Thanks, I cannot post this because of copyright. Also there is now a disagreement about whether or not the colour changes occur in calcite. So I will emphasize conservation of energy and momentum in UFT279 to give a plausible explanation. That is a watertight argument that led to another estimate of photon mass. Can Den Davis attempt to see colour changes in glasses? That would be a third attempt at replication. I am confident that Trevor Morris and Gareth Evans have observed reproducible and repeatable effects in glasses. Can they give us more details of how they observed the colour changes in glasses. Is there a special technique needed? If these effects are not reproducible and repeatable I will change the emphasis of UFT279 to theory. It can still be a four author paper. I know how difficult it is to face a sceptical world with new ideas. This happened with Gareth’s observation of far infra red peaks in liquids. He was attacked by Yarwood and Birch until I used a theoretical argument to prove plausibility. Then the criticism of far infra red peaks faded away. So I request that Gareth Evans and Trevor Morris give Horst Eckardt, Dennis Davies and the rest of us detailed instructions as to how to observe the colour changes in glasses. The more detail the better.

Sent: 30/11/2014 12:32:25 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Fwd: Re: Question on fluorescence /absorption at 536nm

Retrieved the email and attachment now Myron kindly forward by Russel.

These are more experimental observations, all intensely interesting. The conservation of total energy and momentum holds without reference to fluorescence at all, so will the important photon mass calculation. The fact that frequency shifts are seen in a non absorbing martial means that they are not fluorescence. So now I will proceed to writing up Sections 1 and 2 of UFT279, a four author paper with Horst Eckardt, Gareth Evans and Trevor Morris, the two experimentalists. As GJE mention, anyone can easily reproduce these effects in glass with a laser and at home.

Sent: 30/11/2014 09:47:35 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Re: Fwd: Re: Question on fluorescence /absorption at 536nm

Thanks both. I have had a quick look at this paper (could one of you send Myron a copy because I have broken the link somehow and now lost the paper at my end).

I agree with the general conclusion about the potential use of olive oil in laser technology. Their experiment is almost a perfect replica of Robert Fosbury ‘ s work (or vice-versa). It is good that there are now more examples of confirmation of the actual observations emerging.

The authors of this paper (and Robert) attribute the frequency shifts to the chlorophyll at 680nm to fluoresence (after all this is all that was known to them).

There are indeed some relatively weak absorptions in their transmission spectrum of olive oil. The authors of this paper “use these absorptions to excite the chlorophyll molecules and create the fluorescence”.

However, these weak absorptions are probably not chlorophyll absorptions. Olive oil does not just contain chlorophyll. These weak absorptions are almost certainly associated with another component in olive oil. A spectrum of neat chlorophyll can be seen in the link below:

There are no absorptions at all in the green part of the visible spectrum (which is why I have focused on it). So, they are not exciting chlorophyll molecules with green laser light (but some other molecules – if any at all). If they are not exciting chlorophyll molecules the incident radiation is not causing chlorophyll molecules to fluoresce. But their frequency shifts are to the well known chlorophyll absorption at around 680nm. This cannot be a consequence of chlorophyll fluorescence. They have not looked closely enough at the source of their weak absorption lines.

Also, remember that olive oil frequency shifts white light itself to the chlorophyll absorption at 680nm (photo 4). That is, all the individual frequencies in this broad band source are shifted to the same frequency. If they had chosen laser light well away from their weak absorptions they would still have observed a frequency shift to the same chlorophyll absorption

If we can get close to reproducing these frequency shifts in olive oil (or formaldehyde, or both) it is going to cast great doubt over the interpretaion of much of the fluorescent work published in the literature. We now have a much better explanation of frequency shifts based on accurate first principles. Optics as we have known it was wrong. There are always frequency shifts in absorption and reflection.

As for calcite Horst, if you can get hold of some Icelandic Spar you will easily see the frequency shifts. This crystal was used by Newton, and others around the same time, in discoveries that effectively laid the foundations of most of classic optics as we know it. They missed some things though because they did not have lasers (see photo 1). The first Icelandic Spar crystal on the right in the photo is illuminated by blue and green laser light at the same time from different directions. Green laser light changes to yellow and blue laser light to pale blue / white light in the first crystal. Blue laser light changes to red in the second crystal (pink Icelandic Spar). Fluorescence?

The best way to argue againgst fluorecence as we thought of it though was to find frequency shifts in glass itself. We have already reported a frequency shift in a glass prism using blue / violet laser light but knew we needed to find a shift with green laser light (glass strongly absorbs at the uv end of the spectrum so the farther we can see shifts away from that end of the spectrum with visible light the better). We have had last seen a pronounced shift in glass with green laser light (photos 2 and 3). There is no absorption in glass at this frequency (see the clear glass spectrum in the link below):

To: EMyrone@aol.com
Sent: 29/11/2014 19:48:00 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Re: Coding up Exact Solutions for the refraction theory

I will first check the temperature effects in the linearized theory, compared to the single frequency theory.

