BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Crazy Science Idea- Light meets Crytozoology

 
  

Page: (1)2

 
 
Spyder Todd 2008
18:05 / 30.03.06
I had a random musing about 4 months ago, and talked about it on my website, The Tangled Web of Infinity (that's all the shameless self promotion I'm doing today, I promise). The idea has still been stirring in the back of my mind, so I thought I'd repost it here, and have people with more background in this type of thing discuss it. Feel freee to rip it apart if it needs to be- like I said, it's just a random idea I had. Here goes:

And now begins our examination on light, colour, and the possibilities that our senses are completely muted.

First and foremost: when you “see” an object, you are not seeing it at all. Your eyes are actually processing the light bouncing off an object and striking your pupil, as most of you probably already know. It’s slightly more complicated than that, as an object absorbs radiation at varying levels and reflects back the unabsorbed wavelengths, but that’s not overly important for my purposes at the moment.

Light is a nice way of saying electromagnetic radiation, with visible light being radiation with a certain wavelength. The range of light of light visible to the average human eye runs from a wavelength of 380 nanometers (alternatively a frequency interval of 790 terahertz) to 740 nanometers (405 terahertz). Purples are at the low end of the of the wavelengths and highest frequency, and reds are at the highest intensity wavelengths and shortest frequency. At higher wavelengths than we can see is infrared and higher, and lower wavelengths than we can see are ultraviolet and lower.
A handy dandy graphic to better explain:




Now, what you're saying is "What the hell? What are you babbling about?" Well, I'm getting there. Infrared is the first clue to it all. Although humans are incapable of seeing infrared due to our optic structure, we can perceive it. We do this not with out optic nerve, but with every neuron in our body. Infrared is perceived by our bodies as heat. All objects emit radiation to some degree, and heat is nothing more than radiation. Most objects at room temperature or above emit radiation at around mid-infrared level (infrared radiation gives off a wavelength roughly from 740 nanometers to 1 millimeter). So, even though we can't see the infrared light/radiation, we can perceive it.

Ultraviolet light, however, is not perceivable by humans at all. You can't feel UV light like you can IR light. However, UV radiation still has affects upon the human body. UV rays cause damage collagen fibers, contributing to skin aging and cancer. On the plus side, UV radiation is necessary for Vitamin D production in our bodies. Despite the fact that we fail to perceive UV light, it has profound affects on the body.

Now comes the interesting part. Different animals perceive light at different wavelengths. Bees, for a classic example, don’t see much higher wavelengths than yellowish orange; however, they see UV levels considerably lower than humans can. Bees can naturally see things that we simply can't process.

The reason all this stuff has been on my mind for a couple of weeks is because a friend of mine has been telling me about this ghost who's living in his new house. Ghost activity is generally associated with immediate-climate change. Things usually get very cold, around the area a ghost "appears". This would mean a change in thermal-radiation level, and thus possibly a change in light level. I'm curious if some so-called paranormal entities aren't simply organisms operating at a light level we are incapable of perceiving. Psychologists tell us that our brains are only capable of interpreting 3% of the outside stimuli our senses feel and see. That's a lot of missed information. It seems completely possible to me that a species might have evolved over the last 4 billion years that would be undetectable by most animals' senses. Who hear hasn't felt something touching our leg or something and looked down and seen that nothing was there? Was this sensation merely a neuron spasm sending us false information, or was it possibly something more?

I'm wondering at what intensity something has to be to have a nerve send an electrical signal to the brain. I should find that out. Is it possible that host or fairies or aliens or whatever are constantly present, but simply at a perception level we're incapable of perceiving? It seems as good a conjecture as any I've heard to explain some of these phenomenons. Perhaps time and advancements in science will explain everything.

And yes, I do lie in bed, staring at the ceiling, thinking about stuff like this for hours on end at night. Thanks for asking.


So yes. That's my original post. What holes are there in this? Is my knowledge of light inaccurate? Let me know.
 
 
Dead Megatron
00:22 / 31.03.06
Yeah, interesting theory. But here's to add to the complexity.

