul, the blue little dot that circles the sun. To protect the sun, to protect the galaxy.
You don’t really need much else to understand what that meant. He was talking about the sun and the quotes describing what Enstein saw the hydrogen atom “looking” like if spectral energy was described as color. That’s why in chemistry it’s a yellow proton, green neutron, and blue electron. Enstein thought about it as a color. But he had the spectrums of energy wrong. The electron is ultraviolet. And you can use the different stars and there base materials that burn to figure it out.
So a proton based star, hydrogen, is yellow. A neutron star is brown, a brown dwarf. Almost a star and almost a planet. And an electron is like a black hole, that’s what I’m getting at.
So look for the electron atomically in the ultraviolet spectrum.
Edit: and a proton heavy star burns, a neutron heavy star doesn’t, and an electron heavy star becomes a black hole
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
Edited by mushroomboy (01/15/24 08:16 PM)
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|
Is there any chance that you could be mistaken about any of this?
Edited by Nillion (01/15/24 09:00 PM)
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
Quote:
Nillion said: Is there any chance that you could be mistaken about any of this?
What do you mean?
Literally stars burn fuel. Right? Fuel is?
So then, we can already extrapolate how a star burns. So they know the general particles present and their percents. Then just figure out the difference of a burning star and a brown dwarf. You’ll probably get more protons than neutrons……. Mass , all that they can extrapolate.
Then what’s a black hole? A star that doesn’t burn. So what’s the difference between a live star and a brown dwarf? Take the opposite of that. You now know what a black hole is…..
Next just check to see if the electron leaks ultraviolet. Hawking radiation. What is it? Photons? What leaks out of electrons? Photons? Weird right?
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|
I mean, is there any chance, in your mind, that you could be mistaken about any of this?
Do you believe it might be possible for any of the details you are sharing to be incorrect?
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
Hawking Quote:
Nillion said: I mean, is there any chance, in your mind, that you could be mistaken about any of this?
Do you believe it might be possible for any of the details you are sharing to be incorrect?
So the electron gets excited and emits photons….. what is hawking radiation?
Like no. That’s why I posted the Enstein quote as I’ve never taken physics. Ever, I just added a bit.
Azul the little blue man, the little blue dot that circles the sun. The little blue man to protect the earth, to protect the sun, to protect the galaxy. For if we blew up mars, we could blow up the earth. If we blew up the earth, we lose Father Time. If we lose Father Time, we lose all hope. Without hope there would be no bomb. For without the bomb there would be no explosion. Without the explosion there would be no space and all time would be lost in the galaxy.
And I realized what he was trying to say. And all you have to do is use the technology we have today.
Enstein said the atomic bomb wasn’t right. And I’ve always had an issue with the electron. It doesn’t make sense the way you describe it. And this, this makes much more sense. Especially if you take into account what hawking radiation is.
So yah, I’m basically saying that you got the wrong spin on the electron. Use ultraviolet to find it. It’s there, trust me.
Edit:
Time is the illusion the self tells the mind as it passes through space
Space is the illusion the mind tells the self to exist
Space time is the illusion the self tells the mind as a story
Story is the illusion the mind tells the self as it passes through space and time
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
Edited by mushroomboy (01/15/24 11:14 PM)
|
koraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,729
|
|
Your story about blue, green and yellow shows you're clutching at straws. It's interesting subject matter, but you'll have to investigate further. Moreover, you'll have to get rid of the apparent feeling of "I've got this" that currently stops you from learning.
I didn't ask because I wanted you to explain it to me. I asked because I hoped that you'd be stimulated to do some very basic reading on the subject. Whether you want to do this, is up to you. Good luck and have fun with physics. Or metaphysics, if you prefer. Don't ever mix them up, again.
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
Re: Physics [Re: koraks]
#28622924 - 01/16/24 04:33 AM (4 months, 1 hour ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koraks said: Your story about blue, green and yellow shows you're clutching at straws. It's interesting subject matter, but you'll have to investigate further. Moreover, you'll have to get rid of the apparent feeling of "I've got this" that currently stops you from learning.
I didn't ask because I wanted you to explain it to me. I asked because I hoped that you'd be stimulated to do some very basic reading on the subject. Whether you want to do this, is up to you. Good luck and have fun with physics. Or metaphysics, if you prefer. Don't ever mix them up, again.
No, it’s seriously how fusion works. When you burn fuel, you’re actually burning something? So you figure this out by going from hotter stars to cooler stars. The color of a star is the representation of the energy and amount of fuel.
https://www.space.com/22437-main-sequence-star.html
They primarily burn? And the difference between a star and a theoretical brown dwarf? Is? It’s considered neutron star.
https://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/science/objects/neutron_stars1.html
So a star with fuel is a proton based star. And the amount of fuel is the color. So find the weakest star….
