[Beam of sun light inside the cavity of Rocca ill'Abissu at Fondachelli Fantina, Sicily
](By Fediona - Own work, CC0, Link)
If you are a materialist, then most likely you think that the whole world consists of atoms. I have the same opinion. As the story goes back in ancient Greece or India, now we probably will not exactly define it, but as it often happens, it is possible in different places simultaneously and independently, the pundits introduced this concept, calling them the smallest indivisible particle of which is our material world. Atoms are the smallest indivisible particles, non-arising and non-vanishing, qualitatively homogeneous, impenetrable (not containing a void) essence (particles) possessing a definite form. Now, of course, we are aware of the presence of objects even less than atoms, but we are not aware of the existence of these particles outside the atom, except for the strange case of free electrons that arise (appear) to apply a potential difference. In order to obtain particles smaller than an atom, we need to perform certain actions with the atom or create conditions under which an atom collapses into fragments or fragments, resulting in the appearance of human-defined components, like electrons, protons, neurons and various radiations, in the form a-particles, b-particles and r-particles. But all these particles, outside the atom, do not exist, and if they exist, then for a short time, only at the moment, the effect on the atom or states, when the atom collapses. Consequently, modern man has not invented anything new, and the world still consists of atoms, as from minute and constantly existing particles.
[A triangular prism dispersing a beam of white light. The longer wavelengths (red) and the shorter wavelengths (blue) are separated.](By Lucas V. Barbosa - Own work, Public Domain, Link)
Discreteness (from the Latin discretus - divided, intermittent) is a property opposed to continuity, discontinuity. I would continue this notion and say, this is what consists of atoms. Or we can still say that an atom is continuity, and all that more has the property of discreteness. The elementary unit of discretion in my representation is the atom, at least in the world in which we live. What does this mean. Since we consider our world to be material, it follows that everything that happens in our world or exists has a material basis. If this substance, then this atom, as the smallest elementary particle. There are no questions. But it is interesting to consider the phenomena that arise in our world. It is not difficult to draw a conclusion that all the phenomena that manifest in our world must be based on the matter from which our world consists, and consequently they will also have discreteness, in other words, discontinuity. Nothing can be continuous in our world. And not only because of the discrete basis of materialism. It is difficult for me to imagine continuity or constancy, how can this exist at all? Continuity, should denote the absence as such of the beginning and end. You met such. If something does not have a beginning and an end, then it can not exist in our world. Because in this case it can be defined as infinity or eternity. I will try another way to explain infinity. Imagine a circle. If we move only along the circumference, then this motion is continuous and constant. There is no beginning, not an end. There is nothing! Because to determine something in our world, one must know at least the beginning or the end. As with the atom, we know that it has certain dimensions, so it exists and is material. Only the presence of dimensions at the atom and makes it a separate particle and allows us to distinguish them. Of course the motion along the circle, this motion is "based" on elementary particles - atoms. If all atoms were combined together, they would merge into one, they would simply "disappear", then the circle would disappear, and along with it the movement along the circumference. Only the discreteness of matter enables us to exist, move and manifest in this world. If we agree that the material world is discrete, then the next step will be to consider the discreteness of the phenomena of our world.
[Muybridge sequence of a horse galloping](By The sequence is set to motion using these frames, originally taken from Eadweard Muybridge's Human and Animal Locomotion series, (plate 626, thoroughbred bay mare "Annie G." galloping) published 1887 by the University of Pennsylvania, Public Domain, Link)
The number of phenomena in our world is enormous. All of them are called in some way to confirm the existence of the material world, to make the material real. The existence of the material must be confirmed by something. With the help of all known phenomena, this is what happens. This is light, and the amount of matter, the size of the bodies, the movement, the interactions between themselves and the same heat, etc. Everything that we can imagine and can not, but it exists, all this is a consequence of the existence of the material world.
