The Jimmerson Spiral

omg, everybody knows, that light goes in a straight line...

Shine a laser pointer at a mirror and then an hero.

Shine a laser pointer at a mirror and then an hero.

and? it still goes in a straight line...

Quote from: Waste of Mind on May 15, 2009, 05:09:39 AM

Shine a laser pointer at a mirror and then an hero.

and? it still goes in a straight line...

No. It follows the Jimmerson Wave Dynamic.

Quote from: Waste of Mind on May 15, 2009, 05:09:39 AM

Shine a laser pointer at a mirror and then an hero.

and? it still goes in a straight line...

Actually, it will go in a > shape.

Quote from: Waste of Mind on May 15, 2009, 05:09:39 AM

Shine a laser pointer at a mirror and then an hero.

and? it still goes in a straight line...

It travels in what I call a light tube. Light appears to be traveling in a straight line, yet it is not in actuality. Light doesn't appear to be anything, mind you, if there is no way to perceive it. The eye does not perceive the world directly, but in its own special way.

prove it..

The first part or the last part?

What you're describing is light traveling sinusoidally in the xy-plane, and longitudinally along the z-axis. It's trajectory can be somewhat modeled as  u(x(t),y(t),z(t)) = <sin(t),cos(t),t>. There I did most of the math for you, doing the actual experiment should be incredibly easy. And if you prove that light travels in such a manner you will be rich and famous beyond your imagination. Now go and publish your work in a peer reviewed journal, and wait for the Nobel prizes to pour in.

Unless, of course, you're speaking out of your ass and know nothing about physics, and instead of looking at the evidence and coming to a conclusion, you've already come to a conclusion and now you're doing fantastic mental and logical gymnastics to support your conclusion. How's that, am I in the ballpark?

First of all, physics does not describe nature.

Second of all, I'm interested in your equation, but you will have to explain it too me more plainly. I am not well trained mathematics.

How does the spiral say anything for light O.o im so confused like light now twists into a slinky kinda thing :O try get a bunch of cars and shove in the dark so your light thing can not be involved at this moment stack them all on top of each other perfectly than poke a hole in the same spot on all than shine a light through the card holes how can the spiral light fit through the holes since from waht i see the spiral of light cannont be controled and it could hit the side of the card O.o?? so try it a different paces away or half paces and stuff I mean the spiral of light makes no sense to me at all like how does taht create the FE to seem like an RE when ships sail away?

damn, even physics is in on the conspiracy against us!

It is not unusual for science to be corrected about physical phenomena. If you don't contest ideas of your time and follow it blindly, you are being unscientific. Perhaps you need to self examine your life....

that looks like circularly polarized light 


i know its not supposed to be, but i cant be the only one who thought of that when i saw it!


EDIT:  im not exactly sure what you mean by "bendy" light though, doesnt light from the sun already bend in both the RE and the FE theory?

Bendy light behaves radically different than gravitational lensing.

oh, im not talknig about gravitational lensing, light naturally bends in the earth's atmosphere, especially when viewed from a large height due to the varing refractive index from the varing density of air. (the slow transition of vacuum -> ground level pressure)

Like the light from the sun, once it hits the atmosphere bends continously till it hits the ground.  Which is your primary source of light, and then it would bend again if you were high up. (high enough anyway).  It probaby wont bend with the same curvature as when it came from the sun though.

Light doesn't bend in the way you spoke of. Light travels straight, gets absorbed by an atom, and then is shot straight out in another direction. It just appears to bend. Bendy light and the Jimmerson Spiral postulates that light does physically bend.

"Bendy light" is priceless. All of these FE "theories" actually "hurt" my brain (go ahead and comment on that one, I'm a big boy). You guys are SO out of touch with reality it is truly amazing. I live in Massachusetts and would LOVE to meet one of you FErs just to make sure you actually believe this nonsense (and I do have my doubts).

It is my opinion that you must belittle people to feel smart. You have not contributed to anything that has been said before in this thread. Therefore you have displayed little evidence of intelligence or basic comprehension skills. Even your taunts are garbage in themselves. You are not even worth reading. If you are so smart, why don't you go and do smart things instead of making fun of strangers about things that you don't understand on the internet?

*Ahem*
Anyways with that said, lets get this thread back on topic, please.

I can't insult you if you do not believe this "theory", however, I can't help but to make fun of your "theory". Why don't you do something important instead of ranting and raving about what you really do not believe. This "theory" is IMPOSSIBLE to believe. Oh sure you can lie and get under other people's skin but not mine. I actually like watching you idiots rankle the REers. As to my intelligence I need not prove it to you. I'm fine with it.  But do keep up the fake, it's impressive.

You did a little better than most trolls by stating there is a theory you disagree with, but other than that you are just the same as the other mindless trolls. Think hard my friend, show you have intelligence by talking about something that I actually said that you disagree with.

