Explanation for cosmological red shift of light

[Atlan0001]

Inclusive of Trojan superpositions!

 

[billslugg]

Square waves are forbidden in physics. Each incoming and outgoing "vertical" line cannot be perfectly straight up and down. This would require harmonics of infinite frequency thus infinite energy. The shape of any EM wave is exactly that of the movement of the charged particle that created it. No particle with mass can move infinitely fast, which would be required to make a "square wave". The top of the square wave is also impossible to create, as all EM waves are constantly changing. Constant change is needed as a magnetic field can only be created by a moving charged particle. All "square" waves are comprised of many different waves of different frequencies and phases. This is called a Fourier Transform. Well established in physics.

 

[Atlan0001]

Square waves are forbidden in physics. Each incoming and outgoing "vertical" line cannot be perfectly straight up and down. This would require harmonics of infinite frequency thus infinite energy. The shape of any EM wave is exactly that of the movement of the charged particle that created it. No particle with mass can move infinitely fast, which would be required to make a "square wave". The top of the square wave is also impossible to create, as all EM waves are constantly changing. Constant change is needed as a magnetic field can only be created by a moving charged particle. All "square" waves are comprised of many different waves of different frequencies and phases. This is called a Fourier Transform. Well established in physics.

"Fast" is relative, Bill, not absolute. And, waves are macrocosmic as well as microcosmic. Lines macrocosmic and microcosmic, both, are asymptotic.

 

[marcin]

@billslugg Your explanation is probably the best possible. Thank you.

 

[Atlan0001]

Ad#78:

I prefer the wormhole, the tunnel, the warp, the powering constant of a 1g gravitationally accelerating contraction of SPACE and SPACETIME to zip and "fly over country." Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Schrodinger's box and cat inside and/or outside the box. Cantor set and space. Waves?! I like the 'soliton' and the 'standing wave'.

=================

Wormhole - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

=================
=================

Soliton - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

=================
=================

Standing wave - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

=================

 

[Classical Motion]

No one said anything about square waves. There is a duration pattern and a density pattern. Only the time pattern is square. The density pattern is sawtooth. A linear ramp of handed density.

The time pattern is square with no distance displacement. A square TIME duty cycle, an intermittent sawtooth density pattern.

Only the time pattern, the time ratio changes with motion. The sawtooth is constant in duration but looses density at inverse square. Looses density but not duration.

The 180 input is not square. It’s a conventional sine…...1/2 of a full sine. One radial pi.

Only the time is square.

Imagine a charged sphere. Now imagine one incident E line. That line is denser at the surface than at the tip of the field. That line has an inverse square density along it’s length.

Now cut that line and let it fly out. As it goes by, the starting tip is thin, and the ass end is the thickest.

The most density is at the END of the fly by. This chunk of field also has an inverse square density pattern.

That pattern give the photon an acceleration. An EM ramp.

 

[billslugg]

Angles are forbidden in EM wave patterns. A sharp angle would result in an infinitely high frequency component which would require infinite energy. All EM waves are smooth.

 

[Classical Motion]

The slope of that angle is the energy of the photon.

 

[billslugg]

Yes, the slope of the EM wave as it passes through zero is equal to the energy of the photon. A 90 degree slope would be an infinite energy.

 

[Classical Motion]

The 90 degree is only the stop, the ending of the acceleration, not the stimulus. Not the beginning.

 

[Classical Motion]

Right before the photon hits you, you feel nothing. ZERO. Then the photon first touches you and it’s just a tickle. As the photon proceeds into you, it gets thicker, denser and stronger. Hotter….. then at maximum intensity…… it stops. Instantly stops. ZIP.

That took a period of time. Immediately after that, there is nothing, no stimulus. That period of nothingness is equal to the period of acceleration. 180 degrees of time, and ½ wave…. length. And this is the period where the matter reacts to that stimulus. It vibrates like a sine oscillation. Sine output. Mass rings like a bell. The photon is the hammer, the clapper. Think of class B amp.

These two periods are equal if no distance displacement. If the distance changes, the length of photon remains constant…….. but the duration of the empty space changes. Because of increased distance. Increase time. If receding, decrease time if approaching. But photon length remains the same.

Thus changing the duty cycle of the photon. A shift in that intermittence.

Redshift is duty cycle shift, not a frequency shift. And a duty cycle shift is LIMITED.

I thought I had been working with sine waves all these years. There are no sines in space. EMR is rated with intermittence. Not frequency.

Cubic empty space with omnipresent time and length. A constant velocity has to be understood in a different manner.

All starlight has a different velocity. Because the velocity is rated with intermittence.

The continuous personality of light’s flux has fooled us all. Photons are chunky.

 

[billslugg]

All waves, regardless of medium or shape, are entirely comprised of sine waves. Fourier Transform.

 

[Classical Motion]

My experiment is a real heart breaker, Bill.

There are no waves in space.

 

[marcin]

If you'll keep thinking about your 0/1 binary base (especially in your From a drop of water... thread ), you may end up like FrankDiMeg12 on physicsdiscussionforum.org with his ON/IN BALANCE: https://physicsdiscussionforum.org/i-have-the-grand-unified-theory-of-physics-t3043.html
That's not his only post like this and there were many more of them before they were deleted.

@Atlan0001 I was wrong. You don't have to worry that you'll end up like Frank, you're already there.

