RE: c^2 and Longitudinal Waves

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "Steve Greenfield by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <alienrelics-at-yahoo-dot-com>

I think we're getting -way- OT for the Tesla Coil
list. I'd love to continue this discussion in a place
where it is on topic. How about the Mad Scientist
list?

http://groups.yahoo-dot-com/group/mad_scientist/

Steve Greenfield

--- Tesla list <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com> wrote:
> Original poster: "David Thomson by way of Terry
> Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <dave-at-volantis-dot-org>
> 
> >But by the formula you show, that is ~434 billion
> square miles. How can
> 186,000**2 equal 4*Pi*(186,000**2)?
> 
> It can't.  What c^2 is saying is that light does not
> radiate in all
> directions as a sphere.  It radiates in longitudinal
> waves.  We know this by
> observing the behavior of electrons in a conductor. 
> There is a magnetic
> field perpendicular to the conductor that opposes
> the flow of current.
> Light behaves in a similar way.  There is a field
> perpendicular to the flow
> of light that opposes the flow of light.  This is
> probably what causes gamma
> ray bursts in exploding stars.  It has been reported
> by Mr. Matthews, one of
> Tesla's assistants, that Tesla invented a device
> that could oppose light and
> make any given area be dark, even in the middle of a
> sunny afternoon.  But
> this is not a discussion for this list.
> 
> What c^2 is saying is that light, and all
> electromagnetic radiation,
> radiates as a flat disc.  This is consistent with
> lasers emitting polarized
> light.  It is also consistent with dipole antenna
> theory.
> 
> >A supernova explosion may form a flat disk -of-
> -ejecta-, which is another
> thing entirely.
> 
> But it's not different.  Why would an explosion in
> space send all the ejecta
> in a flat disc?  "Common sense" would tell us the
> ejecta in space should
> radiate like a sphere.  But it doesn't.  There are
> forces acting on the
> ejecta that direct its movement into a defined
> space.
> 
> >This would require the speed of light to vary
> according to direction.
> 
> What it requires is that light should behave just as
> all electromagnetic
> radiation does.  It requires that perpendicular to
> the direction of light
> there is a field that opposes it.  It makes perfect
> sense.
> 
> Dave
> 
> 
>