I'll help you out:
"I don't think light actually travels in spirals ... [take it from there]"

First of all, physics does not describe nature.

This is where I must take the gravest offense with you, respectfully, of course. Physics is almost by definition the study and science which describes (or at least attempts to describe) reality. I used the disclaimer "attempts to" solely because physics isn't a complete and perfect science (nor does one exist) and never will be.

Second of all, I'm interested in your equation, but you will have to explain it too me more plainly. I am not well trained mathematics.

No matter, the math isn't as important as empirical evidence (the equation was just a mathematical way of describing the kind of spiral you drew). If you truly believe this is how light behaves, and I'm not convinced that this is the case, there's a simple way to test this with minimal scientific training. All you need is a laser, a photoelectric plate (most metals would do given that the next item is sensitive enough) and an ammeter.

Shine a laser or some other source of coherent light waves parallel to the ground and place the photoelectric plate flat and parallel to the ground. If light does behave in the manner that you described, some of it the waves ought to hit the plate while moving parallel to the ground and produce a current which your ammeter will detect. Make sure to do this in a dark room! Let us know how it turns out.

Quote from: grogberries on May 18, 2009, 10:49:28 PM

First of all, physics does not describe nature.

This is where I must take the gravest offense with you, respectfully, of course. Physics is almost by definition the study and science which describes (or at least attempts to describe) reality. I used the disclaimer "attempts to" solely because physics isn't a complete and perfect science (nor does one exist) and never will be.

I am appalled at how it took such a long time for somebody to catch this humongous mistake. Anyone who thinks Physics does not describe nature should renounce Science altogether.

Physics is the very basis of Science. All other branches of Science are based on Physics and study a subject beyond what current Physics knowledge explains, but never, ever contradict Physics. Someday we might understand in detail how the physical forces interact during a thought process, or during a DNA duplication process. But the day someone demonstrates that something happens during those processes that is not explained by current Physics, both disciplines will undergo a complete revolution.

Humans can only describe the things we make. There is no way we can have an understanding of nature. And I define things by nature as a thing that self generates itself. Science can provide practical applications of studying nature, but it can never fully describe reality.

I find it hard to understand the  JS theory. It might just be your MS paint drawing, or the unexplainable idea of the theory itself.
The questions I find myself asking are
why would the light spiral? what makes this happen? and what would make portions of the spiral invisable to the human eye? is it only visible light that spirals?

You can't impose your perception of a concept on the rest of the population.

Humans can only describe the things we make. There is no way we can have an understanding of nature. And I define things by nature as a thing that self generates itself. Science can provide practical applications of studying nature, but it can never fully describe reality.

Your definition of nature may be unique and I don't see what relevance it has to this topic.

If you want descriptions of reality I can give you any number of chemical reactions in every day life which are fully describable.

Humans can only describe the things we make. There is no way we can have an understanding of nature. And I define things by nature as a thing that self generates itself. Science can provide practical applications of studying nature, but it can never fully describe reality.

I agree with Dyno. The previous paragraph has so much that is wrong that it deserves its own thread, and it has no function here except for the obfuscation of a thread that just makes no sense.

Can you provide some more mathematics for this? I would like to know at what rate different light frequencies oscillate in accordance with the Jimmerson Spiral and how they disentangle to provide coherent sensory perception, as well as how light from thousands of miles away can continue being perceived as -well- as bending to provide the illusion of a round world.

I'm sure if I collaborated with someone who is adept in mathematics I could form a mathematical model. As of now it is just a mere illustration. But this should not discredit it. Common theory today says many puzzling and conflicting definitions of light. It is particle and wave. It is energy. But what is energy? The ability to do stuff. Hardly a solid foundation to stand on. Light is a particle wave that has the ability to do stuff. We can calculate it but that really doesn't help our understanding of light much at all. It sounds like light needs more thinking. I am trying to do that. I do not claim to solve all the mysteries of light.

"Bendy light" is priceless. All of these FE "theories" actually "hurt" my brain (go ahead and comment on that one, I'm a big boy). You guys are SO out of touch with reality it is truly amazing. I live in Massachusetts and would LOVE to meet one of you FErs just to make sure you actually believe this nonsense (and I do have my doubts).

One of the main FE'ers of this site told me that the members here mainly consist of non-believers just trying to see how far they can go with the theory.  I'd suggest you find a site consisting mostly of believers.  By the way, this thread is literally a joke.  I give you brownie points, Grog.

If you want to talk with intelligent FE believers, I can only recommend you check out theflatearthsociety.net. They're actually different forums, not sure if you realised; the main difference is that the .ORG is basically infested with globularist pretenders. I don't think there's a single active .ORG member who believes the Earth is flat. All the true believers have migrated to the .NET site.

- James McIntyre

Edit:No, I did not twist this as I easily could have done.  If a screen shot of the pm is requested, I'll post it.

Edit: Robosteve is.. insanely smart, so I have no clue as to his actual beliefs.