Does A Prism Imply The Existence Of An Aether Field

munty13

Registered Senior Member
I'm trying to imagine what happens to light as it passes through a prism. It is thought that the speed of light 'slows down' inside the prism. Perhaps light does not slow down at all. I think this could be an illusion that infers the existence of an aether field.

The visible spectrum begins with the shorter wavelengths of violet at 400 nm. So we are saying that violet light travels 400 billionths of a meter, about 400 million million times a second (400 terahertz). The wavelength of light is inversely proportional to frequency.

Current thinking is that upon entering a new medium (such as glass or water from air) the speed and wavelength of light is reduced, although the frequency remains unaltered. The speed of light travelling through window glass is around 120,000 miles per second, and I shall use this same speed for the light passing through the prism. 120,000 miles per second is two thirds the speed of light in a vacuum. If the frequency remains at 400 terahertz, then the slower moving violet light shall form wavelengths which are one third shorter - that's something like 266 nm; but this is the size of shortwave UV light and it's outside the visible spectrum!

The angles of refraction infer that the light which appears as violet inside the prism, is the exact same which emerges once again into the medium of the air. The violet light, once outside the prism, is restored to its normal speed (around 180,000 miles per second) - but with no obvious change in its wavelength or frequency.

If the wavelength and frequency of the light has remained the same, then it must be the velocity at which the wave propagates that has changed. A change in velocity would have to be enforced by a change in the speed of light, but then, it has been shown that the speed of light does not actually differ inside the prism. I think an illusion is taking place that makes it appear as if light slows down. Rather than the speed of light slowing down, perhaps it is the medium through which light travels that is being stretched.

Science dictates that the mechanism by which a light wave is transported through a medium occurs in a manner which is similar to the way that any other wave is transported - by particle -to -particle interaction.

I struggle with this current theory. Light travels just fine through a vacuum without being passed from atom to atom. Is it possible that light is actually propagating through a medium that is inside the vacuum : the aether field? If light travels through a vacuum, why would it choose to switch travel plans in a medium (such as glass or water), and instead travel from atom to vibrating atom? What illusion is taking place that makes it appear as if light is slowing down inside the prism? One possible explanation is that if the speed of light does not change inside the prism, then it is the aether field which is being stretched.

I should explain this next bit with a diagram, but I plain don't know how to, so please bear with me. Draw a U-shape. Now draw a triangle shape with the U in the centre. The triangle is your prism. A simple line to denote white light moving from outside to inside the prism is enough. Once inside, the white light is dispersed, so we shall draw frantic shortwave frequencies to denote the violet end of the spectrum - these travel not in a straight line through the prism, but follow the shape of the U - until you are out the other side of the prism. Okay, so next-up is red light moving through the prism and following the shape of the U. Red has a longer wavelength, and lower frequency than violet, and it travels much faster around the U than the higher frequencies of violet.

The 'U' represents the aether field. I am proposing that inside the prism the aether field is being distorted. This would explain why the shorter wavelengths of violet appear to travel faster inside the prism than the longer wavelengths of red. It's an illusion. Violet does not travel faster than red, it simply takes longer to cover the same distance. It would also imply that the higher frequencies are more affected by a distortion in the aether field. Perhaps the prism has created a 'cold energy sink' in the aether field for all the world to see.
 
If light traveled along a path other than "straight" through a prism it would be easy to determine by parrying down the edges of the prism until the light escaped. Right?

I've always envisioned prisms as a front of horrible weather and the incoming light as a military troop of many soldiers marching abreast toward it. The change in the soldier's formation (i.e. their marching direction) is determined by the angle between the soldier's front line and the weather's front. That probably doesn't help elucidate anything but as long as we're sharing opinions.... :)
 
munty13:

Can you suggest an experimental test that would distinguish your aether theory from currently accepted theories of light propagation?
 
This is foolishness and should be cesspooled immediately.

Once again, the OP attempts to challenge ALL the professional physicists in the entire world as well as millions and millions of hours of experimental AND operational data - without ONE having shown any remote need for "aether."

Seriously - this kind of junk is disgusting and an insult to any real scientist!!
 
well wait a minute, Read-Only, while you are most likely justified in your skepticism I feel your attitude is a bit anti-scientific. Maybe you've butt heads with more crack pots than I have but I still think we should encourage thinking outside of the box.
 
well wait a minute, Read-Only, while you are most likely justified in your skepticism I feel your attitude is a bit anti-scientific. Maybe you've butt heads with more crack pots than I have but I still think we should encourage thinking outside of the box.

I've no problem at all with thinking outside the box. But when the box has been signed, sealed and delivered without one single instance where an aether field was needed or even implied IS pure crackpottery.

Imagination and research IS warrented in areas where there is question or doubt. But that simply is not the case in this instance.;)
 
Point taken. As soon as the author shows evidence of being undeterred by logic, reason, and lab results then I will jump on the dog pile myself. :D
 
munty13:

Can you suggest an experimental test that would distinguish your aether theory from currently accepted theories of light propagation?