Then you already know a neutron star, they can find them.
The only fucking thing left, is an electron based star. Which is what we never had tech to find. A black hole. Aka the reverse star
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
Edited by mushroomboy (01/16/24 04:34 AM)
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
When light hits something like a pigment, color…. Or a metal…. It gets warm right? But it reflects a color right? The heat is a representation of the atom being? Excited? With the most excited thing the? Electron? When then reflects, leaks the spectrum of light that it is……
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
Oh, and I’m coming from Robert Penrose and the perspective that consciousness isn’t what it appears. So then, what is light? As we assume that something hits the eye? Right? But we know rods and cones don’t detect photons.
So, what is light? Like, hawking radiation? Electrons emit light when excited, we already know this. It’s in physics.
So I’m saying that is a total system harmonic. So light is absorbed by the system as a hole, we’ll say for now. Then it’s somehow internalized and reflected back at another wavelength.
That’s an interesting process if you think about it. So light what, messages the atom? Then the atom produces new light?
So how exactly does light reflect off a surface? That’s a good question isn’t it? If it’s a particle then it bounces. If it’s a wave, does it reflect? Still bounces, tho how does it dump its energy as heat then? Like?
So there has to be a mechanic you can use, that allows for atoms to absorb the energy of light and output that energy. And the proper angle of physics.
I did a lot of programming. So look at 3D modeling of light, especially ocular occlusion and modeling. It’s very difficult alone to create a model to reflect light. Then we have to layer a thermal dynamic system into light as well? Where is this data going? How are you going to explain that?
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
|
koraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,729
|
|
Look son, you sound incredibly confused, but the irony is that everyone recognizes it except yourself. I can't blame you for it, nor do I want to give you a hard time. Enjoy your view on physics; if if gives you pleasure giving your personal spin to theory, then so be it.
As to the color thing:
Light behaves as a particle as well as a wave. The color of light is its wavelength, and wavelength is the inverse of frequency. A photon has only one wavelength, and this doesn't change. So if light (photons) with a wavelength of around 550nm (= green) hit a red target, they get absorbed and none reflect. If the target is green, they bounce back. Yes, absorbed photons result in their energy being absorbed by the target as well.
Yellow is a special case because you need to distinguish between pure wavelength yellow (around 575nm or thereabouts) and human-perceived yellow. We perceive single-wavelength 575nm light as yellow, but this is actually pretty rare, and the vast amount of yellow we see is the combination of red and green. The reason for this is that the human eye has no receptors that are specific for yellow. Our brain deduces yellow from the simultaneous stimulus of our red and green receptors. Coincidentally, this is also why we perceive yellow as a bright color, because it creates an effectively bigger (because, combined/superimposed) signal compared to the 'single' colors of blue and green. Note that our blue and green spectral sensitivity is pretty closely spaced on the spectrum; look at the peak sensitivities of our red and green cones and note how little distance there is between them. From this, and the much bigger distance to the retina's blue sensitivity peak you can deduce that our sensitivity to blue/green hues ('cyans') is pretty poor. In an absolute sense, our green sensitivity is pretty big, which is likely due to evolutionary reasons: a lot of our natural environment and plant-based food is green, so it's advantageous that we can differentiate quite well in that part of the spectrum.
Sunlight we can sometimes/often perceive as yellow, but this is a bit of a ruse. It really isn't. The sun effectively behaves as a near-perfect black-body radiator and as such, its emitted wavelengths span the entire spectrum. In terms of visible light, it's white - but how we perceive it, depends on the human eye (see above) and also on atmospheric effect. Note that we see only a tiny bit of the sun's emitted electromagnetic radiation - the vast majority of the emitted energy we don't see because it's either too short-waved (UV and even higher frequencies stretching into xray territory) or too long-waved (> 700nm; i.e. infrared).
The relationship between the perceived color of a star (compensated for atmospheric effects and other effects such as red-shift) is directly related to its temperature, and this in turn relates to its size and stage in its life cycle. In fact, temperature is the main determinant, not so much the 'type of fuel', i.e. its composition. The main energy conversion process in a live star is by definition nuclear fusion, which always involves just the fusion of hydrogen into helium. In bigger stars, the alpha process also occurs, which is responsible for the fusion of helium into the other (heavier) atoms. It's evident that this only happens in the bigger, more massive stars since the fusion of these larger elements requires extreme temperatures and pressures not found in smaller and older (less active) stars.
