How we could detect and register DC EM waves with wavelengh larger than 10 exp +10 meters?
Is it theoretically and practically possible?
If yes, how we can do it?
Established Member
How we could detect and register DC EM waves with wavelengh larger than 10 exp +10 meters?
Is it theoretically and practically possible?
If yes, how we can do it?
Established Member
Try rephrasing your question. DC, by definition, has no wavelength. Radios exist, however, that operate below 30 hertz.
Uh-oh. Here come the black suit guys again.
Regards, John M.
I'm not a hardnosed mainstreamer; I just like the observations, theories, predictions, and results to match.
"Mainstream isn’t a faith system. It is a verified body of work that must be taken into account if you wish to add to that body of work, or if you want to change the conclusions of that body of work." - korjik
Established Member
Well, as you know DC EM waves reffers to waves with very long wavelengh... and 10 exp + 10 meters I think that is very long.
But never mind, ... to be or not to be DC... it is possible to detect and register EM waves of wavelengh larger than 10 exp +10 meters?
If it is possible...How we could do it?
Last edited by dapifo; 2012-Jul-04 at 11:33 PM.
Established Member
Escus me, but DC reffers to very large EM waves...and I understand tha 10 exp +10 meters i really very large....
But doesn´t matter, do you know if it is possible to detect EM waves with waveslengh larger than 10 exp +10 meters?
If yes, please how we could do it?
Established Member
Are you saying 10^10 meters? 10,000,000,000? If so, I would say no.Originally Posted by dapifo
And your language must be exact. DC refers commonly to 'direct current'. It does not refer to 'long wavelength'. DC has no wavelength, by definition.
I'm not a hardnosed mainstreamer; I just like the observations, theories, predictions, and results to match.
"Mainstream isn’t a faith system. It is a verified body of work that must be taken into account if you wish to add to that body of work, or if you want to change the conclusions of that body of work." - korjik
Order of Kilopi
DC, by definition, refers to current with a frequency of 0 Hz. A wavelength of 10^10 m would be a frequency of 30 mHz, which is very low. One would probably detect it with something like a multimeter attached to a strip chart recorder.
Established Member
And DC would have an infinite wavelength. Just checking to see if anyone was awake. Not sure about your frequency claim. It's off to Wiki.
Regards, John M.
I'm not a hardnosed mainstreamer; I just like the observations, theories, predictions, and results to match.
"Mainstream isn’t a faith system. It is a verified body of work that must be taken into account if you wish to add to that body of work, or if you want to change the conclusions of that body of work." - korjik
Order of Kilopi
As others said, there's no such thing as a "DC EM wave". The terminology is wrong on multiple levels...the use of "DC" for 0 Hz can be excused as common although technically incorrect terminology, but a static field is not a propagating wave, and if there's a wavelength, it's not 0 Hz and not a static field.
But anyway, you're talking about an EM wave with a period of 5.6 minutes. It's not DC, but as far as measurements are concerned it may as well be...you're not reasonably going to construct a tuned circuit for such a low frequency, you're probably going to log measurements of electrical and magnetic fields that are basically static on the timescale of the individual measurements, and look for evidence of waves. You just need instruments that can detect the fields, and very good isolation from any sort of interference, which may involve going into interstellar space.
Moderator
In space physics, my profession, 30 mHz waves is nothing special acutally. This is just a 30 second wave, which is, e.g. the frequency of magnetic field line resonances in the Earth's magnetosphere. If you measure long enough, i.e. at least 3 wave periods as a rule of thumb, you can find that frequency in a power spectrum.
All comments made in red are moderator comments. Please, read the rules of the forum here and read the additional rules for ATM, and for conspiracy theories. If you think a post is inappropriate, don't comment on it in thread but report it using the /!\ button in the lower left corner of each message. But most of all, have fun!
Bi-weekly space physics research "blog" at tusenfem.blogspot.co.at
Established Member
So I can resume:
EM waves of 10 exp +10 meters (equivalent to 30 mHz or 30 second EM wave with a period of 5.6 minutes) are not scecial actually and could be detected, mesured and registred with an multimeter attached to a strip chart recorder with a very good isolation from any sort of interference (which may involve going into interstellar space).
Is It OK?
And which will be the larger wave we could detect, messure and register in this way?
Order of Kilopi
I was off by a decimal point, the period is 33 seconds, not 5.6 minutes. "30 second EM wave with a period of 5.6 minutes" is meaningless.
There is no hard limit.
