[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

The nature of light.

A photon has energy and momentum (weight) but no mass. It is obvious that light is vibrations of some medium (ether). This environment cannot but have resistance, damping or absorbing light vibrations with time and distance. I will describe the essence in simple words so as not to complicate and not drag out the explanation.

1) Water waves.
They spread longer (in time) than sound, but at a shorter distance (at a lower speed). Distribution medium: water.

2) Sound waves.
The lifetime of sound waves is shorter than that of water waves, but the speed (and distance) is greater. Distribution medium: atmosphere (gas).

3) Light waves.
By analogy, the lifetime of light waves should be much shorter than the lifetime of sound waves, but since the speed of light is about 300,000 km/s - the propagation distance is greater. Distribution medium: aether.


(a schematic representation of a photon - a conventional unit of oscillation (wave) of the aether) Image text translation: The movement of one light wave (photon) from the source to complete attenuation and / or absorption by the medium (aether).

At the beginning of the 20th century, scientists rejected the completely plausible hypothesis of the Tired Light, began to carry out fortune-telling by redshifts of the spectrum (like on coffee grounds, only by the spectral emissions), and billions of light years, black holes, dark energies, and distant-distant galaxies rushed.

Light years?

A photon cannot exist not only for years, but even for minutes. Example. Standing in the lake. You throw a stone. First you hear the sound, later the waves come. Waves on water, sound waves in a gaseous medium and light waves in ether are phenomena of the same nature, but of different orders due to the environment. If waves on water “live” for minutes, and sound waves in a gaseous medium “live” for seconds, then light waves in their medium (ether) “live” for a fraction of a second. All this depends on the power of the source of wave oscillations, so it can be assumed that light waves from the Sun can exist for several seconds, but not more (not minutes, and even less years).

Even if in the space environment (vacuum) there is no resistance, there is no heat exchange, then the distance is overcome (volume expansion with distance), which cannot occur absolutely without energy consumption. In addition, the space of the cosmic vacuum cannot be absolutely empty. There cannot but be certain, albeit minimal, resistance and heat transfer. Light years and 8 light minutes from Sun to Earth are physically impossible.

Again. Attentively. This is very important to understand. Overcoming distance in any environment, that is, regardless of the environment, cannot occur without energy consumption (or with zero energy consumption). Since a photon has a very low energy charge, and a very high speed of movement, and no medium (including space) can have absolutely zero resistance, then, accordingly, the lifetime (life) of one photon (wave oscillation of the medium - ether) is very short, not exceeding at least one minute.

Definition. The lifetime of a unit of wave oscillations (one wave) is inversely proportional to the speed of their propagation (or directly proportional to the inertia of the medium) and is directly proportional to the power of their source.

Since the aether is not scientifically recognized, it turns out that a photon is a conventional unit of wave oscillations of an incomprehensible medium? A photon has weight (energy and momentum), but no mass - it is obvious that this is an oscillation (wave) of some medium (aether).

Addition.

If the distance from the Earth to the Sun were 150,000,000 km, that is, 8 light minutes, then the STEREO Ahead and STEREO Behind spacecraft would simply be impossible to control, and it would be impossible to receive any data from them. For example. STEREO A (itself being in constant motion in orbit) sends a signal to the Earth that flies in space for 8 minutes, and during this time the Earth moves in orbit for 8 minutes. * 60 sec. * 30 km/s = 14 400 km. Not to mention the enormous degree of radio signal scattering over distances of tens of millions of kilometers or several light minutes.


(animation of the movement of STEREO spacecrafts around the Sun)

There is a photo animation on the web that shows a solar flare in the direction of one of these satellites. The STEREO Ahead spacecraft supposedly moves along the Earth's orbit, that is, at the same distance from the Sun as the Earth. This is an animation of STEREO A photos from July 23, 2012.



The solar flare flew exactly in the direction of STEREO A. It began at almost exactly 03:00 (UTC), and the first visible particles of coronal matter (white ripples in the animation) flew to STEREO A at about 07:00 (UTC). If the distance from the Sun to the Earth's orbit (on which the STEREO spacecraft are located) were 150,000,000 km, as is officially believed, then the speed of coronal material particles would be 150,000,000 km. / 4 hours / 60 minutes / 60 seconds = about 10,000 km / s. - this is 3% of the speed of light, which is hardly physically possible.