The composition of a star does indeed contribute to its perceived color; after all, the elements present in a (very hot) black-body radiator will add light emission in accordance with their specific spectral lines - some well-known ones are the orange (and green) line of sodium (known from the old-fashioned LPS street lights, and also easy to demonstrate by holding a sample of sodium chloride in a blue or colorless flame, which will turn yellow) or the various lines of helium. However, the main determinant of a start's color is still its temperature, in accordance with the theory on blackbody radiators (which date back to the 19th and early 20th century, so not particularly 'hot' - but still very solid).
So all the mumbo-jumbo like this:
Quote:
So the neutron is represented as? Green, but wasn’t that blue and yellow? So now what would be yellow and purple? That’s the energy range if you converted light frequency into an energy spectrum.
..is all confused ramblings that make no sense whatsoever. It's incoherent, meaningless and any attempt to make meaning out of it results in falsehoods and further inconsistencies.
If you find this stuff interesting, there are plenty of books to pick up. In the short term, you'll have your hands full on highschool textbooks on physics and the literature used in the first semester of university physics. If you're still hungry for knowledge at that point, and actually understand what you've learned so far, proceed from there. As I said, it's interesting stuff - but I admit that I only dig into it to the extent that I need to understand it in order to do the projects I work on. Which coincidentally revolve a lot around light, color, spectral sensitivities etc.
I'm going to leave you with this to do your own research/studies. Good luck with it all; I hope you find your way in this subject matter, or that you'll at least learn to differentiate between accepted physics and your idiosyncratic construct of arcane metaphysics along the lines of what you've posted so far. It'll help others to more easily figure out what's up if you're clear on what you know and what you make up.
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|
G-type star on the main sequence is called a yellow dwarf as a misnomer, that's common knowledge in astrophysics.
Our star's light is white, but has several spectral component that we examine for being able to forecast space weather.
You can find videos, images and more of this at the Solar Domain Observatory: https://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/data/ Note on that page it list Angstrom units rather than Nanometers, one Å is 0.1 nm.
I am into astrophysics too, but it is a broad topic that has a lot to it and by no means do I know or understand all of it, but I enjoy learning about it and have spent considerable time studying it. As far as that goes, I still have a lot to learn.
Here is more information about the type of star called a Yellow Dwarf incorrectly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-type_main-sequence_star
Our Sun is one of these stars and the true color image of the Sun that I posted came from this page and no, it is not impossible, it is a literal image of the Sun, just dimmed so that it isn't blindingly bright.
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
Yah it’s metaphors. I know, and I’m telling you buried in some theology. Like Hinduism and the stories bRAma taught sheva….. there is another story.
How do I know this? Because, it’s about me and my spirituality….. and I’m telling you, that the electron represents the ultraviolet spectrum.
I’m well aware how light works. The Enstein quote is also code, passed down as Enstein said to keep it secret. And only when he returned would its meaning be revealed.
I came to the community that the quote was meant for. I delivered the message it was meant to say. Enstein had the wrong spin.
I’ve even explained where to look and how. Like, the whole concept of how the energies were thought about.
And on top of that, Enstein wasn’t good at math. He stood on the shoulders of giants. The main thing he had was relativity. And it’s becoming very obvious that your figuring out consciousness isn’t all that it appears.
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
Reverse star, how do I know that? That hawking radiation is the only thing to escape the event horizon of a black hole. And you can only see it in the ultraviolet spectrum.
That’s why it’s a reverse star, it absorbs light.
And consciousness, the actuation speed of thought is a very interesting physics phenomenon. As you can’t actually create a plausible explanation for how neurology acts and advanced thought patterns. Is like the brain is too simple for the complexity of consciousness.
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
Light isn’t magic. It hits a surface and diffuses,this puts heat into the surface and reflects “light” back in another direction.
You still can’t even decide if it’s a particle or a wave. You still can’t decide the meaning of the double slit quantum eraser experiment. Like, if light is that fucking complex. Then how does it transfer heat, change shape, and reflect in the angles it does?
If your smart, how does light do quantum functions on atomic particles?
Edit: bringing up how color works, shows that we detect light as an organic being through waves. The rods and cones in the eyes don’t detect particles, they detect vibrations. Which favors light being a wave.
Edit: and it’s a double meaning. That the electron is as complex as a black hole. The atom, as a construct or “agent” in the ORT theory Robert Penrose is working on. Would then work with light. As you make the atom a quantum computer itself. Doing a set of functions predefined.
Edit: Robert is close, but looking in the wrong direction. Think of an atom in that sense, as a quantum construct. A quantum node so to speak.
Edit: and another question. Are you sensing a particle or the intersection of two waves? I’ve yet to see an individually trapped photon.
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
Edited by mushroomboy (01/16/24 07:41 AM)
|
koraks
Registered: 06/02/03
Posts: 26,729
|
|
Verbal diarrhea isn't magic, either. It's still shit, though.
