Femto camera experiment says space is the medium for light

[Grumblenuts]

So when you have enough infrared heat you get all the colors mixed in white light.

Really?

 

[trevorjohnson83]

Evidence? Do flashlight bulbs quickly heat up and cool off? At a certain frequency? Same whether LED or incandescent? What's the frequency of white? What's the temperature in actual degrees Kelvin?

Your flashlight comment is irrelevant. The cooling off stage is not in equilibrium with the surrounding aether temperature.

As for the frequency of white light I was thinking about that myself. The source of the white light must be oscillating at all frequency's at once. Maybe when there are high enough energy infrared heat waves, the oscillating electromagnetic shell converts the heat to an infrared white light that can be separated into the colors?

 

[Grumblenuts]

Your flashlight comment is irrelevant.

Final answer?

 

[Grumblenuts]

Evidently gold which is the best conductor

Evidently not. If you bothered to look something up once in a while.. you might not get so mad at me for correcting you. Both silver and copper are considered more conductive of electricity. That said, the Aether actually transfers electrical power outside of what's commonly referred to as "conductors" and within what's commonly called "insulators." So mankind, not some weird science cult, has had it all backwards for quite some time.

Eric Dollard has called what flows through copper wires a waste product of any generated electricity. The wires literally act as "wave guides", meaning they each center at least one phase of an AC signal while the power flows around and between them. DC can't be used to transfer large amounts of power over distances because it wastes so much electricity fighting the supposed conductor's internal resistance.

 

[trevorjohnson83]

Final answer?

I guess its a ridiculous analogy.

 

[trevorjohnson83]

One thing we can say about the nucleus is it must be similar to earth in that it creates and internal stationary heat from pressure. The heat then creates a density/temperature on the surrounding aether that creates a gravity field. For its size we can probably assume the nucleus is very dense and small and hot.

 

[Grumblenuts]

One thing we can say about the nucleus is it must be similar to earth in that it creates and internal stationary heat from pressure. The heat then creates a density/temperature on the surrounding aether that creates a gravity field. For its size we can probably assume the nucleus is very dense and small and hot.

There are clear similarities, but not like that. Again, consider an LED flashlight. Seriously. It emits plenty light (energy) with very little input power. Stays quite cool. No gravity involved. Nothing molten nor suggestive of black holes. Those things are clearly not required.

We know the aether faithfully transmits the cool energy produced regardless. The aether clearly can grab and transfer cold energy. We don't and perhaps can't know exactly what goes on in atomic nuclei, but we can deduce a lot. Protons drive everything. Protons automatically transform into neutrons, thereby stabilizing the nuclei.

Supposedly,.. orbiting "electrons" magically pop into existence and create "shells" of quantum energy far out from those nuclear protons and neutrons. Only, that's at least 99% speculation. No one's ever seen an "electron" let alone any of the myriad Standard Model crapola. We've seen energy trails and made lots of shit up attempting to explain them is all. Forget all that. Focus on what we can solidly deduce. What makes sense.

Regarding nuclei, looking at it from a proton's perspective makes far more sense than making up tons of crap about "electron particles" or "waves" for that matter. Fields, yes. Pressures, yes. Charges, yes. Polarities, yes. Spins, perhaps. Heats, no. Temperatures, no.

 

[trevorjohnson83]

Nuts I was looking at pictures of nerves that branch out and send electrical signals. Maybe the device to create lightning in a lab should be a branching mechanism that absorbs heat in a solution of some sort, water? The branching effect might be the result of an amplifying.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Nuts I was looking at pictures of nerves that branch out and send electrical signals.

Link? Image?

Maybe the device to create lightning in a lab should be a branching mechanism that absorbs heat in a solution of some sort, water? The branching effect might be the result of an amplifying.

Tesla coil - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Golden Ratio Discharge - A & P Electronic Media

The Golden Ratio is one of the fundamental underlying principles in the Wheelwork of Nature, and is reflected within many forms in the natural world. The

emediapress.com

 

[trevorjohnson83]

Link? Image?

There are a lot of systems in nature that run on branching: trees, lungs, the nervous system. Maybe a cast of something that branches and create a copper branch system?