A small digression. Let's talk about the movie. This is another way to confirm the discreteness of our existence. Everyone knows that cinema is just a whole set of pictures that repeat with a certain frequency. This frequency is 24 frames per second. According to Wikipedia: Frame (from the French cadre - "frame, frame") - a fragment of the movie or video series, a separate image or a piece of film. I do not like such explanations. The logic is not built correctly. It turns out that the frame is not primary, but in fact, neither the movie nor the video series exists. It's just a private name for a set of frames. For example, like a deck of playing cards. The creation of a movie, in my opinion, an opinion, confirms some important theses. First, everything that a person creates, he repeats what he sees in the world around him. Realizing that the world is discrete, and continuous, helped him to come up with a way to create a movie. Secondly, this once again confirms the discreteness of the world and not the possibility of the existence of something uninterrupted in our world. Even the movement that we observe or try to repeat discretely and is perceived by us as frames. And in fact this is the case. If we continue to argue further, then concepts such as the past, the present and the future, logically represent a set of successive frames. Passed this frame behind us, the future is the frame ahead of us. The present is the frame in which we are. We must exist in the world. A set of frames, creates a movie length with our life. But still these are cadres and they all have a beginning and an end. In other words, if you want to prove the existence of something, you need to determine the beginning and the end of this ...
Let's continue the topic of discreteness of phenomena. I have long been interested in the nature of light. What is the source of light. It is logical to assume that the source of light is an atom, as was previously identified as the unique discrete unit of our world. And as noted, all phenomena are called upon to confirm the existence of the material. And light is not an exception, it is one of the main ways of manifesting the existence of the material world. And it's not because we see it, but because it's glowing. Everything that is materially shines. Light, probably this is the very first and important thing that determines the materiality of the world. Because, it gives us the opportunity to determine material, without resorting to contact, and at a distance.
[Electromagnetic spectrum with light highlighted](CC BY-SA 3.0, Link)
About the light. Assuming that every existing atom is glowing, then what is the brightness and power of light and how is it possible to glow. To begin with, following the logic of the discreteness of the world, and the light should be like that. Although light and phenomenon, but like a movie, it must consist of finite fragments or parts, or moments. My reasoning is this, that the discreteness consists in a certain repetition of the constantly changing state of the atom. On Off. A kind of repeating oscillator, with two positions or states. Only in contrast to the physical definition of the oscillator, the amplitude is constant, but the frequency of repetition varies. And why not! And even yes. And the source of the frequency change in this case will be heat! We will not deny that heating increases the intensity of light.
Once again, the light is discrete, the light source is an atom! Just a question. Why, according to the physical theory of light in one case, the atom emits light, and in the other reflects. Indeed, the presence of light is also indicated by the presence of heat. "Absolutely cold" body is not a source of light, therefore, this can not be, we simply will not "see" it, we will not define it. Theoretically, one can assume that it is possible to determine the existence of a body if one touches, or in this case, the movement of heat, in the direction of a cold body. But it seems to me that it is impossible that the atom does not shine.
So, by heating the body, or simply an atom, it does not matter, physics claims that light is emitted. The body itself is lit up as a result of heating or not. Light belongs to the body or it becomes so when it is already in motion. What is light. All this creates an insoluble confusion in concepts and makes us doubt the reliability of the theory of light. But if we assume that the atom does not light, but lights up. The difference is huge. Then everything is easily explained. And darkness on the way is light in space. And not the possibility of exposure to light, against each other, when crossing or meeting two rays. And this question is one of the most scrupulous. How is this possible, there is light, but it does not seem to exist.
I have to say, I'm not against theories, they help us live and create machines, mechanisms, build buildings, yes, everything. Thanks to science there is industry and many other aspects of our life. I try to explain the essence of what is happening, which, in principle, physics must do.
