Light “Waves” or Energy Consistency?

Planck’s quantum of action ‘h’ shows that radiative energy is proportional to “frequency”. In case of a wave, which is a disturbance in a medium, the energy is proportional to the square of amplitude. Therefore, the electromagnetic energy cannot be a disturbance in a material medium. The frequency of energy is not a rate of disturbance; instead, it is the rate of transitions between electrical and magnetic fields. Since the speed of electromagnetic radiation is constant, its frequency is, probably, better interpreted as its consistency.

The “wave nature” of electromagnetic radiation is very different from that of a wave in water or air. An energy or light wave is neither transversal nor longitudinal.

Newton’s corpuscles and Planck-Einstein quanta are correct in the sense that light is not a disturbance in some medium, but it is something physical.

However, these corpuscles/quanta are not discrete “particles” in space; instead, they represent the consistency of energy.

Quantum doesn’t really break the sense of continuity of variables of the classical mechanics when frequency is interpreted as consistency. It does change the consideration of Maxwell’s theory, which assumes the consistency of electromagnetic energy to be constant.

Maxwell’s theory assumes the consistency of electromagnetic energy to be constant.

As consistency gets thicker there are sudden transitions possible from thinner to thicker consistency. This may give an illusion of discontinuity, but that is simply a sharp gradient.

The boundary between matter and void is not a discontinuity, but an extreme gradient in the consistency of energy.


Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.


  • Chris Thompson  On July 25, 2021 at 8:02 PM

    Now we only need to find out what is energy. Probably, for that we will need to be satisfied with what energy seems to be at the macro-scale, where we live, in our universe. Talking about the effects that are created by earlier causes that we cannot KNOW seem to be our fate.

    You see, the infinite regression and progression of scales going both relatively larger and smaller than the macro-scale (where we daily live) leave one with a laundry list of tautologies for descriptions and definitions. For those who cannot withstand the stress of not-knowing, then solipsists comes to mind. Existentialism is so easy for the tired mind to fall into.

    Have you ever had an occasion to bleed into a sink? The density of the red color of the blood always amazes me because it can stand quite a bit of diluting before we can’t see the red, yet hemoglobin is so very fine-grained. A shark is said to be able to detect one drop of blood a mile away from an injured prey. What I’m saying is that electromagnetism seems to be both densely present (omnipresent) while being particular about being detected at the same time. In the absence of any disturbance, can we detect it at all?

    As a youth I studied and then drew penciled graphics trying to demonstrate the various ways that we have imagined EMR to be propagated. They get quite complicated in a hurry. The very dimmest of red glows from galaxies far away remind me of the hemoglobin in that it is hard for me to grasp that photons from that distant place yet arrived to our place in a form which can yet be resolved into an image.

    I’m not sure I am communicating that idea or question very well.


  • vinaire  On July 25, 2021 at 8:48 PM

    Energy is interchanging electric and magnetic fields. These fields are alter-ego of each other. They consist of pure force.


    • Chris Thompson  On July 25, 2021 at 9:29 PM

      Ah, “pure force.” NOW I understand . . . welcome to my Tautological Universe.

      For me, tautologies help exploit where the placeholders for understanding go, so that I can keep some of these unknowns properly labeled and organized in me head.

      But since we’re talking about it, pure force must represent the potential differences between forces here and forces over there, yes? Is energetic space denser than space full of entropy?

      We speak of equilibrium as something the macro-universe is drifting toward . . . with organization/energy/force on one side of the equation –> and a different amount organization/energy/force on the other –> with entropy as the result?

      Did you understand my hemoglobin simile? What did that communicate to you?

      When the volume of space is altered by gravity, has the density of space been actually increased through compression? In the previous sentence, is compression a metaphor?


  • Chris Thompson  On July 25, 2021 at 9:32 PM

    PS: I liked your old corkscrew or snake model of photons. It allowed for waves and particles. We need a new way of thinking about the substance of the universe. Or maybe electromagnetism has opened up a newer understanding for you?


  • vinaire  On July 26, 2021 at 11:56 AM

    A cycle of something is the duration of that thing. The universe has been enduring forever. So that is a huge cycle without beginning or end. But the universe has also been changing. So there are smaller cycles of duration within the overall cycle of duration of the universe.

    So the larger cycle exists because of the smaller cycles within it. The larger cycle is actually as abstract as are the smaller cycles within it because each one of them is a construct.

    So, the question arises:

    “Is there at the bottom of it all something which is not a construct?”

