1
New Theories / Re: Is there a better way to explain light?
« on: 05/12/2022 21:00:16 »There is a huge difference between wrong and fraud.As there is between physics and engineering. At least MG was honest enough to show a very narrow incident beam in his "fraud" diagram, and a wide beam in "truth". Fact is that for any finite width, i.e. any real experiment, there will be a lot of overlap in the near field and a cunning engineer can exploit this to generate a spectrum of complementary colours
But a real engineer will know that the underlying physics remains true: the most energetic photons undergo the greatest deflection in a normally dispersive medium, as can be demonstrated with monochromatic light sources.
What a meaningless waste of words!
Let me tell you some basic stuff.
There is no need of double refraction (as it is happening on a triangular prism) to get refraction colors.
A single refraction is quite enough (as it is visible in this video 0:54, watch it on full screen).
Now, let's say that the incident beam doesn't get refracted because it reaches the border between the two mediums at right angle (figure a below):
https://drive.google.com/file/d/15QbYQnYticIXc2CLtuUZw1h5rxytpmA_/view?usp=share_link
Now, let's say the beam is only very little refracted, as it is happening at 0:24 of the video above (figure b in the file above).
Should we expect that in this case b something will drastically change in a visual sense compared to the case when the beam is not refracted at all (case a)?
Of course not.
And still, the case b doesn't principally differ from any other case of refraction (it doesn't matter whether single or double)!