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
Re: Physics [Re: koraks]
#28623054 - 01/16/24 07:42 AM (3 months, 30 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koraks said: Verbal diarrhea isn't magic, either. It's still shit, though.
The slit expiration? Splitting photons? Isn’t that a quantum function? The wave form collapse? Does it collapse at all? You create a sensor that detects what you call photons. But all your detecting is a strong vibration. Nothing more.
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
Edited by mushroomboy (01/16/24 07:42 AM)
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|
Quote:
How do I know this? Because, it’s about me and my spirituality….. and I’m telling you, that the electron represents the ultraviolet spectrum.
Called it, you posted this stuff in the wrong section.
Quote:
The Enstein quote is also code, passed down as Enstein said to keep it secret. And only when he returned would its meaning be revealed.
A secret code passed down from Einstein who said it's meaning would be revealed when he returned?
Did you use a laser and powerful psychedelics to see the code?
Quote:
I came to the community that the quote was meant for. I delivered the message it was meant to say.
So, Einstein passed down a secret code in a secret quote that would be revealed when he returned and here you are revealing the secret code meaning. You just implied that you are something like the reincarnated version of Einstein.
This does not belong in the Science and Technology section.
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
No, not exactly. I’ve actually learned programming, psychology, sociology, neurology. It’s about one who can think outside the box. So I started this a long time ago, the obsession with the atom.
If you take light and make it a quantum function, how would it interact? Obviously it’s a field harmonic, that’s how you would explain light diffusion. This comes from my knowledge of game engines being in the gaming community for decades.
So now what I’m saying, is you can’t ever measure the smallest piece of light. It would be infinitely small, if you believed in fractal math and quantum harmonics. As light being a wave would infinitely shrink.
Now what I’m saying we detect is based off my understanding of advanced computing technologies. I’ve been paying attention to how microprocessors work, 3D stacked gates. All that, because I was building computers at such a young age. When I went to college, I already know the rough concept of how a processor worked. And I took C++. So advanced functions to finite systems is another learning thing.
Now, I say make light a construct, because you literally create a quantum interaction then when it reflects off a surface. You get light diffusion, heat creation, and the restructuring of light as reflected color.
No, I’m not actually crazy. And then you can get into what are you using to actually sense the light?
Edit: theology, was originally called? In Egypt the clue is the eye of Horus. The creative side, the study of astrology. The planets and the stars, the first astrophysics. You might have things hidden in there, that has been lost. Like concepts of colors, representing the complexity of certain quantum functions being described as poetry. Just saying.
You could say, the description of a planetary orbit can describe the wobble of the electron? A their spin, right, electron spin? At different rates depending the orbit and distance from the sun?
It’s not a direct comparison but, kinda gets the idea across.
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
Edited by mushroomboy (01/16/24 08:20 AM)
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
si=OpMBXeZoiUNl7yGK
And another question, when running a laser through a perfectly grown crystal. What is the physical mechanic that splits the light. Anyone?
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|
Do you think you could be wrong about any of this?
For example, I think Putin is dead and made a thread about it in the conspiracy section, but openly admit I could be wrong.
Could you be wrong?
Ever read : Femtosecond spectroscopic study of photochromic reactions of bacteriorhodopsin and visual rhodopsin...? https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1011134416305383
Quote:
As shown in these studies, the low-frequencies that form a wave packets experimentally observed in the dynamics of primary products formation as a result of retinal photoisomerization have different intensities and are clearer for bovine rhodopsin. Photo-reversible reactions for both retinal proteins were performed from the stage of the relatively stable photointermediates that appear within 3–5 ps after the light pulse impact.
A single photon hits a single molecule of Rhodopsin and causes it to change shape almost instantly, and with 100% efficiency. This molecular change is like a hammer dropping and the amount of energy in the hammer is then passed through the molecule as wave energy, allowing different colors to be perceived based on the wavelength of the light that activate the molecule. After this the hammer is reset by enzymes. If you close your eyes for awhile you can see the waves of the enzymes doing this, this is the same enzyme system effect that keeps resetting your visual rhodopsin so that you can keep seeing.
I am at least somewhat aware of how our eyes work on a molecular level, having studied it.
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
And that doesn’t align with what we consider light to be. It breaks the wave, so there is something about the focusing through a lens that’s important.
But beyond that, I’m serious when I say. How do you split light in a perfectly grown crystal? Like a perfect diamond?
So what’s the interaction with that? In that sense, light shouldn’t interact this way.
It also becomes a problem when you look at the double slit quantum eraser experiment. Taking into account quantum entanglement breaks the speed of light. There are obviously holes in what we are discussing.