A "ghost", or to be more broad, non-materialist life/thought forms are more than just "invisible", they are also, to a higher or lesses extend, depending of the amont of ectoplasm (is this term still in use?) "intangible" also. They move through solid matter. They move to places they are thinking about regardless of distance (or so says the legends). They adjust their own forms according to their perception of themselves. They do not age or reproduce as we do (again, in theory). It's not in ligth wavelength that they differ from us, it is in the entirely make-up of their "molecules" (ah, the limitations of language) So, if they have "evolved" as we did, the difference betwen them must be much more fundamental than just the wavelength they occupy in this dimension we exist (in the lack of a better term). They would not have any common ancestral with us. Or, it is not our perception of the outside world that needs to be amped up, but our perception of ourselves.

I'm posting this reflexively, is it making any sense?
 
 
Phex: Dorset Doom
05:52 / 31.03.06
Very good sense actually.
(btw Spyder, have you seen/read 'The Mothman Prophecies'? I've only seen the ((very weak)) film adaptation, but it advances an idea similar to yours. The book is probably better.)

Also, nitpicking: Are ghosts, fairies and aliens technically included in the 'cryptozoology' category? The field has always seemed more concerned with the more mundane lake monsters/sasquatch side of forteana.
 
 
*
07:35 / 31.03.06
I'm pretty sure they're not. Apparently ghostology is its own branch of parapsychology.
 
 
All Acting Regiment
18:14 / 31.03.06
Very interesting idea, Spyder, you've put into words something I've been trying to get my head round for a while. Just to clear something up: if something was giving off UV light, that means they're absorbing lots and lots of radiation, right, and so only a little bit's coming off, at the low end of the scale?

If so, it would suggest that there is a niche for lifeforms capable of absorbing very high radiation. What might this niche be? Perhaps something aerial, that lived in the upper atmosphere where radiation levels are highest?

Maddeningly, I can't find it now, but on Fortean Times.com there was a large forum article about planes that went up as normal and came down with no crew, or with surviving crew members traumatised, and the planes in either case would be physically unharmed with no bullet holes etc but would be a scene of total carnage inside. There was talk of huge aerial predators and articles and links of varying viability were put forward.

Thinking further afield, something that lived on the moon, where there's no atmosphere to protect from the UV rays? Because a surface that could absorb high levels of radiation makes for a sort of biological space-suit.
 
 
grant
19:55 / 31.03.06
Rods.

Personally, I think these are goofy, but an interesting possibility.
 
 
nameinuse
20:32 / 31.03.06
My personal take on this is slightly more conventional that most people who've posted thus far.

It's an interesting idea that there are non-carbon (or even non-matter) living beings of some description. However, I think the chances of us crossing paths with them and realising it are more remote than the amount of cryptozoology and paranormal reports we get would possibly allow for. It's a very easy way to answer questions that have difficult or unpalletable answers. The obvious explaination to the example of planes where the crew were slaughtered is that one of the crew did it. As with aliens, which are a remarkably convenient myth to explain the testing the military were doing of something they didn't want investigated further... can you imagine a better way of stopping an in-depth report of technology than saying "It certainly wasn't aliens"?

The limits of our perception are probably the key to this - our brain automatically filters a huge amount of information to present us with something that "makes sense". Sometimes it fails, and what we experience doesn't tally with the model that our brain has created for itself. When that happens, we try and fill in the gaps with things that feel most natural to us. Some people perceive their incongruities as aliens, some as cryptids (though there are certainly more animals than we know of, some probably reasonably large), some as faeries, and some probably think they're glitches in the matrix (if I'm not following a done-to-death meme with that one).

On a more scientific level, the mechanisms that all life we know of require to function can only happen in a relatively narrow window of temperature and conditions. Nothing that shares DNA (or even uses DNA) with us could live permanently in the upper atmosphere, the levels of free radicals and derived compounds, and high solar radiation, are too much. Having said that, if you'd asked a marine biologist thirty years go what lived around a hydrothermal vent on the ocean floor, they'd have told you nothing could. Now some people have theorised that's where life started.
 
