A Model for the Propagation of Visible Light and Other Rays

[yaldonTheory]

Dear Alex (aka Xelasnave. 1947),
Please do not quote us out of context. You had quoted us as saying, "Theory provides a formula showing that the universe is not expanding." Which is a statement taken out of context. Our original statement reads, "...the Yaldon Theory provides a formula showing that the universe is not expanding." We are well aware of what the definition of a theory is, and there is nothing from our work which goes against the concept of what a theory is.

The red-shift from the far stars is not due to galaxies moving away from the Earth, but it's due to the attenuation in the momentum of light while it is traveling through space.
According to the yaldon theory, the color of light is determined by the momentum of several propagated groups within a certain time. This is shown by equation 'a' on page 12. When the light travels a distance that is measured in light years, there is an amount of attenuation which is shown by equation 7 on page 16. It is not the Doppler Effect that causes the red-shift, but it's the attenuation in the momentum of light. This is due to the existence of yaldons in empty space where the light travels. Hubble noticed that the farther a galaxy is, the greater the red-shift. This prior statement supports equation 7.

This whole theory is based on the assumption that the yaldon has a perfectly elastic mass and volume with no spin, charge, nor any other kinds of field forces. These yaldons are simply governed by Newton's Laws. All the formulas have been derived without diverting away from this assumption, guided by logic from math.

If one would like a better understanding for this new theory, we are willing to provide a step-by-step walk-through for all 30 pages. All of our work depends on Classical Mechanics. Thank you for continual efforts to help us clarify this young (newly developed) theory to the whole world.

 

[yaldonTheory]

Granted, there are current theories that are in conflict, especially General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. The hoped for solution is that a quantum gravity theory will gain acceptance. But when the only conflict you mention is there are stars older than the Big Bang, I too would like to know what evidence you are going on.

We did not say it was the only conflict, but it is the only one we mentioned.
Here is a video from a "NASA Documentary" post on Youtube showing the topic about the age of the stars being older than the big bang. If you do not have time to watch the whole video, you can begin watching from 16 minutes into the video.

That reminds me of the "Tired Light" theory that has been used to explain away the red shift, and I suppose that yaldons could be the explanation. Do yaldons also explain the blue shift observed when galaxies are thought to be moving toward us?

Also, there is some attention given to the fact that the CMBR is observed in all directions, and has an average temperature of about 2.7K. If there was no big bang in Yaldon Theory, what is the source of the CMB?
It would be fine with me if the universe wasn't expanding, but history has not been kind to the tired light theory, which seems to be the same as yaldon theory in respect to the red shift. The presence of both red shift and blue shift tend to support the recession of the distant galaxies.

We currently would like to only concentrate on the contents within the thirty pages of The Propagation of Rays. As we have previously mentioned, the yaldon theory does not implement any particles from the standard particle model, and the "Tired Light" theory uses particles from the standard particle model.
A side note for the blue-shifted galaxies: This effect is only able to be noticed when the galaxy is close to the point of observation, since the propagated light groups have not traveled a distance great enough for there to be a noticeable effect in the attenuation in the momentum. Light from farther galaxies will have a noticeable effect in the deterioration of momentum.
As mentioned before, we like to focus on topics discussed within these 30 pages.

 

[el es]

A model with electron orbital transitions better explains emission spectra. Looks like your model would have continuous emission spectra for all the elements.

E=hf has one h per cycle. You have 15 thingies per cycle, that's just bizarre.

I don't see how you can get polarized light out of your model.

 

[yaldonTheory]

A model with electron orbital transitions better explains emission spectra. Looks like your model would have continuous emission spectra for all the elements.

What exactly is a photon? Is it red? Is it green? Is it blue? And how can 1 photon be able to generate so many different frequencies?
And you are very correct, our model would have a continuous emission spectra for all the elements... this is known as infrared. Infrared has a very wide range from the spectrum band of propagated rays.

E=hf has one h per cycle.

Please refer to equation 'b' on the top of page 13, you will find what h is in regards to frequency and energy.

