Katirai on Photon frequency as a pressure
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2016 9:33 am
I've been going through Bahram Katirai's book, Revolution in Physics, where he revives ether theory ideas to explain many of the frauds perpetrated by Einstein (he includes about 100 pages on how Einstein stole his work from other researchers, particularly Henri Poincaré (the first guy to come up with E=mc2). I find the book very interesting, because if you substitute "time" for "ether," you end up with many of the concepts of the Reciprocal System, including an independent charge mechanism (Katirai's samareh) and that atoms are rotating systems. But since Katirai's premise is from the cosmic sector side of things, he fills in many of the gaps that Larson never addressed.
Katirai, like Larson, is also a "common sense" observer. Most people will discount what their senses tell them, if it conflicts with their beliefs. Larson and Katirai are the opposite. When they encounter something that doesn't make sense, they investigate it, rather than ignore it, to try to understand it and incorporate it into their world views.
One of the more interesting analogies he makes is his return to the "waves in ether" theory of light, comparing "pressure waves in air" (sound) to "pressure waves in ether" (light). In particular, the observation that it is the medium (air, water, ether) that determines the propagation speed of waves. When a train passes, the Doppler shift causes the approaching frequency to be higher (higher pressures in air, compressing waves), and the departing frequency lower (lower pressure spreads waves).
In Nehru's model, light is a birotation being carried by the progression. A change in frequency would require the addition or subtraction of units of motion (angular velocity) to each photon. The Doppler effect, however, seems to invalidate that frequency model because the effect is a property of the linear speed of the source and observer--not a property of the photon, itself.
So what I am wondering today is: what if frequency is a pressure differential, and not a property of the photon?
Katirai, like Larson, is also a "common sense" observer. Most people will discount what their senses tell them, if it conflicts with their beliefs. Larson and Katirai are the opposite. When they encounter something that doesn't make sense, they investigate it, rather than ignore it, to try to understand it and incorporate it into their world views.
One of the more interesting analogies he makes is his return to the "waves in ether" theory of light, comparing "pressure waves in air" (sound) to "pressure waves in ether" (light). In particular, the observation that it is the medium (air, water, ether) that determines the propagation speed of waves. When a train passes, the Doppler shift causes the approaching frequency to be higher (higher pressures in air, compressing waves), and the departing frequency lower (lower pressure spreads waves).
In Nehru's model, light is a birotation being carried by the progression. A change in frequency would require the addition or subtraction of units of motion (angular velocity) to each photon. The Doppler effect, however, seems to invalidate that frequency model because the effect is a property of the linear speed of the source and observer--not a property of the photon, itself.
So what I am wondering today is: what if frequency is a pressure differential, and not a property of the photon?