[A 3–dimensional rendering of linearly polarised light wave frozen in time and showing the two oscillating components of light; an electric field and a magnetic field perpendicular to each other and to the direction of motion (a transverse wave).](By No machine-readable author provided. Gpvos assumed (based on copyright claims). - No machine-readable source provided. Own work assumed (based on copyright claims)., CC BY-SA 3.0, Link)
If the light is discrete and is, constantly repeating with a certain frequency of "lights," I can so I will call it to be more intelligible. And now the light of each atom constantly flares up and flashes. Each atom, in view of various geometric sizes, has a different light, which determines the amplitude or wave of light. But the frequency of light can already be determined by mathematical calculations to identify a different light source. But there is also the frequency of flashing lights. This flash frequency determines the intensity or brightness of light. The more it will be repeated and with greater speed, the brighter the source of light. The conclusion is obtained by the following, the main parameter of light will be a substance that is a light source of a certain wave, a frequency, as a basis for the intensity or brightness of light, and the propagation of light in the surrounding space.
Here on the spread of light I would like to stop separately. According to the theory of light, we have the following description of behavior, if this word is appropriate, of light. I have already asked this question, the substance itself is glowing, or only radiating, but according to theory, the light is only radiated, then it moves, with the "speed of light", which is constant and its magnitude is mathematically calculated, meeting the substance in its path, light partially reflected and partially absorbed, and then continues to move and so far so what? not completely absorbed ... substance. It seems to be true, the reflection of light, but here with the move, I think the error came out ...
According to my view, light is copied or repeated because of its capabilities. Suppose we have a single light source. Let it be an atom. This atom constantly flares up with a certain frequency-intensity. Now we put another object in the line of sight of the light source and let it also be an atom. If light is a property of matter, then the second object will also shine. But since I said earlier he will copy the light from our source. Consequently, the frequency of flares in the object observed by us will increase. And it will glow brighter. And even a light source, will copy light from the object, but since our object initially, by human standards did not shine, then it will contribute a little or little noticeable due to the light source. But in addition, the object will glow, repeating the light source. It is logical to assume that this component should also be copied by a light source. But copying is based on the possibility of repeating the wavelength, since this parameter is related to the geometric dimensions of the atom. In other words, the object will only light in the range (the wavelength parameter) of the light source, therefore, it can not affect the light source.
[Thomas Young's sketch of a double-slit experiment showing diffraction. Young's experiments supported the theory that light consists of waves.](Public Domain, Link)
The more line of sight the objects will be, the more copying of the light source and, as a consequence, become brighter. Source one, and objects 10 means, 10 times brighter. But I think this can not be. This is possible only if all objects are on imaginary circles and are removed from the center. In the center is a light source, which is spherical in nature. Presumably, the light source has a direction, for example, by analogy with the electrical properties of matter. And if the light source has a direction, therefore, it has direction and copying (reflection of light). If there is light on the mirror, the light will almost completely be reflected from the mirror. The angle of incidence of light is equal to the angle of reflection. But if the mirror is a discrete entity and includes all of the same atoms, it is natural to assume that the reflection process, based on the fact that an atom copies light source, but it comes up at an angle. Reminds the reaction to the action. Here it was added, there appeared, through the central axis. It is very difficult to describe the process of reflection, if you have I will listen with pleasure. But it is difficult for me to imagine the physics of the process of reflection. I tend to assume that this is a repetition or copying, but according to the parameters of the reflector. Of course, it seems to us that the soccer ball, hitting the bar, is reflected from it. But in fact, the bar has a hardness, allowing repeated (COPY) increase the impact of the ball on the rod and directs it at the same angle, but symmetrically about an axis on the ball! Why in this case, physics interprets this action as a separate force, and as stated in the third law of Newton's "Power of action is smooth strength of opposition." In the case of light, we have some kind of slip, not a new movement. But also can not be. Allow me to stop at this and leave you an opportunity for reflection.
DOES NOT LIGHT, A LIGHT.
DOES NOT MOVE, AND COPY.
SPEED OF LIGHT, SPEED OF REACTION AND OBJECT.
invite to the discussion and subscribe to my blog, if interested ...
SteemSTEM is a community project with the goal to promote and support Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics on the Steem blockchain. If you wish to support the steemSTEM project you can:
Contribute STEM content using the #steemstem tag | Support steemstem authors | Join our curation trail | Visit our Discord community | Delegate SP to steemstem