The solar wind is a stream of ionized particles (mainly helium-hydrogen plasma) flowing out from the solar corona at a speed of 300-1200 km/s into the surrounding space.

In addition, it is generally known that the flow of coronal matter from a solar flare reaches the Earth's orbit (in which the STEREO spacecraft are supposedly located) in an average of 150,000,000 km. / 750 km / s / 60 sec. / 60 min. / 24 hours = ~ 2.5 - 3 days. But in fact, the animation of the photos turns out to be 07:00 (UTC) - 03:00 (UTC) = 4 hours. Looks like it turns out this way, because STEREO spacecrafts are located on the orbit of Venus (around the Sun), and SOHO spacecraft is located in common center of mass between the Earth and the Sun in the Solar System (Universe) with approximately the same parameters as in the schematic image below.


(ProtoEarth, Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars; common center of mass between Earth and Sun; distance to the Moon is about 100 000 km., distance to the Sun is about 300 000 km.; Oort Cloud is the border of the Universe where all the "stars" and "galaxies" located; the diameter of the Universe does not exceed one light minute)

The rotation of the Earth and the Sun, as two commensurate objects, around a common center of mass, is difficult to describe in words and to draw schematically - therefore, I end the article with a corresponding animation, in which the size ratios are close to reality (the Earth is larger, the Sun is smaller).

[Halc]

This topic is being posted on multiple sites, in violation of the rules of this site.

The latest has earned the author a suspension for failing to use anything but ignorance to support the ignorance presented, being evasive resorting only to repetition. The post is just soapboxing.

Had the topic been posted in New Theories, I would have left it there, but since it was posted in the mainstream section, it has been moved to 'That Can't Be True" section.

[Kryptid]

This is painfully wrong...

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

Had the topic been posted in New Theories, I would have left it there, but since it was posted in the mainstream section, it has been moved to 'That Can't Be True" section.

Dear moderator Halc, would you please be so kind to move two my topics "New model of the Universe." and "The nature of light and the size of the Universe." to the section "New Theories". I honestly haven't seen that section. I just scrolled the section till I saw "Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology" and didn't scrolled below it. This is my fault for my carelessness. I apologize and please move my two topics to a more appropriate section of this forum: "New Theories", please.

[Halc]

Dear moderator Halc, would you please be so kind to move two my topics "New model of the Universe." and "The nature of light and the size of the Universe." to the section "New Theories".

Can do if the assertions made are accompanied by evidence. You've a reputation for not providing such, hence this forum seems to be the appropriate classification.

The topic is already under discussion on other sites under various categories of 'speculations'. Continue the discussion there if you will.

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

The topic is already under discussion on other sites under various categories of 'speculations'. Continue the discussion there if you will.

Dear Halc, these two my topics are deleted from three forums: space.com, livescience.com and physicsforums.com. These two my topics are only on scienceforums.net but they are both closed there now. That's my falut that I didnt scroll down your forum lower and didn't notice the propper section for my topics "New Theories". Please forgive me my carelessness and move these two my topics to the section "New Theories". There is logic and argumentation in my suggestions, they are theories, or at least hypothesis. I promise to be more attentive and consistent and not violate the rules of your forum. Is it so hard for you to do . . . please.

[Kryptid]

There is logic and argumentation in my suggestions

Very, very poor ones that don't align with known physics.

[alancalverd]

It is obvious that light is vibrations of some medium

Wrong.

[alancalverd]

First you hear the sound, later the waves come.

Wrong

[alancalverd]

Even if in the space environment (vacuum) there is no resistance, there is no heat exchange,

Wrong

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

I did not post this information in the "Ask a question" section, because it is impossible to add photos there, without which the questions would be incomprehensible.

1) First question.

It is comet NEOWISE on both STEREOs and SOHOs photos. Here is a link to the article with confirmation of this fact: The tale of a comet's tail http://www.stce.be/news/489/welcome.html But how is it possible considering the SOHOs and STEREOs  interposition (location in space) an their fields of view?





2) Second question.