E=hf has one h per cycle. You have 15 thingies per cycle, that's just bizarre.

Can you be more specific with what you meant to convey by saying, "15 thingies?"

I don't see how you can get polarized light out of your model.

We would like to keep the discussion focused on the topics addressed within the 30 pages. But, for your own personal information, we will be addressing that issue along with the bending, diffraction, and interference in a later edition.

Thank you so very much for your interest and response in the Yaldon Theory.

 

[quantum_wave]

...
Here is a video from a "NASA Documentary" post on Youtube showing the topic about the age of the stars being older than the big bang. If you do not have time to watch the whole video, you can begin watching from 16 minutes into the video.

I see now what your are referring to, in regard to the age of stars vs. the age of the universe as per BBT. A good example of how Science evolves, and a reminder that it takes awhile for everything to get back in sync.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

We are well aware of what the definition of a theory is, and there is nothing from our work which goes against the concept of what a theory is.

Thank you for your reply.
Alex

 

[el es]

I think you have taken discreteness a few yaldons too far.
Carry on, I've lost interest and will leave you to it.

 

[yaldonTheory]

I see now what your are referring to, in regard to the age of stars vs. the age of the universe as per BBT. A good example of how Science evolves, and a reminder that it takes awhile for everything to get back in sync.

Yes, we are all here together to help each other work, share, and produce a better environment for humanity. We hold your comments with the highest regard, and thank you as always. Please let us know if you have any further questions or comments.

 

[quantum_wave]

Thanks YT. I'm a layman science enthusiast, and find the section of the video you pointed out to be worth looking at closer. I'll do that, and if I have any comments that might be of interest, I'll bring them up here.

 

[origin]

And you are very correct, our model would have a continuous emission spectra for all the elements... this is known as infrared.

Then your conjecture is demonstrably wrong. And you apparently do not understand what infrared radiation is.

But keep having fun making your speculations.

If you find Physcs interesting I suggest you take some physics courses at your local community college. You might be able to audit the courses for free. Good luck.

 

[river]

Then your conjecture is demonstrably wrong. And you apparently do not understand what infrared radiation is.

But keep having fun making your speculations.

If you find Physcs interesting I suggest you take some physics courses at your local community college. You might be able to audit the courses for free. Good luck.

No don't take physics courses , they will pollute your thinking .

Stay your course , yaldon.

You will come up against their thinking in all do time . meanwhile , just keep on truck'n with your perspective .

river

 

[origin]

No don't take physics courses , they will pollute your thinking .

Stay your course , yaldon.

You will come up against their thinking in all do time . meanwhile , just keep on truck'n with your perspective .

river

Well that is some really stupid advice.

If you get sick do not pollute your mind with 'main stream' medicine. Try killing a chicken at midnight in a grave yard - that should fix you right up.

If you ever get sued - don't go with those 'main stream' lawyers - defend yourself.

 

[rpenner]

Here is a video from a "NASA Documentary" post on Youtube showing the topic about the age of the stars being older than the big bang. If you do not have time to watch the whole video, you can begin watching from 16 minutes into the video.

I see now what your are referring to, in regard to the age of stars vs. the age of the universe as per BBT. A good example of how Science evolves, and a reminder that it takes awhile for everything to get back in sync.

Well, the documentary refers to a conflict 20 years old — that between models that estimate star ages based on their spectrum, luminosity and distance, all of which are imperfectly known, and models that attempt to fix the age of the universe by modeling big bang expansion.

The 20-year-old controversy in the video was about some very young estimates of the age of the universe compares with very old estimates of the age of certain stars in galactic globular clusters. Better estimates of each have been made, and now the uncertainty of the age of the oldest globular clusters exceeds that of the age of the universe. Within those error bars, we have room for a self-consistent model. https://arxiv.org/abs/1308.2257

An alternate approach is to estimate the age of stars where distance and chemical composition is better known, and so more directly compare stellar evolution models with cosmological evolution models. “An alternative approach to stellar chronology is to determine ages of extreme Population II subgiants in the solar neighborhood based on direct trigonometric parallaxes, combined with state-of-the-art theoretical isochrones appropriate to the detailed composition of each star. This method bypasses most of the problems associated with the much more distant clusters.” But then they still run into significant problems with chemistry rendering the ages uncertain by about a billion years. https://arxiv.org/abs/1302.3180

The solution, when science returns an answer of "we don't know" is to do more science.