For a century and more the cosmological CONSTANT (t=0) of CHANGE (entropy (t=+1) (t=-1) (t=*1*)) has been denied existence by some who should know better!
-----------------------------

1.) "Instantaneous spontaneous concurrent REALTIME (t=0) 'front' ('Frontier')."
2.) "Light's coordinate point SPACETIME (past histories (t=+1) past light cones -->|<-- future histories (t=-1) future light cones)."
3.) "Collapsed cosmological constant (/\) Planck / Big Bang 'Mirror Horizon' (t=*1*)." The Horizon set of all the possible infinities of horizon universes. Physically, Infinite MULTIVERSE Universe (possibly including -- to me more and more probably including -- the anti-Universe to the Universe (it only being a matter of where and what it, the anti-Universe, is / it was never annihilated)).
4.) "Change" ("Entropy") is not 1-dimensional."
5.) "Fundamental Binary Base2" (infinite ('0' (null unity)) and/or finite ('1' (unity)) . . . plus parity trojan (Oops! '1/2' (3-d?) . . . and vibratory / NOT so much a symmetrically "flat" irresistibly immovable 2-d "parity").

That's just pure insanity, just like his ON/IN BALANCE:

Consistent WITH what are E=MC2, TIME dilation, the fourth dimension, AND TIME, gravity/acceleration involves what is BALANCED inertia/inertial resistance; AS the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky; AS WHAT IS E=MC2 is taken directly from F=MA; AS the rotation of WHAT IS the Moon matches the revolution; AS TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE; AS two AND three dimensional SPACE are BALANCED in accordance WITH WHAT IS the fourth dimension; AS the mean density of WHAT IS the Sun is ONE FOURTH of that of WHAT IS the Earth. (INDEED, consider WHAT IS THE EYE ON BALANCE !!!!) Magnificent !!!! It is CLEARLY proven. I have CLEARLY proven WHAT IS the fourth dimension !!!! I have CLEARLY solved WHAT IS the coronal heating “problem” !!!! (AGAIN, I have CLEARLY explained how and why the mean density of WHAT IS the Sun IS ONE FOURTH of that of WHAT IS the Earth. Great.) TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE. Great. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense ON BALANCE !!!! (BALANCE AND completeness go hand in hand !!!!) Perfect. Piece it ALL together. Think !!!!

There is practically no difference between you two.

And you can really shake your hands with @Classical Motion who denies waves.

My experiment is a real heart breaker, Bill.

There are no waves in space.

@COLGeek That's not just being wrong. That's pure insanity.

 

[Classical Motion]

It depends on what your concept of a wave is. If you believe that any EM pattern is a wave, then they are waves.

If you believe that a wave is a continuous smooth repeating pattern, then there are no waves.

This is in reference to propagated EM, not connected charge fields. Or net charge matter.

My concept of a wave is a sine. I call intermittence a duty cycle. But a duty cycle does have a EM pattern. It’s just not continuous.

You can give intermittence a frequency too. An asymmetric frequency.

A sinewave is symmetric.

 

[marcin]

Right before the photon hits you, you feel nothing. ZERO. Then the photon first touches you and it’s just a tickle. As the photon proceeds into you, it gets thicker, denser and stronger. Hotter….. then at maximum intensity…… it stops. Instantly stops. ZIP.

That took a period of time. Immediately after that, there is nothing, no stimulus. That period of nothingness is equal to the period of acceleration. 180 degrees of time, and ½ wave…. length. And this is the period where the matter reacts to that stimulus. It vibrates like a sine oscillation. Sine output. Mass rings like a bell. The photon is the hammer, the clapper. Think of class B amp.

What you wrote contradicts Newton's second law of motion. And you chose @Classical Motion for your user name.

 

[Classical Motion]

A photon doesn't have any mass. It has no inertia, just a little momentum. Only density is needed for momentum. Not mass. The acceleration transferred is a torque, not a push. A twist.

 

[marcin]

The acceleration transferred is a torque, not a push. A twist.

A twist in logic and basic physics. What is the lever arm of your torque in case of the oscillating electric charge?

Your electron oscillates when there is no force or torque acting on it. That contradicts Newton's second law of motion.

 

[Classical Motion]

The pivot point of the twist is the inertia of matter. The stimulus lever of the photon distorts the matter field. The inertia reacts, and resets the matter field.

Stimulus- reaction. stimulus -reaction. An oscillation.

 

[marcin]

How does your charge oscillate - parallel or perpendicular to the photon's motion?

 

[Classical Motion]

A charge has two orientations or alignments. Both of these alignments are twisted on when the photon is shinning on them. And when the photon ends, they bounce back.

Distortion-rebound distortion-rebound. This is measured as an oscillation.

If the matter has free charge, the charge can line up fully, causing a much stronger signal. The charge can even be accelerated at right angles to the shine. But that acceleration will be reset when returning to neutral state.

EM shine can generate current. Especially if you restrict the directional path of current.

Oscillation can just be a back and forth twist, does not have to have charge flow. The twist alone causes heat.

 

[billslugg]

How does your charge oscillate - parallel or perpendicular to the photon's motion?

When a charged particle moves sideways it creates an EM wave that moves outward perpendicular to the direction of motion. A simple straight wire antenna sends no energy in the direction the wire is pointed.

 

[marcin]

@billslugg please... I'm not asking him these questions to gain a real knowledge. You should really already know who you are talking to and where you are - in a haven for madness. That's why I asked him about his charge, not a charge in general.

@Classical Motion What makes your charges bounce back after they were pushed by a photon?

 

[Classical Motion]

Thanks for insulting me in person. Makes me feel welcome.

Please pardon me.

 

[marcin]

@Classical Motion I'm sorry.

What makes your charges bounce back after they were pushed by a photon?