#73 Newton's discovery that white light is composite; new book: "Howthe Universe is organized into Galaxies & Voids by the Atom Totality"

I find it worthwhile to listen to repeat programs of PBS such as
"Newton" where it shows Newton
playing with alchemy. But the facet of this program that seemed to
catch my interest this time
was the discovery that white light in a prism breaks apart the
whiteness into the rainbow colors.
And where the program then said words to the effect " counterintuitive
to the times".

I suppose it was counterintuitive in the time of Newton because people
could take the rainbow
colors in paint and combine them and never coming out as white, but
rather approaching black.

So why is white a composite of other colors? And does it have more
profound meaning than
just an analysis of light waves? I think so.

I dismissed this previously as uninteresting because, why would I
think that the superposition
of wavelengths of colored light delivering a wavelength of white light
is anything noteworthy?
They are simply the superposition of numbers.

But maybe, I should explore this question for there probably is a far
deeper answer as to
why the Universe is so constructed that "white" is the superposition
of the rainbow colors
and is not black.

Perhaps the question may enter the Dark Night Sky Paradox. Perhaps
light, after it travels
a long distance, begins to tire and change from white to black. Here I
would get into
Planck's blackbody radiation theory. And perhaps even get into Doppler
redshift.

Does the Big Bang theory have any thing to say as to whether light,
when going through
a prism should be composite of the rainbow colors? I suspect not.
However, I would suspect
that the Atom Totality theory, since the Universe itself is a big
atom, that it may require
"Light Waves" to be compositery.

You see, if gravity in an Atom Totality arises due to Space being a
Dirac ocean of positrons
and these positrons attracted to the mass/matter that floats in Space
and thus bending space
and we seeing this bending and thence calling it gravity. So gravity
in an Atom Totality is a
Coulomb force of positrons bending the Space where mass lies.

So that in a Big Bang theory, white-light should fill the entire night-
sky and where white light
is not composite. In an Atom Totality, the white-light should be the
reverse of black-light
where white is composite and black is no-light.

I have not put my finger on this yet, but certainly can see that white-
light has more to it
than what Newton found.

The reason no-one could solve the Unification of Forces of physics is
that they could not
realize that gravity was "bent space" so what was space that could
hold a Coulomb force?
And the answer was space was Dirac's ocean of positrons. Now again, we
must ask why
is "white light" composite and in blackbody radiation the walls are
black. So could it be,
that there really does exist "black light" and that in a Big Bang
theory, light should be
"black light" and not "white-light"?

Well, I am on vacation , and so leave this as a note for the 3rd
edition of this book.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

Learn how to format text, you blithering ****.

wrote in message
...

"I find it worthwhile to listen to reach into my shorts and scratch
furiously"


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

Perhaps this should be in my Atom Totality book and not my Galaxy
formation book?
But perhaps it may go nowhere and thus leftout.

I wrote earlier tonight:

I find it worthwhile to listen to repeat programs of PBS such as
"Newton" where it shows Newton
playing with alchemy. But the facet of this program that seemed to
catch my interest this time
was the discovery that white light in a prism breaks apart the
whiteness into the rainbow colors.
And where the program then said words to the effect " counterintuitive
to the times".

I suppose it was counterintuitive in the time of Newton because people
could take the rainbow
colors in paint and combine them and never coming out as white, but
rather approaching black.

So why is white a composite of other colors? And does it have more
profound meaning than
just an analysis of light waves? I think so.

I dismissed this previously as uninteresting because, why would I
think that the superposition
of wavelengths of colored light delivering a wavelength of white light
is anything noteworthy?
They are simply the superposition of numbers.

But maybe, I should explore this question for there probably is a far
deeper answer as to
why the Universe is so constructed that "white" is the superposition
of the rainbow colors
and is not black.

Perhaps the question may enter the Dark Night Sky Paradox. Perhaps
light, after it travels
a long distance, begins to tire and change from white to black. Here I
would get into
Planck's blackbody radiation theory. And perhaps even get into Doppler
redshift.

Does the Big Bang theory have any thing to say as to whether light,
when going through
a prism should be composite of the rainbow colors? I suspect not.
However, I would suspect
that the Atom Totality theory, since the Universe itself is a big
atom, that it may require
"Light Waves" to be compositery.

You see, if gravity in an Atom Totality arises due to Space being a
Dirac ocean of positrons
and these positrons attracted to the mass/matter that floats in Space
and thus bending space
and we seeing this bending and thence calling it gravity. So gravity
in an Atom Totality is a
Coulomb force of positrons bending the Space where mass lies.

So that in a Big Bang theory, white-light should fill the entire night-
sky and where white light
is not composite. In an Atom Totality, the white-light should be the
reverse of black-light
where white is composite and black is no-light.

I have not put my finger on this yet, but certainly can see that white-
light has more to it
than what Newton found.


Perhaps I now can put my finger on the source. A positron is every
much
the same as an electron except for charge is opposite and thus they
are
antiparticles of one another. But are there more opposites than just
charge?
Would there have to be other opposites to be antiparticles? I believe
the answer
is affirmative-- that you need more opposites than simply opposite
charge.

One of those opposites is the light-wave inside a positron compared to
a
light-wave inside a electron cavity. A light-wave inside an electron
cavity, such as
a light-wave or beam of light in the cosmic night sky when run through
a prism
shows the light waves to be composite waves of the rainbow color.

However, since positrons are antiparticles, then a light-wave inside a
positron when
run through a prism would not be composite.

In particle physics they have various symmetries that are opposite one
another and they
give them special names. I am reasonable sure that white light
compositery has never
before been a discussion by particle physicists, until now. So that
white-light-compositery
for electron is opposite for positron, and whether it has a name for
it already in the literature
is unknown to me.


The reason no-one could solve the Unification of Forces of physics is
that they could not
realize that gravity was "bent space" so what was space that could
hold a Coulomb force?
And the answer was space was Dirac's ocean of positrons. Now again, we
must ask why
is "white light" composite and in blackbody radiation the walls are
black. So could it be,
that there really does exist "black light" and that in a Big Bang
theory, light should be
"black light" and not "white-light"?

Well, I am on vacation , and so leave this as a note for the 3rd
edition of this book.


I have always maintained that some day in the future, the proof of the
Atom Totality
theory will come easier and easier with each new discoveries. If we
fly in an airplane
in a geodesic and end up where we started from is proof the Earth is
round and how
much easier of a proof that was than some abstract reasoning.

Someday, someone is going to find a pathway that easily proves the
Universe
must be a atom itself. One of the reasons I stand alert for things
like compositery of
white light is that I am always on the alert for something simple and
direct proof of Atom
Totality. White Light Compositery is not a proof test of the Atom
Totality, but if I keep alert
and watchful, someday I just might find that quick and easy and short
proof. There is going to
be a bunch of those short proofs, not just one. The proof that atoms
exist via Brownian Motion
was one short proof of the existence of atoms, and one short proof
amoung many others and
better proofs.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

wrote:
Perhaps this should be in my Atom Totality book and not my Galaxy
formation book?
Start talking to yourself now, radioactive refuse???