Horst

Am 29.11.2014 18:38, schrieb EMyrone

This would be of great interest, because it is the exact conservation of energy and momentum with the Planck distribution. Nothing else is assumed in the theory. In my opinion these equations are perfectly general and must be obeyed in any optical process involving reflection and refraction. A desk top these days is almost as powerful as the IBM 3084 of the eighties.

Sent: 29/11/2014 16:41:37 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Exact Solutions for the refraction theory

Eqs. (4) and (5) of note 279(8) are non-linear, transcendent equations. In principle they can be solved by a zero crossing (root finding) method. I will look if Maxima can handle more than one equation simultaneously for this. In the worst case this problem has to be coded by hand. I do not believe that a supercomputer is necessary, that should be handable on a desktop.

Horst

Am 29.11.2014 11:07, schrieb EMyrone

This note summarizes a scheme for comparison of experiment and theory using the linearized n photon monochromatic theory with conservation of energy and momentum. As shown yesterday by Horst Eckardt there are four possible solutions for the refracted frequency omega1 in terms of the incident frequency omega, and it is possible to produce refracted red shifts and blue shifts as observed experiemntally by Gareth Evans and Trevor Morris. In the first instance the refarctive index of olive oil can be used, n = 1.4665, to see if this is sufficient to produce red shifts. The angle theta3 appears to be unknown experimentally but it can be adjusted to try to produce a fit with data. I note that the frequencies in hertz sent over by Gareth are calculated from the wavelengths using the speed of light c as in Eq. (1). If this simple constant refractive index theory does not work then the complex refractive index must be used as described by Horst yesterday. The real and imaginary parts of the complex refractive index are given in Eqs. (10) and (11). The rigorous theory is given in Eqs. (4) and (5), using the Planck distribution. Can Maxima solve those equations? Probably not, a mainframe computer will probably be needed.

There were 2,406 files downloaded (hits) from 416 reading sessions (distinct visits). Main spiders from baidu, google, MSN, wotbox, yandex and yahoo. Auto1 740, Auto2 100, UFT145 618, F3(Sp) 391, Book of Scientometrics 158, UFT88 122, Englynion 95, CEFE 60, Engineering Model 55, Evans Equations 62 numerous Spanish, Llais 50, Auto Sonnets 18, Principles of ECE 15 to date in November 2014. University of the Andes Colombia F9(Sp); TMCZ Heavy Transport Czechia my page; British Library general. Intense interest all sectors, updated usage file attached for November 2014.

Usage Statistics for aias.us aias.us

Summary Period: November 2014 – URL
Generated 29-Nov-2014 20:58 EST

This would be of great interest, because it is the exact conservation of energy and momentum with the Planck distribution. Nothing else is assumed in the theory. In my opinion these equations are perfectly general and must be obeyed in any optical process involving reflection and refraction. A desk top these days is almost as powerful as the IBM 3084 of the eighties.

Sent: 29/11/2014 16:41:37 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Exact Solutions for the refraction theory

Eqs. (4) and (5) of note 279(8) are non-linear, transcendent equations. In principle they can be solved by a zero crossing (root finding) method. I will look if Maxima can handle more than one equation simultaneously for this. In the worst case this problem has to be coded by hand. I do not believe that a supercomputer is necessary, that should be handable on a desktop.

Horst

Am 29.11.2014 11:07, schrieb EMyrone

This note summarizes a scheme for comparison of experiment and theory using the linearized n photon monochromatic theory with conservation of energy and momentum. As shown yesterday by Horst Eckardt there are four possible solutions for the refracted frequency omega1 in terms of the incident frequency omega, and it is possible to produce refracted red shifts and blue shifts as observed experiemntally by Gareth Evans and Trevor Morris. In the first instance the refarctive index of olive oil can be used, n = 1.4665, to see if this is sufficient to produce red shifts. The angle theta3 appears to be unknown experimentally but it can be adjusted to try to produce a fit with data. I note that the frequencies in hertz sent over by Gareth are calculated from the wavelengths using the speed of light c as in Eq. (1). If this simple constant refractive index theory does not work then the complex refractive index must be used as described by Horst yesterday. The real and imaginary parts of the complex refractive index are given in Eqs. (10) and (11). The rigorous theory is given in Eqs. (4) and (5), using the Planck distribution. Can Maxima solve those equations? Probably not, a mainframe computer will probably be needed.

Subject to clarification by Gareth, these are three visible laser frequencies each shifted to the lower frequency. This is possible theoretically if different angles theta3 are used, and complex refractive index.

To: EMyrone@aol.com
Sent: 29/11/2014 16:36:21 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Re: 279(8): Comparison of Experiment and Theory

What do the equations (7,8) mean? This is one refracted frequency for three incident frequencies. I would expect a 1-1 correspondence. Is it plausible that different incident frequencies are refracted to the same frequency?