 
Olulabelle
21:02 / 31.03.06
So if some animals perceive light at different wavelengths and if there were to be some kind of organism that visually existed for us at a frequency we can't see then that would very well explain why my dog occasionally gets the colliewobbles and appears tgo be barking at shadows, why the cat can freak out and race from the room for no apparent reason at all and why sometimes the parrot appears to scare 'himself' witless just by standing on his perch.

Is it all entirely justified because they can see something that I can't or am I just living in a house of insanity?
 
 
All Acting Regiment
23:57 / 31.03.06
Cats can pick up on smells and sounds we can't hear as well. Probnably rats in next door's garden. Obviously we shouldn't rule out mundane explanations, only wrong ones.
 
 
Lurid Archive
17:49 / 01.04.06
Guys....So what happens to the light that hits this ultraviolet (or whatever) object? It bounces off as part of the em spectrum we cant detect with our eyes, right? So imagine you are looking at a painting. Now the "creature" gets in the way. The light bounces off the creature at a wavelenghth you cant see. So how can you see the picture behind the creature? You can't. What you see is a black figure which outlines the creature.

You need invisible creatures to explain invisibility....camouflage, bees made of glass, etc, etc.

BTW, infrared is not heat, though hot objects do give out infrared radiation.
 
 
All Acting Regiment
08:08 / 02.04.06
It could be made of transparent material though, or something that was translucent to a level we were incapable of detecting as solid.

I'm getting quite scared now.
 
 
Spyder Todd 2008
15:46 / 03.04.06
Thanks for clearing up that crypto/ghostology thing. Legba and Lulu- you two are talking some of the stuff that inspired me to think about this. And Lurid, that was one of the things I was worried about with this idea, what happens when you’re looking right at something you can’t perceive correctly.

Nameinuse mentions something that I think is important, that when your brain is given something it can’t process “correctly” it does it’s best to fill in the gaps, causing “glitches” sometimes. It’s the way we would perceive something like this that interests me. Would it be just a blob of black or white, as Lurid said? Would we be able to make out features at all? Or would our mind just delete it from visual record, and fill in the best it could with the rest of the environment, as it does with optical blind spots?

I think there might be something to this idea, but I don’t know if my above hypothesis is anywhere close to whatever that “something” may be.
 
 
nameinuse
14:52 / 04.04.06
In making things out of not-properly-understood data, we're highly likely to anthropomorphise things. We've evolved to spot the two-eyes, nose, mouth arrangement and to take notice of it. We spot faces in lots of things, really easily, clouds, smoke (including a famous picture of Sept. 11th) and other inanimate things. It's all part of our heritage as highly social animals. It's impossible to generalise, though, as different people will make different connections, particularly if what they see is pretty sparse on the useful-information front in the first place.

For something to exists in the way you're talking about, all bets are off as to the mechanisms of its existence. As I mentioned before, DNA certainly wouldn't work, and without that kind of heredity it's possible evolution in the sense we understand it wouldn't apply either. The processes that govern how an animal works just don't apply to radiation the way they do to atoms.

It's certainly true animals perceive things we don't, but I think there are almost always more mundane exlpainations. They just have better hearing, smell, and less reasoning-away-strange-occurences than we do.
 
 
All Acting Regiment
22:33 / 04.04.06
On a more scientific level, the mechanisms that all life we know of require to function can only happen in a relatively narrow window of temperature and conditions. Nothing that shares DNA (or even uses DNA) with us could live permanently in the upper atmosphere, the levels of free radicals and derived compounds, and high solar radiation, are too much.

If it's not off-topic, is there an "upper limit" in our atmosphere for life as we know it? All this talk of the big sky creatures has got me excited again and I'm wondering if an organism might roost on top of mountains or if it might be so light as to just drift among the clouds.

From the link about "rods" above:

In 1896, for two days straight, people over Crawfordsville, Indiana saw a large, 30-foot thing in the sky they called a "Sky Monster" that moved "like a serpent swimming through the air." This was probably a rod. Other case histories included the dragons in caves and skies over London, the "ghost rockets" over Norway and Sweden, and many other historical "myths" that could have been rods.

So you've got people definitely seeing something (could just be mundane but it's something) in 1896. The reports with the planes make me wonder if perhaps we disturbed something. I really wish I could find that forum article now.

Could rains of fishes perhaps be something to do with these creature's feeding habits?
 
 
Woodsurfer
00:38 / 08.04.06
All this sounds like it belongs over in Temple but there are a growing number of things that straddle the boundary between physics and metaphysics these days. I have my view on some of these if you'll bear with me. If you roll your eyes, though, I won't be able to see you.

One of the tenets of metaphysics is that we share our physical reality with other "planes of existence" that are at a different "vibrational state" and hence, invisible to most of us most of the time. People with what is called "second sight" can see some of the entities of these other planes, sometimes as an overlay to normal sight. With some training (part of which involves a bit of suspension of disbelief) many people can perceive other-plane entities on the "inner plane" -- their "mind's eye". The entities are for all intents, figments of the imagination but they can sometimes provide information that would seem impossible to know though mere rationality and sometimes more than one person can get the same information and thus, verify what has been received. All of this seems to be completely in the realm of hogwash until you've experienced it and then suddenly it's not. Depending on the point of view, you've either gone a bit barmy -- or you have seen a deeper reality.

Ghosts. This is again 'orthodox' metaphysics: Our physical bodies are only a small part of the total being that comprises "us". Starting from the skin outward, we have numerous "subtle bodies" layered like Russian Matryoshka dolls. When we die, the innermost body (the physical) dies first, then each of the subtle bodies fades because it no longer has an energetic core to feed it. Under most circumstances, we eventually fade away completely (a matter of weeks) but in those cases where there is an energy source to sustain the "shell" body(s), it/they stick around the Earth plane and, under the right conditions, manifest to the living. An example of this is when someone is so grieved by the loss of a loved one that they pray for them not to be dead. The energy of their hope and prayer can be sufficient to animate a shell. (Source: Of Spirits by Ivo Dominguez, Jr.)
 
 
All Acting Regiment
22:35 / 08.04.06
So, these outer bodies. Do they work sort of like this...



...where character "a" has (like everyone else) a long sort of trail of space occupations which we normally don't see, as, for example, character "b" can only see "a" as he appeared in "b"'s timeframe (1974)- "b" can't see him in the slots preceding that.

Meanwhile, because character "c" can see ghosts, even though character "a" in his timeframe (1978) is dead from a surfeit of lampreys, character "c" can still see the preceding "a"'s in the positions they occupied before?

So "c" must have acessed some sort of different way of perceiving time and space to the "normal", right? I don't think that's too hard to accept, having tried Salvia.

So assuming I've understood your point, woodsurfer, you're saying that these outer bodies deal react to light differently- and so they might ordinarily be "invisible" in the way talked about at the start of the thread, but some people have a certain knack to see past this, where they can perceive the UV light?

What I want to know is why, then, don't they see the ghosts of everything that moves? Trees, animals, the earth moving in relation to them- wouldn't most mediums just be seeing a massive blur?
 
 
Woodsurfer
00:33 / 09.04.06
No, I don't think it's light. I'll have to drag out my copy of "Of Spirits" (cited above) and see what it has to say about this (or tap into other resources). I suspect that under certain circumstances we can see things that aren't "there" but which impinge on our reality nonetheless. Our senses are only gateways to our perceptions; not the perceptions themselves. Something that stimulates the same area of the brain through other means can produce the same effect as something "seen", "heard", etc. Researchers fooling around with electrodes in people's brains have demonstrated this.
 
 
Evil Scientist
07:22 / 28.04.06
This is an interesting thread, I must have missed it the first time round.

Whilst it's certainly possible to theorise organisms which don't live within our perceptual range there are a number of possible arguments one could make against them.

One being that although such organisms wouldn't be visible to the naked eye, they could be visualised using the wide variety of optical technologies which we use to view other parts of the EM spectrum. They would also, theoretically, show up on EM sensitive equipment would they not?

The concept of energy-based lifeforms is an interesting one. But I think I'd need a better explanation of how such an organism would exist. There must be a few out there in the big wide world?

Could rains of fishes perhaps be something to do with these creature's feeding habits?

Conventional theories for this phenomena is that the fish are pulled up into the sky in air twister and then fall back to Earth. This isn't to say that invisible upper-atmosphere organisms couldn't be responsible. But requiring flesh to survive suggests a more mundane biology, and I'm not sure why a creature that evolved to exist in the upper-atmosphere would require a food source from so far down.

The differences in air pressure, and the energetic requirements needed to go down to feed and then come back up would be rather large.
 
 
Hydra vs Leviathan
21:09 / 28.04.06
Ambrose Bierce had this idea with The Damned Thing.

[surprised no one else posted this actually - before i got registered, i was checking this thread every time i came on Barbelith, expecting someone on it to have mentioned that story...]

The point about creatures being perceptible to other forms of detection is a good one - but then, there are many examples of things that *have been* (apparently) detected in other ways, and yet oddly not actually seen - these mostly get explained away as neurological phenomena (sleep paralysis, deja vu/false memory type stuff, auditory processing glitches, muscle spasms fooling nerve endings, etc) on the part of the "observers", or eq
 
 
Hydra vs Leviathan
21:17 / 28.04.06
dunno why that posted halfway through me typing a word... accidental key press (think i might have hit Ctrl, if that does it)?

anyway:

...or equipment failures if it was picked up on radar or something, but i suppose it *could* be due to "invisible" creatures... Occam's Razor leads me to prefer the aforementioned possibilities tho...

also, if an animal was a colour that was invisible to us, wouldn't we at least see it as a sort of grey/colourless outline, blocking from us whatever was behind it? what do colourblind people see when they look at (say) an all-red object?

also, just realised... if these postulated creatures exist, we could refer to them as the Invisibles...
 
 
Evil Scientist
11:07 / 02.05.06
Drawing on sci-fi. The novel Telempath theorises about a species of intelligent plasmoids that live in the upper atmosphere. Invisible to the naked eye humanity only becomes aware of them when an accident raises the human sense of smell beyond that of a dog (good book BTW).

I'm curious how we would appear to these hypothetical creatures. Could they percieve us?

How and why would such a creature evolve? What evolutionary pressures would create such an elusive creature?

Assuming fish are a staple diet for them, perhaps this would (in part) explain the sensitivity of fish to EM fields?
 
 
Spyder Todd 2008
16:55 / 02.05.06
Assuming fish are a staple diet for them, perhaps this would (in part) explain the sensitivity of fish to EM fields?

Whozawha? Now that is interesting. Is there a more "standard" explanation for this? Clearly oceanology isn't my strongest suit, as I don't recall ever hearing about this.
 
 
alejandrodelloco
23:21 / 02.05.06
Speaking of referring to fiction and making this thread even more pseudoscientific, I am reminded of the shoggoths of H.P. Lovecraft's In the Mountains of Madness. Jus' Sayin.
 
 
Mirror
00:35 / 03.05.06
I know that others have mentioned things along these lines, but a body that absorbs radiation isn't invisible; it's simply black. There's actually a significant branch of optics and materials science devoted to trying to develop better black-body materials for use in spectrography.

As far as ghosts are concerned, I'd like to point out that there is good reason to believe that the perception of ghostly activity (as with alien abductions, etc.) has more to do with the varagies of human psychology than with the actual presence of beings undetectable by science or sexually fixated visitors from other worlds. Carl Sagan does a rather exhaustive job of dissecting paranormal experience in The Demon-Haunted World, which I highly recommend to those interested in pseudoscience.

In any case, if the beings-under-a-different-light hypothesis were correct, it should be trivial to devise an experiment to test its correctness. In fact, I'd be surprised if existing ghost detection attempts haven't used broad-spectrum em sensors as part of their apparatus.

One more thing - just because something absorbs radiation at infrared (or any) wavelengths, that doesn't mean that the surrounding area gets colder. After all, black objects don't have halos of cold air surrounding them. Or rather, if it did, it would be a perfect black body that did not reradiate any of the incident energy. Since energy is neither created or destroyed, such an entity would be continuously increasing in mass (via our old buddy, E=MC^2).
 