Established Member
I think I did this by accident watching for some stray fields when I was calibrating an electron beam welder with a long throw but then we called it "drift". We never did find what caused the drift!
Established Member
OK..Thanks
Then we could detect, mesure and register any large/long (DC) EM wave (larger/longer than 10 exp +10 meters, equivalent to 30 mHz) with an multimeter attached to a strip chart recorder with a very good isolation from any sort of interference (which may involve going into interstellar space.
So, if we could detect, mesure and register a EM wave larger/longer than 10 exp +25 meters of wavelengh, it will mean that this wave has ben issued out of Our Known Universe, and it is coming from outside ... isn´t it?
Established Member
No - that would merely mean a period of 1 milliard years. Wavelength being a full cycle.
Since the Universe between event horizons on both sides is 27,5 milliard lightyears across, a pure dipole anisotropy of universe means wavelengths over 55 milliard lightyears, right?
There are known relic radiation fluctuations - pure dipole anisotropy is of course impossible to detect because it is eliminated with Doppler shift of Milky Way, but what is the magnitude of pure quadrupole anisotropy of Universe?
What type of pattern in anisotropy of Universe would you expect from a stationary electrostatic field? From a stationary magnetostatic field? From a wave with wavelength exceeding the double diametre of Universe propagating at light speed across Universe?
Established Member
Well, it is clear that we cannot wait 1 milliard years for a full ctcle !!!
We have to be able to detect and mesure only a little part of the whole cycle (!!??)
Which could be the larger EM wave we could detect and mesure nowadays...with the existing instruments (radio telescopes of magnetic fields?)..
10 exp + 10 meters (30 mHz).....10 exp +20 meters (3 picoHz)?
Established Member
the phrase flogging a dead horse comes to mind; what is the idea behind this enquiry? An antenna linked to an amplifier and a trace can run for years but what is the point?
Established Member
If we could detect, mesure and register an EM wave larger than 10 exp +(20-25) meters, it will mean that this wave have been issued out of Our Knouw Universe (diameter aprox. 10 exp +26 meters).
This could be an evidence of other Universes out of our one.
Order of Kilopi
No, it wouldn't. Wavelength doesn't say anything about the distance of the source.
Established Member
I have understud that Wavelengh give (an idea) of the dimension/size of the issuer body....a wave of 10 exp +20 meters have been isssued by a body of similar dimension/size... doesn´t it?
Order of Kilopi
The generator at your local power station generates power at 50 Hz or 60 Hz (depending on which country you're in). These have wavelengths of 5000 km (60 Hz) to 6000 km (50 Hz), which is probably a trifle larger than the generators. If you were to take a magnet (ordinary bar magnet) and wave it up and down at a frequency of 1 Hz, you'd generate an electromagnetic wave with a length of 300,000 km.
Established Member
So a wave of 10 exp + 50 meters wavelengh could be generated inside Our Known Universe????
Which caracteristic of EM waves could be usefull to realize it comes from out of Our Universe ?
Order of Kilopi
No. For example, 27 MHz is a common frequency for walky talkies, remote controls, etc. 27 MHz means a wavelength of 10.5 m...rather larger than your typical garage door opener. And the sun radiates most strongly in the range of hundreds of nanometers. Generally, electromagnetic radiation is most effectively emitted from or absorbed by conductive structures on the scale of the wavelength, but the presence of radiation at a wavelength doesn't indicate a structure of that size.
There hasn't been time for a full period at such a wavelength, and given the expansion of the universe over such a period it might be rather meaningless to consider it to be a wave, but there are no hard limits preventing it from existing or being produced.
Nothing known to science.
Established Member
That is new for me... and it is contrary to what I understand (??).
My idea was to evidence that could be other things (entities, universes,...) out of the limits of our known universe (between 10 exp 10-35 and 10 exp +26 meters).
I though that one way to do it was detecting EM waves smaller and larger than this lengh, that will mean that has been emited by issuers of this dimensions...
If this belief is not correct then it crumbles my idea...(???)
Established Member
My idea was to evidence the following proposal for the Whole/Global Universe:
If we could define the Global Universe like the Whole/Total Universe. (infinite or finite). and we consider Our Universe like that Universe that we know (from 10 exp -35 to 10 exp +27 meters), I propose the idea that we can divide the Global Universe in various (infinite) power of 10 levels or spectra (see attached file). Like a RAINBOW or MATRYOSHKA DOLLS.
Global Univ (Ing).pdf
These levels/spectra could be posives or negatives, and we can supose that aprox. every googol (10 exp 100) could be a very different Universe with its own science laws, waves, entities and possible living beings.
The shape and appearance of Our and Global Universe is only a "virtual" or "apparent" Univers that we sape and model taking into account the different stimuli that we recive by our senses.
In every level or spectra ther will be different stimuli (waves) and we will need different senses and receptors. Althogh the EM waves could exist in different levels...but with differents wavelengh and amplitude.....smaller in levels of negetive potntials and larger in levels of positive potential.
If we want to detect these stimuli, we have to try to recive and capture these stimuli (waves,...)...if they arrive to Our Universe.
Last edited by dapifo; 2012-Jul-06 at 10:52 AM.
Established Member
well one objection to your hypothesis is that any sudden (square wave) event contains by fourier analysis all the frequencies. I do not think (but I am often wrong) that a long wavelength uniquely means a similar sized source. Using sound as a metaphor, a small loudspeaker can deliver sound waves longer than its diameter.
Order of Kilopi
A flaw with this argument is that there aren't perfect square waves in the real world.
No need for metaphors or analogies. An RF remote control a few cm long can emit 27 MHz 11 m wavelength radiation (sorry, the 10.5 m I mentioned above was for something else) to be picked up by a receiver also a few cm long, positioned a fraction of a wavelength away. The famous 21 cm hydrogen line is 21.1 cm wavelength radiation emitted by individual neutral hydrogen atoms.
More fundamentally: there is no limit to how slowly a field produced by something in our universe can change. A particularly slow changing field is not evidence of origin outside the universe.
The basic idea has other problems. There is nothing separating the different scales, why call them different universes?
Established Member
"The basic idea has other problems. There is nothing separating the different scales, why call them different universes?"
OK...I agree, it is only a way to say that if Our Universe (it that we know) has a range of aprox 10 exp +65 (10 exp -35 to 10 exp +27) ... we can imagine that for every observer of any scale could be an Universe like Our in this range (or at least every 10 exp 100 = gugool), but is obvius that the laws and entities (wave type, ...) will change gradually like the colors in an Rainbow (!!!)
One Universe could be the red spectrum, other the yellow one,...and otrer one the orange spectrum....could be infinites levels...depending were it is the observator.
You can read the following doccument to understand better my proposal Rainbow _I_.pdf
It is very simple ... with very easy words (escuse my poor English), but I think that can give a more wide view of the Global/Whole Universe, helping to understand better it.
"there is no limit to how slowly a field produced by something in our universe can change. A particularly slow changing field is not evidence of origin outside the universe."
In Our Universe scale we have specific waves that only could exist here (sound waves, sea waves, gravity (?), ...) , but others waves could be in different scales, and posible in all scales (EM waves?).
That is why I suposed that EM waves that are very smaller (< 10 exp -35 meters) or very larger (> 10 exp + 25 meters) have to be emited by sources/issues of similar dimensions or scales (?).
I am sure that if this proposal is correct.... sure that would be EM waves (?) with very different wavelength :
- Larger (10 exp + 100 meters) crossing Our Universe without beeing detected now.
- Smaller (10 exp -100 meters) ...although this ones possibe in very small/little space, because they seams to be very high energetic (?)
I don´t know if these EM waves that we cannot detect, could have any relation with "Dark Energy" (??)
Moreover, that, in other scales, would be other kind of waves specific to every different scales... that we cannot imagine now.
Do you think that this propossal make any sense?...or it goes against any current physics theory or law (state of the art patterns)?.
If yes (that it could have any chance), how we could evidence this proposal?.... EM waves could not be a way?
Established Member
A second flaw with this is that a square wave contains the fundamental frequency plus multiples of its odd harmonics. So a 10 Hz square wave contains, in Hz: 10, 30, 50, 70... Correct me if I'm wrong, but containing all of the frequencies is white noise, aka, the waterfall sound.
I agree 100% with what James just said: "More fundamentally: there is no limit to how slowly a field produced by something in our universe can change. A particularly slow changing field is not evidence of origin outside the universe." My bold.
Established Member
Well .... someone will give me his opinion (scientific) about the attached document?.
http://www.bautforum.com/attachment....6&d=1341610075
• Makes sense in it?
• Has some points inconsistent with the current state of the art of physics?
• EM waves may have long lengths that are going through our universe?
• EM waves can be less than 10 exp -35? • We could detect some of these waves or other unknown?
Established Member
One obvious question. If the laws of physics are totally different why would you expect to see EM radiation from these other universes?
It read like a series of assertions and analogies. There was nothing scientific in the document to be judged according to scientific opinion.
Posting Permissions