 

[quantum_wave]

Well, the documentary refers to a conflict 20 years old — that between models that estimate star ages based on their spectrum, luminosity and distance, all of which are imperfectly known, and models that attempt to fix the age of the universe by modeling big bang expansion.

The 20-year-old controversy in the video was about some very young estimates of the age of the universe compares with very old estimates of the age of certain stars in galactic globular clusters. Better estimates of each have been made, and now the uncertainty of the age of the oldest globular clusters exceeds that of the age of the universe. Within those error bars, we have room for a self-consistent model. https://arxiv.org/abs/1308.2257

An alternate approach is to estimate the age of stars where distance and chemical composition is better known, and so more directly compare stellar evolution models with cosmological evolution models. “An alternative approach to stellar chronology is to determine ages of extreme Population II subgiants in the solar neighborhood based on direct trigonometric parallaxes, combined with state-of-the-art theoretical isochrones appropriate to the detailed composition of each star. This method bypasses most of the problems associated with the much more distant clusters.” But then they still run into significant problems with chemistry rendering the ages uncertain by about a billion years. https://arxiv.org/abs/1302.3180

Thanks for that report.

The solution, when science returns an answer of "we don't know" is to do more science.

Yes, I leave that kind of thing to the professionals.

 

[yaldonTheory]

Then your conjecture is demonstrably wrong. And you apparently do not understand what infrared radiation is.

But keep having fun making your speculations.

All bodies have infrared radiation that is generated by the thermal motion of particles in matter.
We have stated this on page 3, "All the atoms or molecules in substances are constantly vibrating and orbiting, releasing infrared..."
The statement above is referring to how matter propagates groups of yaldons (rays), the momentum of these groups will fall into the range of infrared. For more clarification, please refer to equation 'a' on page 12. This formula shows that the kind of propagated ray depends on the momentum of the propagated groups within a certain period of time.

If you find Physcs interesting I suggest you take some physics courses at your local community college. You might be able to audit the courses for free. Good luck.

For a person who reads the 30 pages of YT (yaldon theory), and sees the derivatives provided; one must realize that the person who presents these derivatives must have a good background in Physics and Math. We would expect that you would point out a mistake that we have made in these 30 pages, in order to work together and provide a better service for everyone.

Well that is some really stupid advice.

If you get sick do not pollute your mind with 'main stream' medicine. Try killing a chicken at midnight in a grave yard - that should fix you right up.

If you ever get sued - don't go with those 'main stream' lawyers - defend yourself.

The kind of comments you say make you appear to be lacking manners and impolite, especially when you hide your identity behind an image of a rocket and call yourself "origin" (by the way, the rocket in your profile image works on the principle of Newtonian Mechanics... as well as YT).
We feel that manners should come first, and knowledge second. Regardless, please let us keep the topic focused within these 30 pages. Thank you.

 

[origin]

We feel that manners should come first, and knowledge second.

Yeah, I shouldn't make fun of your conjectures, I am not interested in this anyway and you seem to really believe them.

Have fun.

 

[danshawen]

This theory appears to be sourced from an individual whose capacity to reason beyond a superficial level is severely impaired. Anencephaly, perhaps.

What is the energy/mass of a Yalden? How would you go about verifying its existence? Why does light need a Yalden in order to propagate? Why does the Yalden not need spin, mass, or charge to interact with atoms or molecules? What you have there is a 100% mechanical universe. You are very dull, possibly institutionalized, aren't you? Did you sleep through the history of the atomic age or somethings? Were you even born? Did you know, GPS doesn't work without continuous time corrections made possible by the theory of relativity'? Do you even understand what causes a red shift? Conservation of momentum will not suffice. To have momentum, you must have mass. Light doesn't have any, and you have told us that Yaldens don't have any either. You must have a very low regard for the science you use every day.