 
Jack Denfeld
06:39 / 03.05.06
I stopped reading about 2/3rds of the way down because it's late and you guys are scaring the shit out of me.
 
 
Henningjohnathan
20:38 / 05.05.06
i like a lot of this. First, the concept of ghosts is interesting, and it feels similar to the concept of the "dracos" or "reptilians" who are supposedly able to be invisible and intangible. Currently, I'm working on the idea of "shadow walkers" which are interdimensional creatures that devour souls. Essentially, if you look at the human body as a kind of egg for the development of a spirit, these creatures would be like serpents who crack open the egg and devour the fetal soul at death.

If ghosts have any sort of experience that is not simply "imaginary" - the result of cultural and psychological processes - I really doubt that they are the spirits of the dead. However, they do seem to have a lot in common with UFO, alien, angel, demon and other paranormal creatures seen all over the world. If these creatures are real, then they must be somehow recording the life experiences of people so that they can create these transmogrofications of them after death. Why they want us to think that there is a life after death is up to speculation of course but I tend to have a more Lovecraftian view of the whole thing. It's equally dreadful to think that there is some sort of creature out there that would prefer that we think it is part of an alien invasion.

In any case, what is more interesting is the first part of the hypothesis. We don't really "see" what we see. The process is that light, as photons, bounces off the object, enters our eyes through the pupil and hits our retina that then converts the photon into an electric charge that releases neurotransmitters delivering the impression of a color, shape, distance to the chemistry of our minds. Certainly, our minds are more chemical than electric. But isn't chemistry itself an electric process?

Reading the book THE ELEGANT UNIVERSE, I'm struck by how important light is to the conception of reality. That things like the perception of time is somehow set by the speed of light and that there is an invisible reality all around us composed of information that we can't directly perceive because of the complex filter of our senses. On top of that, what physically is doing the perceiving? Can there be things out there composed of completely different arrangements of matter that have perceptual powers?

There is an old myth that iron was anathema to the fairy folk. If they were some kind of electromagnetic assemblage composed mostly of electrons rather than atoms, perhaps the conductive and magnetic power of the metal would shortcircuit them or force them to shift to invisible and intangible wavelenghts.
 
 
Lionheart
18:38 / 06.05.06
Wow, you guys just realized this?

First off, let me point out that we can see a small part of the infra-red (or was it ultra0violet?) spectrum. We don't actually "see" it though due to our body heat emmiting radiation of the same spectrum. This might actually explain the "tunnel of light" seen by people who have a NDE (Near Death Experience). Their body heat basically isn't there anymroe and so they might start seeing infra-red light. That's just one of my theories though. It might be correct, might not.

Anyways,

So what you guys are basically saying is: "We see the visible light spectrum. What if there are beings through which the visible light spectrum radiation is transparent? Passes right through them?"

Well, let me point out something else that's been on my head for a while:

Lenses and prisms focus, refract, and reflect visible light radiotion, right? I can take a magnifying glass and focus visible light onto a small point thereby heating up a point and starting a fire.

So that glass magnifying glass focuses visible light radiation. What if you take other materials that refract and reflect other spectrums of electromagnetic radiation and fashion lenses and crap out of them? Metal antennaes are one example, but what if we take some other element, let's say carbon for example. What if we fashion a lens (saying "lens" is actually a simplification due to the different properties of different wavelengths of light.) out of carbon? What sort of light will it refract? What happens when you use that carbon lens to focus whatever onto a point?

Idea 2: Now what if those animals that we can't see touch us? Ideas were thrown up above that maybe they do and we ignore them and stuff. But what prevents me from falling through the chair that I'm sitting on? The molecules in the chair and the molecules in my body are so far apart that I can probably slide through my chair easily. But this doesn't happen. Instead, the chair supports my weight, our 2 physical bodies don't go right through each other. Why? I'm saying that whatever is the force that prevents me from going right through my chair is probably based on some frequency type thing (I once did research into this but it was years ago so I forget what the theories were.) And what if there are things that are of different frequencies? What if they just pass through objects that we consider to be "solid" as if the object was, basically, empty space?
Which also begs the question, what if they don't see the object that they're passing through?
Which begs the question: The solid ground that we're all on won't be solid for those creatures. The solid ground that they're on won't be solid for us. What if we're the Damned Things in their percieved world?