    So, we cut down the duration of the larger cycle into smaller and smaller cycles to find something which is not a construct of something else. We start with the macro domain of astronomy, and we find that the universe is not one solid thing. It is full of space.

    In this space we find that there are smaller and smaller solid things, and so we cross this material domain until we arrive at the smallest solid particle, which is the atom. But the moment we pierce the atom we are in a different domain, which we find to be full of energy. We find that energy is space and space is energy and matter is a condensed form of energy.

    We try to give energy a cycle and figure out its duration as we did for material things. We make the error of using the words “frequencies” and “wavelengths” that actually belong to the material domain. Energy has its own “cycle.” At the upper level it is the thick current of the cathode rays and underneath it we find thinner and thinner currents of energy. These are different from material cycles. The terms like “frequencies” and “wavelengths” no longer describe the energy domain. We need new terms to describe energy consistencies.

    An energy consistency seems to maintain itself even after crisscrossing or mixing with other consistencies. This we see in the colors of visible light. At one time we wondered if we could transmute lead into gold. Now we wonder, “Can we transmute red into green?”

    The consistency appears to be a fabric of force that becomes thinner or thicker. The thinnest consistency appears to be the space itself. An analogy can be made in terms of space being the “element” or “atom” of energy.

    “Can space be pierced to see what lies beyond it?”

    The research continues.


    • Chris Thompson  On July 26, 2021 at 12:48 PM

      The Big Bang has been postulated as the placeholder for the first cycle.

      But that is an abstraction and our science is yet very quite far – infinitely far – from a successful regression to the first Planck Second. At 300,000 years, we are hardly any closer that we are beginning today, 13.8 billion years.

      It is enough to humble. And if that is not enough to humble, then one best check themself.


  • Chris Thompson  On July 26, 2021 at 1:01 PM

    The universe has been enduring forever.

    . . . is an abstraction. The 4th dimension isn’t understood much more than to say that some metric of motion is there. We layer metaphor upon metaphor and try to strain our knowledge into existence, but that lays down the trap of religion. It is a very slippery slope for a slippery wet meat-sack of a nervous system to divine.

    That mankind is a sentient being is a dubious statement – open to controversy. Even if true, mankind’s spirituality, if it exists, lies on the very teeter-tottery cusp of awakening – if that.

    I suppose that I mostly believe in the multi-dimensional universe, of which we sense very little. I am of the opinion that our minds exist not to drive the universe into existence, but rather as a first step, to increase in sensitivity to perceive more of the universe which already exists.


    • vinaire  On July 26, 2021 at 2:03 PM

      I think that the 4th dimension is time and the 5th dimension is the scale of quantum or consistency–the dimension of electromagnetic spectrum.


      • Chris Thompson  On July 26, 2021 at 4:01 PM

        I do like that. Scales. Orders of magnitude. I strain to understand whether at the scale of quantum/consistency there is substance? . . . or possibly only rules? Quantum is a realm in which we do not exist. Neither do we exist even at the galactic scale. We exist only at the scale which we may call macro.

        The hemoglobin is consistent deeply enough to surprise me when diluting it. Yet, in the end, it is discrete. Below that, it is no longer hemoglobin.


        • vinaire  On July 26, 2021 at 8:06 PM

          Matter is condensed energy. Both matter and energy are substance.

          Space is the extent of substance. Time is the duration of substance. So, matter and energy as substance have 3 dimensions of space, 1 dimension of time, and 1 dimension of consistency. Matter has maximum consistency and its space and time have constancy. So we live in the stable environment of matter.

          Energy is the substance of quantum (and electromagnetic) realm. Energy has variable consistency and its space and time have variable characteristics depending on the consistency. We view the quantum and cosmic realms from the stable datum of the material realm.

          Without the stable datum of material realm we are lost.


      • Chris Thompson  On July 27, 2021 at 5:16 AM

        Help me understand how you are using consistency.


        • vinaire  On July 28, 2021 at 4:45 AM

          Consistency = a degree of density, firmness, viscosity, etc.

          Using the word “consistency” instead of “frequency” for energy ensures that energy is looked upon as a substance and not as a “disturbance in some other substance like aether.”

          Besides, “frequency” depends on a unit of time that has no absolute significance. It is hard to visualize in three dimensions. But “consistency” of substance is much easier to visualize. We can think of “consistency” of space as presence of awareness. It leads to a new dimension.

          Check out


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: