Plasma Theory of Redshift and Deflection of Light

Posted - 06 Mar 2006 : 12:26:06

quote:Originally posted by Thomas

I have already mentioned in a different thread my theory for the Redshift of Galaxies, which essentially suggests that the light waves are stretched by the electric 'micro'field due to the charges in intergalactic space...

Although the suggested mechanism is to a certain degree still somewhat speculative (as it is not based on currently known effects)..,

Any comments on this are welcome.

The study of light-matter interactions is named spectroscopy. The CREIL effect is an ordinary spectroscopic effect which shifts the frequencies.

Posted - 13 Mar 2006 : 02:52:09

quote:Originally posted by Thomas

has the CREIL mechanism then be confirmed for atom densities less than 1o^12 cm^-3? The point is that for densities such that the average distance between the scatterers is less than the wavelength, one should not expect any phase-coherent scattering.

Coherent optics works at any density provided that the "column density" is sufficient. To see this, you can look at the theory of the coherent interactions and zoom it so that the density decreases. Experimentally, you have the example of the refraction which works at the level of the satellites...

Posted - 15 Mar 2006 : 04:12:53

quote:Originally posted by Thomas

I don't think that you will observe refraction in the visible region of the spectrum at satellite level.

Yes, directly not, but if the scattering was incoherent, a blur of the images would be observed.

quote: The density of the atmosphere at let's say a height of 1000 km is just about 10^6 cm^-3. Phase-coherent effects at this height should thus require a wavelength of at least 10^-2 cm (which is in the far infrared).

You must look at the mechanism of the coherent scattering: individually, each molecule radiates a scattered field in all directions (almost), but the interference of the fields destroys them in all directions, forward and backwards, except in the direction of the exciting field, supposing that there are no fluctuations producing an incoherent scattering (Rayleigh or Raman).

An important incoherent scattering requires a high column density (compare the blue of the sky with the Sun)

Posted - 15 Mar 2006 : 08:56:38

quote:Originally posted by Thomas

At ground level, the average distance between two molecules is 1/250 of the wavelength at 5000 A, so the relative statistical variance is 1/sqrt(250)=6*10^-2. Now the Fraunhofer criterion for a perfectly smooth surface (i.e. perfectly coherent scattering) says that the variance has to be less than 1/32 of the wavelength.

I had not understood your error: you suppose that the molecules are synchronous while they are only if they are on a considered wave surface. Therefore, to apply Fraunhofer criterion, you must add the path from a wave surface to the molecules to the path from the molecule to an other wave surface. Only the fluctuations of density break the coherence adding the incoherent Rayleigh scattering to the coherent (which is at the origin of the refraction).

The coherent Raman effect is weak because the sum of these paths is not constant, so that the coherence is destroyed unless the observation is done using a small laser beam, for scattered light propagating along a convenient cone which does not exist for all frequencies .

Posted - 18 Mar 2006 : 07:18:25

quote:Originally posted by Thomas

I don't know why you think the Fraunhofer criterion can not be applied here. The situation of a randomly un-smooth surface should be exactly identical to the scattering of randomly distributed air molecules. In both cases you will have a phase-incoherent reflection/scattering if the wavelength is smaller than the size of the irregularities, but phase-coherent scattering/reflection if the wavelength is larger.

Fraunhofer criterion applies on the wave surfaces, but not easily: you have a lot (almost infinite) of wave surfaces on which there are scattering molecules which perturb locally the wave surface, but the addition of the perturbations for all wave surfaces statistically cancels.

To take into account ALL scattering molecules whose radiated field arrives to the observation system, it is much easier to add all scattered fields to the direct field at the point of observation or close to it. Thus, in the focal plane of the telescope looking at a star, you have a point where all scattered paths are equal, while at a small distance, just out of the image, they differ of a fraction of wavelength. With photocells, this fraction is shorter than with Fraunhofer criterion. A smooth decrease of the intensity from the centre of the image requires a large number of scattering molecules, but does not depend on their distances.