Unfortunately, I am not a physicist. I would love nothing more than a laboratory in my basement. I am, perhaps, something more of a philosopher. But I am interested to know why we are taught that the shorter wavelengths of violet light travel faster than the longer wavelengths of red light inside a prism. I've only done a little research, but as yet, no-one appears to understand why????
 
Last edited:
Munty13: Well the way I understand it light travels through a vacuum as a wave unless it is otherwise hampered. When it hits a transparent medium such as a piece of glass it actually continues to move at the "speed of light" but what happens along the way is that the photons get absorbed and later re-emitted by the atoms in the medium. The light isn't switching its mode of transportation, its simply getting temporarily delayed by all the atoms in its way. The length of time each photon remains with an atom before getting re-emitted depends upon the characteristics of the atom. Some atoms apparently absorb and re-emit all energies of light at the same rate while others are variable with the wavelength.
 
But I am interested to know why we are taught that the shorter wavelengths of violet light travel faster than the longer wavelengths of red light inside a prism. I've only done a little research, but as yet, no-one appears to understand why????

Yes, we do understand why, although the reason is very cleverly concealed inside physics textbooks, so until you read one, you'll never learn the secret.
 
Yes, we do understand why, although the reason is very cleverly concealed inside physics textbooks, so until you read one, you'll never learn the secret.

Why is it that in a rainbow, violet light travels the slowest inside the rainbow? It shows the violet light is moving slower than the red light. The theory of why violet moves faster in a prism, should also be applied to rainbows - right? It's the exact same mechanism. Why do the results not tally up? Why is it one rule for a prism, and another for a rainbow?



http://ocean1025.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/rainbow-too.jpg
 
How do you come by this notion?

A rainbow is actually a circle, is it not? I remember once on a flight, I managed to see a rainbow, formed as a perfect circle, floating in the clouds. (I've also passed only ten feet away from a rainbow as it emerged from the ground. No pot of gold though - unless someone else had beaten me too it).

If you draw a circle, and then travel its circumference, as the colors of the visible spectrum do, then the color nearest the circumference has travelled the shortest distance. This color, on a rainbow, happens to be violet. The color red is the color furthest away, it has the longest distance to travel.

A rainbow forms as you would expect it to, in keeping with the ratio of EMR frequencies. In a prism though, this is turned upside down. The violet light travels the longest distance. If the mechanism for a rainbow and a prism are the same, why do we find this discrepancy?
 
A rainbow is actually a circle, is it not? I remember once on a flight, I managed to see a rainbow, formed as a perfect circle, floating in the clouds. (I've also passed only ten feet away from a rainbow as it emerged from the ground. No pot of gold though - unless someone else had beaten me too it).

If you draw a circle, and then travel its circumference, as the colors of the visible spectrum do, then the color nearest the circumference has travelled the shortest distance. This color, on a rainbow, happens to be violet. The color red is the color furthest away, it has the longest distance to travel.

A rainbow forms as you would expect it to, in keeping with the ratio of EMR frequencies. In a prism though, this is turned upside down. The violet light travels the longest distance. If the mechanism for a rainbow and a prism are the same, why do we find this discrepancy?

Think about this:

How do we see the colours of the rainbow, if they are in fact travelling around in a circle?
 
No, he's saying that the light doesn't travel in a circle "around" a rainbow. It travels from the sun, refracts through the misty air and goes into our eyes. If the thread's author believes otherwise then I can understand why he (and you?) also believes that light curves through a prism. Interesting but not true.
 
A rainbow is actually a circle, is it not?

If you draw a circle, and then travel its circumference, as the colors of the visible spectrum do, then the color nearest the circumference has travelled the shortest distance.

OK, I see it's quite simple, you just don't understand some very basic physics.

Please go read some textbooks, as you need to understand the fundamentals before trying to go further.

The light does not travel in a circle in a rainbow. You see it because the light ends up being focussed onto your retina, the lights moves towards _you_ , how else do you think you see things?
 
OK, I see it's quite simple, you just don't understand some very basic physics.

Please go read some textbooks, as you need to understand the fundamentals before trying to go further.

The light does not travel in a circle in a rainbow. You see it because the light ends up being focussed onto your retina, the lights moves towards _you_ , how else do you think you see things?

Light travels through a prism does it not? We do not describe it simply as light moving towards my eye. We observe the journey that the light is making through the prism. It is this observation of the journey which reaches my eye.
I am implying that this is the exact same way we observe a rainbow.

In a rainbow, we are observing the colors of the visible spectrum as they make a journey around a circle. Surely, the circle has been magnified by a lens, and not created by one?
 
I thought Michelson and Morely went through this ?

They did. And quite carefully and precisely, too. But not that munty13 would know anything about it because he appears far too lazy to do any studying. [heavy sigh]

In fact, I've come to realize that the "13" in his name is probably his age - meaning that he's FAR to young to even have come across any physics in school yet. Instead, he's just making this up as he goes. Pitiful, really.
 
Back
Top