So my suggestion is to figure out the proper mechanics of the atom first, as a quantum node. A set of quantum particle interacting to create what we call the atomic shell of the atom.
Though you need the proper spin, which I’m suggesting might be hidden in texts. Older than we know. Carbon dating is flawed, we know this as we pumped too much radiation into the earth. And radiation goes through the ground, spoiling stuff we haven’t dug up.
Then we get into the sensitivity of equipment, we can’t make steel sensitive enough because there is too much carbon 12? 14? Ugh too many numbers. So we have to use shipwrecked metal that’s hopefully pure enough.
That alone makes this type of poking around physics sketchy at best. Which is fine, completely fine. But you’ve hit a roadblock. And that roadblock is the definition of consciousness and the wave form.
This roadblock created things like nanotubes that might have quantum resonance. Cells now have known ways to communicate, via these more interesting processes. Which has caused an issue, where the reaction time of a person doesn’t match the recorded data.
Which is very odd. And you still haven’t answered how to split light on a prison. You can still say light is a vibration as a particle. It’s just the smallest wave detectable.
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
I’m waiting to see when they realize that a clear perfect carbon crystal manipulates color without pigment.
Edit: I’ll take what is bending light?
The answer: a quantum mechanic.
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
Edited by mushroomboy (01/16/24 09:08 AM)
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|
And I ask again.
Is there any chance you could be wrong?
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
Quote:
Nillion said: And I ask again.
Is there any chance you could be wrong?
Hmm how? I just explained that atoms, arranged in a perfect lattice refract and bend light. You don’t have any other mechanic at play, atoms manipulating light. Without causing diffusion or heat transfer. Now, what’s the actual physics that strips the colors in a prisom?
Like, honestly here. You’re telling me you know the physical process that a prisom uses to refract light?
That would mean the atom itself, the carbon atom. Has the ability to split light. Think about that, one type of atom. A clear crystal, splits light.
So what I’m saying, is figure out the god damn proper spin of the electron. Cause obviously if you want quantum light, you need to figure out how the carbon atom splits it.
That alone should be a big fucking red flag that you know shit about physics. Big big red flag. And making an atom a quantum node, and light a quantum function. That would make a lot more sense.
You also can then look at the electron and its relationship to the proton differently. But you must really understand why now I brought up color and light.
On top of that, how does a lense work? Making an image infinitely small, and then recoding it? Also by way of a crystalline structure and a specific space curve?
Or are mirrors magic? And bending light just funky trait or mechanic of what we call glass?
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|
Quote:
mushroomboy said: You’re telling me you know the physical process that a prisom uses to refract light?
Isn't it called refraction?
Is it even possible for you to be mistaken about any of this? Is it impossible for you to be wrong?
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
Quote:
Nillion said:
Quote:
mushroomboy said: You’re telling me you know the physical process that a prisom uses to refract light?
Isn't it called refraction?
Is it even possible for you to be mistaken about any of this? Is it impossible for you to be wrong?
Look, you call bending of gravity a quantum function. That interacts with time…. Or the movement of space shall we say. And you also agree that gravity can bend light, around stars.
Now I’m pointing out, the bending of light in a crystal structure might be explained if you make atoms quantum nodes. And light more complicated…..
So, now light can be bent by gravity and apparently carbon atoms stacked in a lattice.
Idk, what do you think? Should we start looking for electrons in the ultraviolet space?
Edit: and a glass lens, apparently does ><, how small does the image get inside the “lense” before it’s recoded and flipped?
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
Edited by mushroomboy (01/16/24 09:36 AM)
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
There are three main energies start with in the atom. You have gravity, the neutron. You have light, the proton, and you have electricity the electron. The order in which these are actually stored and manipulated isn’t exactly clear, it’s all symbolic.
That’s why I call the atomic shell a quantum harmonic of the total of the system. When you look at teslas experiment, running high voltage to create a plasma.
The electricity is what one might call the source of ZPE. It’s the main driving force of the atom. It’s what gives other sources energy and the binding agent of the two.
So the plasma between the ladder is gravity binding light fueled by electricity. That’s still a very sketch description, like calling the spin of an electron a color to represent a base mechanic of energy or a power state.
So what is gravity, what is light? And what is energy itself? Those are the real questions here. And how could those interactions create the particle we know as the atom.
That’s why I say to look at an atom as a node and something like a diamond as a system. When you look at it that way, then splitting light takes a different approach.
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|
I'll share a secret.
The first unwritten rule of science is that it can only be based on information and interpretation and as such, any scientific claim or theory can be wrong, no matter what it is.
Theories are made to be tested. They are meant to be attacked by a method called falsification and one of the better methods of this is called the Null-Hypothesis.