 

[Grumblenuts]

I was looking at pictures of nerves that branch out and send electrical signals.

They send and receive. They branch in fractal fashion. Like the Aether. Coincidence or just makes sense?

 

[trevorjohnson83]

Here's a little more on time dilation/pressure/static heat that causes gravity. So in the Earth the weight pressure towards the center causes the atom's to become tightly packed. When the atom's are forced closer to each other, their individual gravity fields retract in on themselves heating the nuclei and causing denser/hotter space or aether surrounding the nuclei. The heat then bulges out around the planet to form a gravity field. When two gravity fields meet the compress each other with the non radiating heat of the core and it pulls the objects together.

 

[Grumblenuts]

"time dilation"
"spacetime"
"heat"
"gravity fields"

Second: Introduction

Time is probably the most measured quantity on Earth.

www.nist.gov

Because, unlike the Aether, it's an abstraction. Thus self-distraction.

 

[trevorjohnson83]

It has to be retraction of a core atoms gravity field that causes the earth's gravity field, if it was retraction of the electromagnetic shell then it would cause a magnetic field. I've always been and still am confused about how a magnetic field exists simultaneously with a gravity field. Still working on that one.

 

[Grumblenuts]

It has to be retraction of a core atoms gravity field

Again, gravity is a singular anti-field. A direct product of the Aether.

1. Mass (i.e., atoms, protons, matter) attract the Aether.
2. The Aether gets between everything.
3. The Aether conveys all energy between matter.
4. It acts to reduce all energy dipoles ("order" -- entropy).
5. By getting between the Aether balances spatial / counterspatial field dipoles.
6. For example, causing about half of all protons to become neutrons.

 

[trevorjohnson83]

Here Nuts. From another forum...

So you honestly believe the core is slowly producing heat through radioactive decay and then slowly releasing it through the crust.

Yes.

Wouldn't that make the core and the whole Earth radioactive? How would people survive the radioactivity when visiting below the surface. Also if the heat is conducting or radiating then shouldn't it be shooting out of the holes that we dig down deep in the surface? with no 'blanket' above? Shouldn't the heat be rising up like a chimney?

 

[Grumblenuts]

Wouldn't that make the core and the whole Earth radioactive?

The core being a small fraction of the whole Earth, no. It means a small fraction of the Earth remains radioactive in its core. That's my guess anyway

Also if the heat is conducting or radiating then shouldn't it be shooting out of the holes that we dig down deep in the surface?

It does from volcanos and deep sea vents. We (humans) have never been able to dig down more than about 7,000 feet because the heat begins melting our drill bits.

with no 'blanket' above?

The mantle, crust, and oceans provide quite a blanket.

Shouldn't the heat be rising up like a chimney?

Heat rises (radiates -- not radioactively), yes. Then most of it escapes into outer space upon eventually reaching the Earth's surface.

 

[trevorjohnson83]

Well then nuts this....how can it be that heat is being made through radioactive decay, is building up up in the core, obviously faster then its conducting to the surface, without increasing exponentially? So in other words if the heat is backing up below the surface, it would seem that the planet would either lose the heat quicker or it would get hotter and hotter in the core?

 

[Grumblenuts]

Well then nuts this....how can it be that heat is being made through radioactive decay, is building up up in the core,

Where you getting this "is building up up in the core" from? I've never suggested that.. Must have been you..

obviously faster then its conducting to the surface,

Obviously not faster.

without increasing exponentially? So in other words if the heat is backing up below the surface,

Your theory, not mine..

it would seem that the planet would either lose the heat quicker

The planet has obviously been cooling (losing heat.. "radiating" it to outer space) from day one..

or it would get hotter and hotter in the core?

Common sense dictates otherwise. However, given our recent bombardment (since the Industrial Revolution) of the surface and atmosphere with carbon compounds dug from below, one may note that the Earth has begun heating up at least at the surface due to resultant greenhouse gas effects. The core likely remains unfazed for now.

 

[trevorjohnson83]

Where you getting this "is building up up in the core" from? I've never suggested that..

You said the crust is like a blanket for the heat, last time i checked blankets are not only capable of but there sole purpose is to trap heat below?