Also, I think that people should take infra-red and ultra-violet cameras and film fields and stuff with them. We don't know what we'll end up catching on film.
 
 
yami
00:51 / 10.05.06
We don't actually "see" it though due to our body heat emmiting radiation of the same spectrum. This might actually explain the "tunnel of light" seen by people who have a NDE (Near Death Experience). Their body heat basically isn't there anymroe and so they might start seeing infra-red light. That's just one of my theories though. It might be correct, might not.

Blackbody radiation from an object at human body temperature peaks in the middle infrared, not especially close to the range of human sight. Are you claiming that people are significantly non-blackbody radiators? That's interesting; I'd love to see your source.

Moreover, body heat takes a while to dissipate after death, which is itself a long process - not all cells stop working (and producing heat) at the same time. The "tunnel of light", as I understand it, happens in the very first stages of death when the body is still quite warm.

I'm saying that whatever is the force that prevents me from going right through my chair is probably based on some frequency type thing (I once did research into this but it was years ago so I forget what the theories were.)

"Some frequency type thing"... you mean, electromagnetism? Not all E&M fields propagate as waves, so it doesn't always make sense to talk about their frequency spectra. My solid-state physics isn't what it could be, but I'm not aware of any way in which it makes sense to say that we're "made of" a particular frequency distribution. Perhaps you could rephrase or refine your ideas here? I'm seriously having trouble understanding you.

What if we fashion a lens (saying "lens" is actually a simplification due to the different properties of different wavelengths of light.) out of carbon?

Actually, the term "lens" is fairly generic; people sometimes apply it to geologic structures that focus seismic waves, or to gravitational lensing, it can work for X-rays or whatever else you're into.

Carbon is actually a pretty cool thing to think about in this regard - diamonds in particular are transparent to X-rays as well as visible light. Which means that you can squeeze materials to enormous pressures between a couple of diamonds (cut and polished exactly the same as what you'd put in an engagement ring, except for the bottom tip) and then use X-ray diffraction techniques to study what's inside. And I know there are imaging techniques that take advantage of -ray refraction in various materials, with medical and engineering applications iirc, but don't know details off the top of my head.
 
 
Mirror
01:04 / 10.05.06
Carbon is actually a pretty cool thing to think about in this regard - diamonds in particular are transparent to X-rays as well as visible light. Which means that you can squeeze materials to enormous pressures between a couple of diamonds (cut and polished exactly the same as what you'd put in an engagement ring, except for the bottom tip) and then use X-ray diffraction techniques to study what's inside.

OT, but in my undergraduate career as a geology student, my mentoring professor was heavily into X-ray crystallography and we did a bunch of work with diamond-anvil cells exactly like you're describing to determine what happens to mineral assemblages at mantle pressures. The most interesting thing I was involved with was designing a piece of experimental apparatus to use the ruby fluorescence spectra to determine what the pressure was inside the cell. Ruby fluoresces when you hit it with an argon-ion laser and the wavelength of the fluorescence peaks varies in direct proportion to the compression of the crystal lattice, meaning that you can get quite exact measurements of pressure this way.

We ended up doing a lot of work on hydrous mineral phases at mantle pressures, and determined that there is likely something like 7 oceans worth of water bound up in hydrous minerals in the mantle.

It was always funny to think about the fact that there were probably 6-8 1+ caret, optically flawless diamonds sitting in a drawer in a lab that was left unlocked a good portion of the time.
 
 
Dead Megatron
10:29 / 10.05.06
Mirror, you make geology sound very cool.
 
 
Quantum
14:59 / 10.05.06
Geology *is* cool, what other subject expects you to lick rocks in your finals?

Re: The Damned Thing, also have a look at 'The Color Out Of Space' by Lovecraft, relevant AND spooky.