Are you familiar with it or its use?
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
Quote:
Nillion said: I'll share a secret.
The first unwritten rule of science is that it can only be based on information and interpretation and as such, any scientific claim or theory can be wrong, no matter what it is.
Theories are made to be tested. They are meant to be attacked by a method called falsification and one of the better methods of this is called the Null-Hypothesis.
Are you familiar with it or its use?
What a scientist does, is prove themself wrong. So you postulate a theory, then you try and prove it wrong. And if you can’t, you might have something.
And if we believe gravity can be bent, Ensteins theory on gravity. Where large objects bend space, and time or the movement of particles slows the stronger the gravitational force. Based off both density and mass.
Right, we know this. And know that mechanic can also bend light. What I’m asking, is how do you explain this? We can know with high certainty that there pretty much pure carbon. They are structured in a lattice shape. And some how this bends light.
This happens in the eye too, it refracts again. To a slower medium, the liquid in the eye. Slowing it down, to a lower more easily detectable frequency. Which I find interesting.
This still doesn’t explain the exact mechanic of focal points. You know it works, but how small are we talking about? How far can you compress an image before you lose data? Compression theory and algorithms, like BZ2 with a tar packager are neat. But have limitations, so when we use a focal point. The amount of data compression going on, it’s fucking insane if you know data like that.
Now, all this fancy talk still doesn’t get around this. That somewhere you assume a focal point in the bending of light. And that points never described, it’s literally just “yup that’s an infinitely small focal point”. And then you expand it? ><
And then we don’t have any exact math to explain how the image is encoded. Ever work with photoshop? Gimp? File compression in visuals? It’s interesting because we don’t see in FPS or pixels. Here everything we use is pixels almost, except physical art. Is pretty much mathematically pixelated, and composed.
The eye does much better work. It filters out wavelengths with the eye. Takes binocular vision and cros composes it. Correcting each eye, matching the patterns and creating depth perception. All while masking imperfections, like the two holes in your eyes.
So the eye alone creates an infinite point, in theory. That somehow expands without any loss in information. All while being used in real time. Without the mythical “delay” in processing.
Very interesting stuff.
Edit: grammar
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
Edited by mushroomboy (01/16/24 10:25 AM)
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
What I’m describing is lossless compression in a data stream. How do you use binoculars? A telescope? Your compressing light? Without data loss? That seems weird doesn’t it?
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|
Once we are open to the idea that we have more to learn or that we could be mistaken about what we believe, it liberates and empowers us further in our quest for knowledge.
I've been wrong, am wrong and will be wrong about a great many things I believe. And because in some ways I happen to know more than most people about many things, that means I am more likely to be wrong than most people, not less, because I have more beliefs that are able to be mistaken. It's an interesting phenomenon where the more one learns about things, the more they realize the limitations of belief itself.
In this way the more we tend to learn the more aware of our ignorance we tend to become.
I am a little disturbed that I shared an image of our sun with you, one that shows its actual color, and you said that it was impossible. How can a person learn if they are not open to new ideas or information?
Sometimes people have to agree to disagree, especially when they interpret facts differently, but they often agree that those facts exist, just they disagree about what those facts mean.
But when a person rejects facts in favor of beliefs that have no factual basis it becomes frustratingly difficult to discuss things with them.
Is there a way I can use language to reach you, so that I can get you to consider things like true color images of the sun, instead of you just rejecting them based on what your belief is?
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
Re: Physics [Re: koraks]
#28623308 - 01/16/24 10:59 AM (3 months, 30 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koraks said: Alright then, since you understand it so well, please explain a couple of things to me.
Quote:
mushroomboy said: the color gets absorbed by the pigment.
Define 'the color'. What is it, according to you?
Quote:
The reflection is the wave without the color it reflected from.
Define 'the wave'. It sounds like you're talking about it in the singular. Explain how a single wave would have 'a color' substracted from it.
Quote:
You then detect this as color. Yup, look it up. It’s the reverse wave form of the pigment you reflect the light on.
Explain how the wave form relates to color. Explain how inverting this supposed waveform would alter color.
I don’t need to really explain that as much as you think. Cause I’m thinking of light as a contrstream of data. Uninterrupted, and what you might call a photon. Would be a high density area within the quantum mechanic we call light.
Cause you’re avoiding how the eye changes the image. Completely, focusing on color. Which I wanted to use to explain that light not only changes color, but dumps heat.
Which is an interesting mechanic, then I wanted to focus on focus itself. Look at a telescope, even the simple design’s essentially bend light. And focus it without losing data. Lossless compression. And then you expand it again?
Light has no FPS, it has no rate it’s constant like a flow of water. So how does an image like a city skyline get compressed in a camera lense? You just say it bends the light to a small focal point?
