Alchemy with light shocks physicists

Now apply this knowledge to the big picture - specifically cosmology and the cosmological red shift.

And latest studies seem to indicate that the "doppler" red shift is quantisized... that it jumps in values rather than a steady variation. This would tend to show that some thing like this shifting is caused by something other than mere distance.

> It's not a myth when we're talking about paints in kindergarten. You cannot mix yellow and green Prang water colors or tempera paint and get blue.

Prang watercolors
are good enough for real tests,
but you have to know

the "actual" wheel
of color, the sequence of
paint pigment bias:

Yellow

Orange Green

Red Blue

Purple

That's a color wheel.
So, to mix "primary" blue,
you would mix purple

with green. The result
will be a very pretty,
less intense real blue.

Similarly, red
is mixed purple and orange.
Primary yellow

is orange and green,
but because it's not intense,
it will be seen brown.

Prang watercolors
aren't Winsor & Newton,
but they'll work for this.

Consider that the the microwave background radiation is highly scattered. If you look at optical communication systems in highly scattering medium it's impossible to tell where the source is, same for microwave. What is the coherence length of the background radiation as a radial function from earth? We only see the transverse coherence.

Secondly, the background radiation can be the summation of many shifts occuring at different times and places and gives a continuous spectrum. Just look at the spectrum of the spread spectrum radio signal. For just "crude" modulation rates the spectra appears as continuous noise. Imagine if it was encoded over astronomical time periods at very high data rates.

I think it would be telling to look at the nature of low level signals of the cosmic background. Refer to the discussion of the difference between "antenna radiation" and "light" in Dishington's book. If the thesis is correct, one would see the microwave background radiation showing photonic properties (since it is shifted light) rather than the properties of antenna radiation, as this is what most microwave signals are. The properties would show as polarization differences. Light type radiation would show circular polarization at the quantum level (individual photons) and antenna type radiation would maintain the same polarization (linear or circular) regardless of signal level.

Hey, I'm not a scientist either. I'm an engineer whose area is electromagnetics. I'm just jealous of the cosmologists who get to use fudge factors to explain everything but that which can be done on earth.
I'm on a quest for explaining the physical world that doesn't invoke the supernatural or the unseen or unmeasurable.
If you are interested, the best book I've seen is "Physics 2001" by Roland Dishington. The book is dynamite, unlike anything else written. If you have a background in Physics or engineering this book is for you. Available at:
Beak Publications, PO Box 333, Pacific Palisades, CA 90272
The author attempts to explain most known phenomena from an ether standpoint. It's all derived from a few basics. The concepts have helped me immensely in my work. There's no extra dimensions, causality is NOT violated, no magic at all. I can't recommend the book enough.

The other factor is whether the colors are viewed by reflected light or transmitted light. The color printed on white paper is not at all the same color when printed on clear plastic and projected as a transparency.

When I blend my Winsor & Newton, all I usually get is brown. I can't get brown at all in my transparencies, everything comes out yellow.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.