Horst

Am 29.11.2014 11:07, schrieb EMyrone

This note summarizes a scheme for comparison of experiment and theory using the linearized n photon monochromatic theory with conservation of energy and momentum. As shown yesterday by Horst Eckardt there are four possible solutions for the refracted frequency omega1 in terms of the incident frequency omega, and it is possible to produce refracted red shifts and blue shifts as observed experiemntally by Gareth Evans and Trevor Morris. In the first instance the refarctive index of olive oil can be used, n = 1.4665, to see if this is sufficient to produce red shifts. The angle theta3 appears to be unknown experimentally but it can be adjusted to try to produce a fit with data. I note that the frequencies in hertz sent over by Gareth are calculated from the wavelengths using the speed of light c as in Eq. (1). If this simple constant refractive index theory does not work then the complex refractive index must be used as described by Horst yesterday. The real and imaginary parts of the complex refractive index are given in Eqs. (10) and (11). The rigorous theory is given in Eqs. (4) and (5), using the Planck distribution. Can Maxima solve those equations? Probably not, a mainframe computer will probably be needed.

This is another remarkable piece of work by Horst Eckardt, obtaining a self consistent value of photon mass from ordinary reflection and refraction. The graphics are most helpful as usual, and are done in three dimensions in colour. The photon mass is similar under these conditions to that obtained by light deflection from the sun.

To: Emyrone@aol.com
Sent: 29/11/2014 15:45:32 GMT Standard Time
Subj: Calculation of photon mass

For omega = 1.e15 Hz the photon mass has been computed in dependence of
omega_1 and theta_3. The first solution is real only for angles theta_3
near to pi/2. Since theta_3 is the difference angle between incoming and
refracted beam, this region is not relevant (probably only for very
special cases of the imaginary part of epsilon).
The second solution shows a plateau in the range of omega_1 ~ omega of
about 0.8*e-35 kg. This is a reasonable value, in the range we obtained
from deflection of light at the sun. I think this is another milestone
of the theory.

The dogmatists may try to argue that the conservation of energy and momentum must be expressed in terms of wavelength and not frequency, so that wavelength may vary. This is a very strained argument but they might try it on. It is countered by the fact that Planck law in terms of wavelength is obtained by lambda = c / f. So again it is concluded that the frequencies cannot be the same AND the wavelnegths canno tbe the same. The relation lambda = c / f is the one used by Gareth. So all is OK with his method. My guess is that if a paper were submitted to “Nature” the dogmatic editors would roll out the old dogma without reading the paper at all, and would not send it to referees. If they did this, we can counter and there will be an infinite argument. Instead of waiting another thousand years they can all be accepted immediately on www.aias.us, which is undogmatic and makes as big an impact as “Nature”. I don’t mind arguing for a thousand years because the legacy of ECE is already clear, it will argue for me.

Visible frequency spectrometers measure wavelengths, or wavenumbers, not frequencies, which is why all the early Omnia Opera papers with Michelson interferometry in the far infra red are expressed in wavenumbers in accordance with National Physical Laboratory standard practice. We worked directly with the National Physical Laboratory, whose staff loaned Mansel Davies one of their interferometers. However absolute frequencies of visible frequency lasers can be measured with great accuracy, and so can absolute wavelengths, so this provides an accurate measurement of c in the vacuum or v in a medium. So the data sent over by Gareth are in wavelengths, converted to frequencies by use of c. Therefore the standard physicists would argue that what is being observed is a wavelength shift and not a frequency shift. However, if the phase velocity is the same, (c or v) then the wavelength shifts are equivalent to frequency shifts. In the far infra red we always used one wavenumber equals 30 GHz, so wavelength and frequency were used interchangeably to link up with dielectric studies which always used frequency. The conversion of one wavenumber to 30 GHz takes place with lambda = c / f, so the use of c by Gareth follows this practice. The key point theoretically is that the old dogma blatantly violates conservation of energy and momentum. The old dogma asserted that the incident, refracted and reflected frequencies are all the same, but the wavelengths and phase velocities change. This assertion was based on the use of boundary conditions, and a particular solution of those conditions chosen to make sure that the frequencies were the same. So it was a circular argument. In notes for UFT279 I have shown that Snell’s Law can be obeyed when the frequencies are not the same. Conservation of energy and momentum was never considered in the old dogma, e. g. Jackson’s treatment in “Classical Electrodynamics”. The Planck Law is based on frequency, and not wavelength. So the Evans / Morris shifts are very large shifts whether they be measured by spectrometers in wavelengths, or by absolute frequency measurement.

This is given by experiment: Snell’s Law of refraction:

sin theta = n1 sin theta1

In Snell’s Law n1 is the real refractive index, because sin theta and sin theta1 are real valued. The other part of Snell’s Law is Snell’s Law of reflection:

theta = theta2

meaning that the angle of incidence is equal to the angle of reflection.