Wave-particle duality

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>[Gregg]: A wave has to occur in a medium - the elysium. Presumably the elysium consists of "particles". So would the light wave consist of an oscillation of these particles in the same sense as a wave in seawater?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Yes.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Would these elysium particles actually possess the property of mass? So, when a "photon" hits an atom (or molecule) would this actually be the effect seawater lapping at a rock? i.e. it would be "millions" of particles nudging the rock rather than one "bullet" particle - called the photon?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Also yes.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>[Jim]: What about the photon energy? Wave or particle the energy is calculated as E=hf in main stream theory. How do you calculate the energy of a wave of light?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Exactly the same way. It's the same for water waves. -|Tom|-

If you use E=hf to fix the energy of a photon what you get is the energy of the Planck bundle. Why is this bundle called a photon? The Planck bundle can be determined from blackbody law to be a great many smaller units of energy equal to the universal charge unit.

Tom,

What you call "elysium", I believe is what I am calling the "Chiral Condensate". I'm not sure on that can you describe "elysium"?

Copied from a response post on UniKEF:

***************************
Doppler shift may be entirely wrong or in some bifurcated way partially wrong. There are serious scientist questioning the function and meaning of the doppler shift. Then again it may be entirely correct. See #4 in the Introduction.

Paradoxes only exist if Relativity exists. Relativity only exists if the "Perception" of the constancy of the velocity of light is "Reality". Before concluding that such things are "Reality" you should consider and satisfy the (3) clock problem offered in "Time Dilation".

If you can't answer that then I don't think you can rightfully support Relativity; which means we need a different view of light propagation which produces the "Pereception of Constant Velocity Light".

One such thought is that the whole issue of Relativity (velocity of light), electron orbit jumping, tunneling and particle entanglement, are all functions of the Chiral Condensate.

Electrons vanish from one orbit and appear in another without existing inbetween and without traversing our spatial dimension or consume time in the process. We now believe that virtual particles appear and vanish in 1E-43 seconds at Planck length throughout every spatial ordinate in the universe.

My current view is that when an electron achieves the correct energy level, frequency, smile or whatever the criteria is, to be absorbed into the condensate, at that moment its counter part is released at another harmonic point by Pauli's Exclusion Principle. The electron doesnot teleport, it is absorbed and re-generated from raw stock down the line.

In that the Chiral Condensate appears to be some form of super-solid, one can see that if I have a steel rod so dense that it doesnot tolerate compression waves, when I push one end the other end of the rod moves at the same instant, even if it is 1,000,000,000 ly away. Assuming a linked surface to our dimension all along the surface particle messages are transmitted across the universe instantly.

This feature of the condensate resolves, particle entanglement, teleporting and tunneling. It also offers us the ability to view light as being a ripple in the condensate which can only be created when the energy is precisely v = c. Such that when you move relative to the source of the energy your velocity is additive or subtractive from the background condensate and you view the light at a new location where collectively the process equals the required v = c. YOU AREN'T SEEING THE SAME VIRTUAL PARTICLES THAT EXIST AS LIGHT.

Just as electrons appear to teleport, so has the light wave front. This moving light point creates the "illusion" that light has remained constant when in fact it isn't the same light but different light generated at the reqired v = c combined velocity.

I take that point and the function of creating light as being a Lorentz Contraction or dimensional collapse (being absorbed into the condensate). Consider a loose grip wheel with a slip clutch and flyball governor attached to a closed loop rope marked off in feet. The rope is being driven well above the maximum governor speed of the measuring device.

If I move up and down the rope the rope slips through the device at a variable rate. My velocity meter being driven downstream from the clutch would tell me the velocity doesn't change, even though logically (not knowing of the mechanical slip clutch arrangement in the box) I would think it must change.

But while the velocity isn't changing, I see the marks on the rope increasing frequency as I move forward against the vector of the rope motion and I see the frequency decrease as I move away from the vector of the ropes motion. (Doppler).

If I don't allow the rope slip to drift (in response to my motion)with my observation but constrain the rope to a fixed amount of slip, then as I move I drag the rope in my vector of motion and while its velocity would remain constant, so would frequency - NO Doppler.

So light is produced "On demand" at a location where conditions are correct and that is only where v = c.

Relativity does not exist. It is a principle based on FLAWS (False Logic About WaveS).



Mac

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>[Mac]: What you call "elysium", I believe is what I am calling the "Chiral Condensate". I'm not sure on that can you describe "elysium"?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

"Elysium" was chosen for its phonetic similarity to "LCM" and for its meaning in Greek mythology. "LCM" was used in <i>Dark Matter</i> as an abbreviation for "light-carrying medium". Other theories speak of "aether" or the "space-time medium". Mathematically, it is described as gravitational potential, where potential corresponds to medium density.

Whereas in GR, light bends because of medium curvature, in MM it curves because of refraction. Many people have shown an exact mathematical equivalence of these two physically different interpretations. -|Tom|-

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Mathematically, it is described as gravitational potential, where potential corresponds to medium density.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Elysium is gravitational potential?

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Elysium is gravitational potential?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

In effect, yes, "gravitational potential" is a mathematical representation of elysium density. That density is imposed on an otherwise uniform medium by gravitational force. In other words, in MM, force causes potential, not the other way around.

Example: Consider the interior of a uniform spherical shell. Gravitational force is everywhere zero, but potential can be quite strong (although constant). Stronger gravitational potential means greater elysium density in this pure case where no forces are involved. -|Tom|-