Re: crazy science idea, there's a large amount of fundamental misunderstandings going on in this thread I think, (here in no order and with no criticism intended of posters);

if something was giving off UV light, that means they're absorbing lots and lots of radiation, right, and so only a little bit's coming off, at the low end of the scale?
No, it doesn't, UV light is the top of the spectrum and has nothing to do with absorbing radiation

let me point out that we can see a small part of the infra-red (or was it ultra0violet?) spectrum. We don't actually "see" it though due to our body heat emmiting radiation of the same spectrum
It's UV, not IR so our body heat is irrelevant and anyway we would see our own IR rad even if it were true

What happens when you use that carbon lens to focus whatever onto a point?
Nothing. What might you be focussing? EM radiation like Radio, X-rays, etc? Depending on the wavelength you'd need different size 'lenses', made of different materials, and most of them that are possible we already have. Not lenses though, transmitters and receivers (a satellite dish for example) and relay stations etc. How do you think mobile phones work?

I'm saying that whatever is the force that prevents me from going right through my chair is probably based on some frequency type thing
What? Physical objects don't occupy the same space because of the nature of matter (in my poor understanding it's the repulsion of the negatively-charged electron shells of the atoms forming the molecules forming the thing), I don't think some frequency-type-thing is the culprit.

So, really, it's a bit crazy. Sorry.
 
 
grant
18:27 / 10.05.06
For Damned Things, see also Guy de Maupassant's The Horla.

For invisible beings that surround us all the time, see microbes (you'll need a microscope). Interesting to think if they could have a macro-effect (like fish rain) by forming large, temporary colonies.

Not likely, but interesting.
 
 
Henningjohnathan
22:20 / 11.05.06
I'm saying that whatever is the force that prevents me from going right through my chair is probably based on some frequency type thing

What? Physical objects don't occupy the same space because of the nature of matter (in my poor understanding it's the repulsion of the negatively-charged electron shells of the atoms forming the molecules forming the thing), I don't think some frequency-type-thing is the culprit.

So, really, it's a bit crazy. Sorry.


I'm probably not going to explain this very well, but the reason that your hand doesn't pass through a wall is not because your atoms touch, but because your atoms can't touch due to the electromagnetic forces their particles generate. Essentially, the electrons and protons generate positive and negative fields that repel the positives and negatives in other atoms. So what you are actually feeling is not the atoms of the wall but the barrier of their fields repelling the fields of your body's atoms. I'd suppose these fields have a wave-like frequency, but I don't think it would be consistent throughout the entire material (body or wall).


For invisible beings that surround us all the time, see microbes (you'll need a microscope). Interesting to think if they could have a macro-effect (like fish rain) by forming large, temporary colonies.

Not likely, but interesting.

It is very interesting if you consider how certain paranormal phenomenon is associated with the growth of fungus. Faerie and UFO's are both associated with fungal rings. It is interesting to think that this phenomenon could have been crucial to the development of these "microbal colonies" for the beginning of multicellular life. After all, all animals are essentially a cooperative collection of millions and millions of very specialized cells.
 
 
yami
23:45 / 11.05.06
For invisible beings that surround us all the time, see microbes (you'll need a microscope). Interesting to think if they could have a macro-effect (like fish rain) by forming large, temporary colonies.

More like slime molds than fish rain, but yeah.
 
 
Quantum
00:14 / 12.05.06
Essentially, the electrons and protons generate positive and negative fields that repel the positives and negatives in other atoms.

But, uh, the protons are in the nucleus with the neutrons. So it's the electrons, forming the outside or 'shell' of the atom, and being negatively charged, that repel each other and thus keep atoms seperate. Molecules are formed of collections of atoms bound together by interactions between their electrons, not their nuclei. So, when I wrote "the repulsion of the negatively-charged electron shells of the atoms forming the molecules forming the thing" that was kind of what I meant.

And yes, they have a frequency, because they have wave-like properties as well as particle-like properties. In fact that's why there are distinct orbits around a nucleus, because they are all whole multiples of the wavelength of the electron, and when an electron drops one orbit closer to the nucleus it gives off a quanta or small packet of energy, which is where the word 'Quantum' comes from...

/atomic trivia. Sorry, it's late
 
  

Page: (1)2

 
  
Add Your Reply