So what IS bending light?
Edit: live data compression of light. Going at the speed of light, constantly. And you never wondered about that? Keeping colors, shapes, depth (shading) in tact. Cross composing, to make the image you see. Reading this text.
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
Edited by mushroomboy (01/16/24 11:17 AM)
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|
Most light, like that from the sun, is a mixture of wavelengths and, with the exception of excitation and emission phenomena where one color of light is changed into another via the action of a molecule, when light reaches a surface the texture of that surface can reflect specific colors, giving the object the hue that is seen. A similar thing basically happens when light moves through things, they can filter out certain colors and allow others to be transmitted.
Among the forms of light that the sun emits is a type called Infrared. It's a thing that relates to this heat concept of yours from light interaction.
How can I use language to reach you so that you will consider the scientific evidence and theories that already provide explanation for the things you describe, if you reject valid evidence like literal photographs of the Sun?
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
Quote:
Nillion said: Most light, like that from the sun, is a mixture of wavelengths and, with the exception of excitation and emission phenomena where one color of light is changed into another via the action of a molecule, when light reaches a surface the texture of that surface can reflect specific colors, giving the object the hue that is seen. A similar thing basically happens when light moves through things, they can filter out certain colors and allow others to be transmitted.
Among the forms of light that the sun emits is a type called Infrared. It's a thing that relates to this heat concept of yours from light interaction.
How can I use language to reach you so that you will consider the scientific evidence and theories that already provide explanation for the things you describe, if you reject valid evidence like literal photographs of the Sun?
Quote:
Nillion said: Most light, like that from the sun, is a mixture of wavelengths and, with the exception of excitation and emission phenomena where one color of light is changed into another via the action of a molecule, when light reaches a surface the texture of that surface can reflect specific colors, giving the object the hue that is seen. A similar thing basically happens when light moves through things, they can filter out certain colors and allow others to be transmitted.
Among the forms of light that the sun emits is a type called Infrared. It's a thing that relates to this heat concept of yours from light interaction.
How can I use language to reach you so that you will consider the scientific evidence and theories that already provide explanation for the things you describe, if you reject valid evidence like literal photographs of the Sun?
Pro ton?
Pro? Before/near
Ton? Tone
Before/near vibration
Neutron?
Neu neutral/none
Tron matter/vibration
Neutral matter
Electron
After/slow
Tron matter/vibration
Matter at slow vibration
Now then, let’s see here. The most active stars with the highest frequency would be a proton star. They vibrate the most, and have the least mass. As the neutron and electron are responsible for mass.
The neutron star would there for have more mass than a proton star, without fuel. So it wouldn’t burn, it would be inert while still having protons.
The last one to find, would then be the electron. Which would have the most mass, no fuel to burn. And what fuel it does burn, burns slowly and leaks out. The reverse star, the electron star, the black hole.
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|
Among the posts I retracted earlier in my frustration in this thread were links to information about what hadrons and leptons are. Both the proton and neutron are hadrons, the electron is a lepton.
Under certain conditions an electron can be absorbed by a proton which makes the proton a neutron and a neutrino is emitted, this is called electron capture.
All of this is well explained by Quantum Chromodynamics and General Relativity as parts of the standard model of Particle Physics.
Is there a way that I can use my words in this conversation to get you to consider the possibility that you can be mistaken about things Like, is it possible that we can reach a point in this conversation where I can show you a true color image of the sun and you will not claim that it is impossible? I'm only engaging you because I am curious if we can reach a point where you will accept evidence that does not fit what you believe.
The other week I had assumed that serotonin passed the blood brain barrier, this was in relation to the potential activity or lack thereof of the molecule called norpsilocin. It turns out that I was wrong about serotonin and the blood brain barrier, someone presented me with evidence that didn't fit my belief and so I had to reject my belief. I wrote in response that they were right, I was wrong and I stand corrected.
I'm not actually trying to teach you, if anything I am trying to see if I can get you to teach yourself, by opening your mind to the possibility that evidence may exist which indicates your belief is incorrect. I think the best example of that here is the true color image of the sun, which you claimed was impossible.
I am often somewhat intellectually aggressive and this is can be mistaken for animosity and I regret that, it is however part of my nature and is at times difficult for me to avoid. I am making a strong conscious effort here to avoid aggressive tones in this conversation.
Of course if we were discussing a topic like harm reduction, which is often a literal matter of life and death, or if you were repeatedly attacking and insulting me and calling me names, I would not take an overly polite approach like this.
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
Quote:
Nillion said:
Of course if we were discussing a topic like harm reduction, which is often a literal matter of life and death, I would not take an overly polite approach like this.
Quotes too big.