Why there is no Moon near the Earth on the STEREOs photos? Considering that Mercury is clearly visible in the same photos, the Moon should be seen at least as a bright bulge on the side of the Earth. The Moon cannot completely merge with the Earth into one round point. Diameters for better representation of ratios: Mercury - 4.8; Moon - 3.5; Earth - 12.7.



How is it possible that there is a Moon near the Earth on MESSENGERs photos, but no Moon near the Earth on STEREOs photos?

[Bored chemist]

The Moon cannot completely merge with the Earth into one round point.

Why not?
Why couldn't the moon be "hidden" behind the Earth?

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

The Moon cannot completely merge with the Earth into one round point.
Why not?

Because of: 1) the ratio Earth - 12.7, Moon - 3.5; 2) The distance between Earth and Moon is 384 000 kilometers.

Why couldn't the moon be "hidden" behind the Earth?

Photo animation for 8 days, during which the Moon cannot hide behind the Earth or be all this time in front of the Earth.

Link to STEREO photo archive: https://stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/images

[Halc]

Why there is no Moon near the Earth on the STEREOs photos?

I don't know how the images are generated, but they do not appear to be photos.  A stereoscopic sensory system generates a 3D maps of a region, not a photo, which would only be 2D.
It is possible that the image is generated as a 2D slice of that 3D map along the orbital plane.  It may be that the moon is well outside that plane, and being so close, it not in the cross section at all.

My argument does not explain the funny curved part that seems to intersect the sun, and the blank 'shadow' region off to the right, nor the fact that Venus seems to track almost straight toward's Earth during the 1-week animation.  Also, Mars is portrayed as being inside the orbit of Earth, which implies more of a point-of view choice (from well to the side, but again in the orbital plane) from which the 2D image is created from the 3D map.  The image point of view might have been chosen in this case to put the comet in the cross section generated.

Just some thoughts. As I said, I don't know how the images are generated from the data gathered by the STEREO probes.

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

I don't know how the images are generated, but they do not appear to be photos.  A stereoscopic sensory system generates a 3D maps of a region, not a photo, which would only be 2D.

STEREO HI-1 and HI-2 - Heliospheric Imagers - are simple visible light cameras placed inside deep optical baffles.

A heliospheric imager is a wide-field camera that is designed to image the solar wind in interplanetary space, far from the Sun itself. The solar wind is composed of plasma and contains both ions and free electrons. The electrons, in particular, scatter incident sunlight via Thomson scattering, and clouds of plasma can therefore be photographed using visible light. Heliospheric imagers are simple in principle - they are simple visible light cameras placed inside deep optical baffles.

Heliospheric imager: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliospheric_imager

[Bored chemist]

STEREO HI-1 and HI-2 - Heliospheric Imagers - are simple visible light cameras placed inside deep optical baffles.

But just looking at the pictures makes it clear that we are not seeing a simple photograph, are we?
The images are obviously processed and , since we don't know what processing has been done, we can't really comment on what might have happened.

But. if the Moon wasn't there, and it should have been, don't you think the scientists on the project would have noticed?

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

Quote from: AlexandrKushnirtshuk on Today at 18:45:35
STEREO HI-1 and HI-2 - Heliospheric Imagers - are simple visible light cameras placed inside deep optical baffles.

But just looking at the pictures makes it clear that we are not seeing a simple photograph, are we? The images are obviously processed and, since we don't know what processing has been done, we can't really comment on what might have happened.

Since STEREO images are photos - not 2D slices of 3D map of region, post-processing can only be in the form of color filters, and can in no way affect objects (adding or erasing) and their relative position to each other.

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

But. if the Moon wasn't there, and it should have been, don't you think the scientists on the project would have noticed?

Of course they are aware of this, and I'm sure they have a "well-reasoned" "explanation" for this discrepancy. But the most important thing - scientists on the project - is a narrow circle of well-paid people from society, in which, moreover, there should be information of different levels of access and a nondisclosure subscription with very harsh sanctions for violation.

[Bored chemist]

post-processing can only be in the form of color filters, and can in no way affect objects (adding or erasing) and their relative position to each other.

Nonsense.
Have you ever seen photoshop?

[Bored chemist]

in which, moreover, there should be information of different levels of access and a nondisclosure subscription with very harsh sanctions for violation.

Why should there be?
Why not just make the information available to anyone?
After all, the taxpayers funded it.