Reflection and partial reflection in RS and RS2

Discussion concerning the first major re-evaluation of Dewey B. Larson's Reciprocal System of theory, updated to include counterspace (Etheric spaces), projective geometry, and the non-local aspects of time/space.
Post Reply
OzzyB
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 4:17 pm

Reflection and partial reflection in RS and RS2

Post by OzzyB »

Hi Bruce,

Can you explain how reflection, say from the surface of a polished metalic surface, works within the context of RS and RS2. Secondly how partial reflection, say from and through a plate of glass, is explained by RS and RS2.

Thanks

OzzyB
User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1501
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

Reflection and Refraction

Post by bperet »

Can you explain how reflection, say from the surface of a polished metalic surface, works within the context of RS and RS2. Secondly how partial reflection, say from and through a plate of glass, is explained by RS and RS2.
It doesn't work using Larson's model of the photon (RS), but does work with the RS2 model based on Nehru's concept of birotation. What you are dealing with is how the photon changes speed when moving between different mediums. In the RS2 model, the photon is a complex quantity containing real and imaginary components that are 90-degrees out of phase with each other. The real component gets refracted, continuing in a straight line--but at a different speed, and the imaginary component (which is 90-degrees out of phase) gets reflected. Gopi can probably provide the mathematics of it.

Light appears to bend because of the way we can only observe space--not time. We have to normalize the additional time into a "change in space" to measure it, which means either a translation or rotation in space must occur. Glass has a higher density than air, which means it has "more time" due to the atoms temporal displacement and crystal structure. Light has no independent motion, being carried by the progression of the natural reference system. So when a photon passes through a piece of glass, the refracted path is much like walking through a deep puddle on the sidewalk. It takes more time to walk through the puddle than the air, so if you use a constant clock time, it appears that your path deflects (even though it doesn't). That deflection, due to the temporal displacement, is what we observe as the index of refraction. When you leave the puddle, you continue on in the same direction in which you entered it. The reflection would be analogous to the splash you make going through the puddle, shooting off to the side.

The normalization of clock time results in an angular change, one for refraction and an orthogonal one for reflection. The magnitude of the light works by the right triangle; the intensity of the incident light being the hypoteneuse, and the horizontal and vertical being the reflected and refracted intensities.

Hope that gives you an idea... in RS2, it is nothing but a change in speed, due to more (or less) temporal displacement from atomic structure.
Every dogma has its day...
User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1501
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

Unit boundary effects on refraction

Post by bperet »

I should also mention that X-rays and gamma rays, being on the other side of the unit boundary, will act oppositely to the visible and RF photons. Rather than bending towards the normal, X-rays will bend away from it. This is explained in conventional science as having an index less than 1.
Every dogma has its day...
User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1501
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

Do photons have intrinsic magnitude?

Post by bperet »

I'm still looking at the reflection/refraction issue, and discovered that there are two variables involved with birotating systems: frequency and magnitude. The magnitude component seems to be overlooked (or avoided). I was taught that photons were point particles, each with a unit energy, so if you wanted a brighter light, you just needed more photons. Well, what the math relations show is that a photon can also have an intrinsic magnitude, in addition to being part of group.

I have a prism, and immediately noticed that the magnitude of reflected and refracted beams is always lower than the incident beam, and it varies with the angles. The closer to orthogonal incidence, higher intensity goes to the refracted. The further, higher intensity goes to the reflected. Conventionally, that would mean that the photons are taking one path or the other--not both--as a statistical distribution. This kind of splitting has created a number of paradoxes in conventional science, where it appears the photon takes both paths at the same time.

Consider... what if the photon has an intrinsic magnitude? When it enters the denser medium, the addition of time could cause the photon to split into two pieces, dividing by frequency, magnitude, or both. The result would be that one half reflects, the other half refracts, each with lower intensity than the incident beam. The frequency splitting is well known and documented by his papers on birotation (such as the Zeeman effect and E/O beams in crystals).

The Euler relations to convert rotation to vibration results in 2 cos(f), the magnitude of the rotation adds to give twice the magnitude in the vibration, so we know that magnitude is not a fixed component and that interaction can change it.

It is also known that waves have magnitude (ever been on the ocean in a storm?), but the principle has never been applied to photons, which is always assumed to have a unit magnitude.

I find that including both variable frequency and variable magnitude solves a lot of the paradox problems.
Every dogma has its day...
rossum
Posts: 33
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 1:36 am

Length and magnitude of a photon

Post by rossum »

I was taught that photons were point particles, each with a unit energy, so if you wanted a brighter light, you just needed more photons. Well, what the math relations show is that a photon can also have an intrinsic magnitude, in addition to being part of group.
It might be supprising, but as experiments show photons do have length and not a small one. The length and magnitude of a photon in HF band can be measured via "spin echo" as it interacts with "nuclear spins" (whatever this might be called in RS terminology). Details can be found in the article "Stimulated Nutation Echo: Dynamic and Decay Properties, G. Bimbo, R. Boscaino, M. Cannas, and F.M. Gelardi". I guess I can't upload it here but here is a great article on the subject:

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/photon/photon.html

Schrodinger's equation gives the exact values of lengths and magnitudes of photons as measured in spin echo. Photons are so large (in visible range tens of cm(!) - one photon is composed of cca ) that they might very well interact with themselfs e.g. inbetween mirrors.
It is also known that waves have magnitude (ever been on the ocean in a storm?), but the principle has never been applied to photons, which is always assumed to have a unit magnitude.
That's not quite true - in fact the Schrodinger's model does so. Now Schrodinger's model is not to be confused with the Heisenberg's one - the modern interpretation of quantum mechanics. In Schrodinger's model the wavefunction is the function of current density instead of some probability nonsens. On this basis he derived his famous equation and showd it's equivalence with Heisenberg's matrix mechanics. He repeatedly critcised the Heisenberg's (modern) view of quantum mechanics as being "an almost physical model" and was sorry that this purely mathematical thinking replaces real physics. Details can be found in the book "Quantum theory at crossroads" by Guido Bacciagaluppi and Antonio Valentini. (Or directly in Schrodinger's collected papers).

So in Schrodinger's model the photon can "split", while halving it's magnitude.
User avatar
bperet
Posts: 1501
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:43 am
Location: 7.5.3.84.70.24.606
Contact:

Larry Spring Magnespheres

Post by bperet »

I found the work of Larry Spring on his "magnespheres" to be quite informative. Not a physicist, just an average HAM guy that figured out a few "common sense" things about photons. Website: http://larryspring.com/
  • Photons are magnetic balls of 1/2 wavelength in size
  • Photons will pass through a metal grid that is with holes larger than their size
  • Photons reflect off a metal grid if the photon is larger than the hole
  • Photons must be spherical (his magnesphere), otherwise they would not reflect off a parabolic dish
    • Point particles have no tangent, so reflection and refraction would be random
    • Only a sphere bounces to a common focus on a dish; other shapes do not.
It is worth going through his website videos; he's a very "down to earth" person that looks at things in a practical fashion, that anybody can understand.

PS: You can attach files to comments--the option is at the very bottom of the reply form. If the filetype you are trying to upload is not supported, let me know and I can add it to the list. Most multimedia and text formats are supported.
Every dogma has its day...
Post Reply