What I’m getting at is the formation of a black hole itself. So the recent James web showed galaxies that have “early” stars that appear as ours. Simple, the yellow star.
Now you can take that information how you will. But if we go on the theory that atomic complexity was built as the universe formed. Then we look at the star colors and ranges as a spectrum of complexity.
Now what causes something to react? Chemistry called the neutron neutral, it’ll burn but you have to give it something. So any burning star is a proton based star, it’s just the idea for a star with fuel.
There are a few scenarios, when a star starts to run out of fuel. Depending on density and mass, so mass could be high and density low. So it’s large and has fuel, or it could be low density and high mass. Larger gravity, less fuel.
This seems to be important, it’s how newer nuclear warheads are designed. To compress fuel, making it more explosive we shall say.
This is a tricky thing, to figure out at what point a stars mass becomes too much for its density compressing it. This can cause a few things to happen, it could burn out rapidly. Eventually becoming a brown dwarf, or just slowly burns out.
Another route can be that the mass compresses the star causing the fuel to become super compressed. And might have a flash point, going supernova. This is one theory of how a black hole is formed. The other is natural decay of a neutron star, slowly compressing mass to an infinite point. The singularity.
New evidence has shown that this can become so intense, that it can rip holes in space. Connecting two black holes, theoretically.
Now, hmmm. I’m confused as to what part I’m missing?
Edit: grammar and might find errors.
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
Edited by mushroomboy (01/16/24 12:15 PM)
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|
Is there a point at which it will be possible that you will give fair consideration to evidence like true color images of the Sun, like this one?
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|
It is a yes or no, but I will regard a lack of an answer as the functional equivalent of no.
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
Quote:
Nillion said: Is there a point at which it will be possible that you will give fair consideration to evidence like true color images of the Sun, like this one?

Dude? I just described the formation of a black hole?
On top of that, the neutron and electron are the same root? Who named them? Why? Does a neutron decay to an electron as a smaller subatomic particle over time? Making a black hole an electron star, only visible with ultraviolet light. The smallest mass, with the largest gravitational pull and highest density. And then the only thing burned in the end would be protons caught in the center. Slowly burning/leaking as hawking radiation.
Unless they eat a star, which then comes out as a burst of energy, of what color? What does a TDE register on the spectrum of light? So what escapes a black hole? What is the spectrum of light that escapes black holes?
Edit: https://www.jwst.nasa.gov/satellite/gametext.pdf
You’re confusing the actual color with meaning. The color just represents the compounds burning and not the actual content of the subatomic particles.
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
Edited by mushroomboy (01/16/24 12:50 PM)
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
A standard star gives off photons and leaks radiation. A black hole gives off radiation(edit: ultraviolet) and leaks photons. It’s a reverse star!
Edit: so a standard star is UV and below dominant. You can see it. A black hole is UV and faster, X-rays. And what you get is the reverse star. It sucks in light and spits out X-rays and UV, while leaking light slowly.
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
Edited by mushroomboy (01/16/24 12:58 PM)
|
Nillion
Nobody

Registered: 04/14/22
Posts: 1,002
Loc: Terra Firma
|
|
So, this was a second attempt to engage with you, despite my instinct telling me that it was not a productive thing to be engaged in and at this point I'm just going to disengage from the conversation.
|
mushroomboy
The Shroom King

Registered: 09/21/11
Posts: 165
Last seen: 11 days, 11 hours
|
|
You’re confusing the actual color with meaning. The color just represents the compounds burning and not the actual content of the subatomic particles.Quote:
Nillion said: So, this was a second attempt to engage with you, despite my instinct telling me that it was not a productive thing to be engaged in and at this point I'm just going to disengage from the conversation.
What I’m saying is, what does all decay become? You’re stuck on what a star is. A star, not a black hole. And when you break down sub atomic particles, at their core. What are they?
And what is light? You’re still wanting me to say a stars light is white. I know that, and it hits our atmosphere and refracts, making it blue to us. The atmosphere, and it changes again upon the surface it hits. Dumping energy into that, as well as reflecting back as the resonance of that color.
I’m well aware. And so my question, is how do you split light? And you won’t answer that. Which I find interesting.
Edit: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dispersion_(optics)
What makes a diamond do this? When it’s 99.95% one material? Carbon?
What’s the mechanic at play that splits the light? The atom? Right? The atom itself is dividing light in a way you can’t replicate with other materials can you?
Edit2: you could say the light gets decompressed into its finer wavelengths. Right?
-------------------- int getRandomNumber() { return 4; // Chosen by random dice roll }; // guaranteed to be random. <3 GeoHot
Edited by mushroomboy (01/16/24 01:18 PM)
|
|