Rainbows

The physicists claim that rainbows are created by light being split into different colours by tiny droplets of water. This is only partially true. If you shine White light into a droplet of water you get White light. If there is an edge between the droplet and the light, or an edge visible through the sphere then you get distorted coloured bands. Coloured light entering a droplet of water is distorted in a similar way that coloured light entering a prism is distorted.

Where are the edges up in the sky to create these colour bands? These are provided by the droplets of water themselves. If you shine White light onto a droplet of water a shadow is formed behind it. The edges of this shadow create thin colour bands (Blue, Red and Yellow) that pass into droplets of water behind it and are distorted and enlarged. After that it becomes complicated as the coloured bands pass through millions of water droplets.

It is easy enough to check this with the use of a couple of brandy glasses filled with water.

Quantum leap

Did you know that if you had a quantum leap in your annual salary and your original salary was £20,000, then your new salary would be £20,000.01, i.e. a one penny increase. A quantum is the smallest quantity possible, one penny in England, one cent in America, etc.

A quantum leap in your annual corn yield would be one grain of corn. A quantum leap in the annual production of nails would be one nail.
Strange how a phrase coined by the physics establishment relating to a vague hypothesis on the structure of the atom, has been taken up by the press and advertisers, and is now considered by the public to have the opposite meaning.

A major problem with physics is that when something is discovered or hypothesised, the public pick up only the most ‘sensational’ aspects of it. Einstein’s fame really came from the ‘time dilation’ hypothesis relating to his interpretation of the Michelson-Morley experiment. This got so embedded in the public mind that even the physicists started to believe it. This problem was made worse when the science fiction writers picked up on it, and it is now almost a constant in science fiction books, and is now even considered by many people to be ‘real’ physics.

Author – Brian Williams

Lightning strikes upwards!

I was giving informal lectures on this over thirty years ago. Yes, lightning does strike upwards. This was an obvious requirement, as there is a build up of electrons on the surface of the Earth and electricity travels from negative to positive. Visual ‘evidence’ indicates that it travels downwards. High speed photography indicates that lightning travels downwards.. However, the physicists have missed the vital point that the eye or the photography are only seeing the light created by the lightning strike, they are not seeing the actual lightning. An electrical charge is electricity and it is static, lightning is electricity and is moving. The electrical charge on the Earth is static, but under the influence of a positive charge it becomes lightning. The change from a ‘charge’ to lightning requires acceleration, it is not instantaneous. (Basic mechanics)

Now Physics or Fantasy, Section 1 shows conclusively that light does not travel at a constant speed. In fact light travels at various speeds, Blue light travels slower than Red light which travels slower than Yellow light which travels slower than White light. White light travels at a vast range of speeds. The same applies to electricity.

Lightning is accelerating during its passage from the Earth to the clouds. Close to the Earth it is travelling quite slowly, therefore its speed of passage creates only low energy light. On entering the cloud layer it is travelling at its highest speed, and therefore creates a higher energy light. The higher the energy of the light the faster it travels. We therefore see the light created at the cloud height before we see the light created at low level. Therefore the lightning appears to travel downwards. No, this does not prove Einstein’s time dilation, it is just basic mechanics.

The lightning strike passing through the atmosphere my be considered to be like a bullet passing through some very light objects. The bullet scatters the light objects in all directions. The speed of scattering of the light objects is considerably less than the speed of the bullet. Unlike a bullet, lightning is constantly accelerating until it reaches the centre of the positive attraction in the cloud layer. It is therefore almost certain that a lightning discharge travels considerably faster than light.

Recent photographs taken from aircraft travelling above the cloud layers, show lightning apparently striking upwards from the cloud layer. This has created much confusion. However, lightning striking a cloud layer from below may not have all its energy absorbed within the cloud, and part of the energy may continue through it to appear as short lightning ‘strikes’ above the cloud layer. This new evidence is certainly indicative that my early thoughts on this were correct. Obviously I may not be correct, but a logical explanation is better than waffle.

Note;  If lightning is electricity and electricity is electrons, then you should not be able to see lightning if light is photons, unless electrons create photons!!!

Lightning can also occur within the clouds. Although we speak of positive and negative, positive should really be considered as ‘Less Negative’. A negative charge is a a supply of free electrons. These will attempt to redistribute themselves into areas with less electrons, i.e. ‘less negative’ areas.  Clouds will generally have areas that are less negative than others and therefore there will be lightning strikes within the cloud layers.

Brian Williams – Author.

Basics of an Atomic Theory

The construction of an atom model that satisfies all the requirements of scientific knowledge regarding both physical and biological facts must be our starting point. It must be able to explain colour, weight (mass), state (i.e. solid, gas or liquid), changes due to temperature, changes due to pressure, hardness, and softness, rigidity and flexibility, chemical reactions, gravity, magnetism, and most importantly, life.

The physics establishments ‘hypotheses’ do not explain any property of matter therefore they do not qualify as theories.

My atomic theory explains all known properties of matter. (It therefore passes the requirements of a theory.)

I may be wrong, but certainly not as wrong as the Physics Establishment.

The reader will have problems due to fact that I go against all the current atomic hypotheses that he/she will have been taught or accepted. I can understand this because I had the same problem myself, many times over the years finding it difficult to believe my own results. Eventually it was easier to consider existing hypotheses only to pinpoint where the problems were. This was a case of selecting any particular hypothesis proposed by the physics establishment, assume it is wrong, and work out alternative hypotheses and then produce a working theory. 90% of current hypotheses cannot even satisfy the title of theory because there are no explanations of how they could work.

One of the main reasons for physicists opting for whizzing high-speed electrons is an attempt to explain the energy of an atom.

However, all energy is stored in one of two states, momentum or stress. (Occasionally it is stored as a combination of both)

The energy of atoms is stored as stress.

The reader may find this statement difficult to accept but it is true, whether you are considering chemistry, radiation, mechanics or biology. However, if you ask a physicist to explain how his model/hypothesis of the atom explains any of the physical or biological facts of reality, he will only mumble that you will not understand the explanation, being a mere mortal, but will then brighten up and go into the fantasy world of physics in the form of time dilation, rubber sheet universes, black holes, time travel etc. things that are basically fairy stories to amuse the public.

Can you remember anything produced from physics hypotheses? Forget atomic energy which was a discovery by SCIENTISTS not PHYSICISTS. The physicists were brought in to attempt to find an explanation, with which they are still struggling. The atom bomb and controlled atomic energy were produced by scientists and engineers, with the physicists hanging about trying to look important. Note; We have atomic energy not nuclear energy.

What we consider to be atomic energy is only another step along the way from rubbing two sticks together to create fire, energy from coal and gas, dynamite, all of which are atomic reactions. The Atom bomb and its derivatives are toys relative to the energies that could be released if we inadvertently hit something that is a lot more stressed than the radioactive materials that are being used today. Radioactive ‘elements’ are already breaking down and are unstable. The more dangerous elements will not show this breakdown, and we will not be aware of their danger until too late. The pointless experiments with the so-called Hadron collider will not produce any useful knowledge, but could inadvertently blast a huge hole in the centre of Europe

From Section 3, Physics or Fantasy