Should probably bid to run for POTUS in the Republican party in the next general election. It seems to be a trend. Do what you're good at. Science does not appear to be an option.

 

[wellwisher]

Light waves have both wavelength and frequency. The universal red shift is currently assumed to be connected to the wavelength changes of energy due to relative motion. However, since space-time is integrated, why isn't the red shift also due to frequency modulation due to time changes? The current theory indirectly assumes; but not spoken, that time modulation of energy via frequency changes is not possible. Is there any evidence for the assumed, but unspoken assumption, that frequency modulation is not possible?

As a visual of the affect, picture a train approaching and then moving away. We would hear the pitch of its whistle go up as it approaches, and then red shift as it moves away. A frequency modulation would the conductor tweaking the pitch of the whistle. The blue and red shift, relative to what we assume is the standard pitch, would sound like relative motion, without there being motion.

If space-time is integrated, why is all time modulation absent from the red shift? Doesn't pure Doppler shift; wavelength=space, imply space-time is not integrated, since the impact of time modulation is assumed to be zero on red shifts. Does dark energy only impact space, but not time?

Malden Theory appears to be taking into account time modulation, which is not considered possible based on a red shift connected to dissociated space time implicit of Doppler shift only.

 

[danshawen]

If you are going to propose a new theory of light propagation with no connection or scaffolding with Maxwell's equations or Faraday's work, you are going to need to come up with a better idea than a new particle derived from nothing more compelling than an Aramaic word relating your last name to the Winter solstice.

Scientific theories with such impact cannot stand on their own merits if they do not explain or reconcile with a wider range of observations and established theories than this one does. Relativity even explains how magnetic fields derive from moving electric charges. Does yours?

 

[yaldonTheory]

Light waves have both wavelength and frequency. The universal red shift is currently assumed to be connected to the wavelength changes of energy due to relative motion. However, since space-time is integrated, why isn't the red shift also due to frequency modulation due to time changes? The current theory indirectly assumes; but not spoken, that time modulation of energy via frequency changes is not possible. Is there any evidence for the assumed, but unspoken assumption, that frequency modulation is not possible?

As a visual of the affect, picture a train approaching and then moving away. We would hear the pitch of its whistle go up as it approaches, and then red shift as it moves away. A frequency modulation would the conductor tweaking the pitch of the whistle. The blue and red shift, relative to what we assume is the standard pitch, would sound like relative motion, without there being motion.

If space-time is integrated, why is all time modulation absent from the red shift? Doesn't pure Doppler shift; wavelength=space, imply space-time is not integrated, since the impact of time modulation is assumed to be zero on red shifts. Does dark energy only impact space, but not time?

Malden Theory appears to be taking into account time modulation, which is not considered possible based on a red shift connected to dissociated space time implicit of Doppler shift only.

The Yaldon Theory is a purely mechanical model. Equation 'a' on page 12 determines the type of ray. If $$M_g$$ becomes less in value, this will be considered a red-shift.

On page 13 where we discuss the Momentum-Shift Effect, we explain how the value of $$M_g$$ becomes less while it is traveling through space. The value of $$M_g$$ will deteriorate upon physical contact with the existing yaldons in space.

Equation 'a' will show that the kind of ray will change if any value for one of the parameters changes. For the galaxies that move towards the observer, the value for f (frequency) will be higher. This is due to the Doppler Effect. BUT, for very far galaxies, the deterioration in the value for $$M_g$$ will be much greater than the gain in the frequency (in the case of a galaxy that is moving towards the observer) to the point where the gain in frequency becomes negligible.

This is the reason as to why all far galaxies have a red-shift, and the further the galaxy is... the greater the shift. This also explains why the observer will always appear to be at the center of the universe.