Blogging backwards

Checking a post concept to reverse time. Because the concept is so complex I am travelling six minutes back in time for every post so that the individual parts can be read in order. [Part 1]

So it starts with red shift and frame of reference. Firstly, an electron is assumed to be whole unto itself in form and I am not quite sure how one would consider the space or frame of reference of something that is not considered to exist outside the bounds of some small radius.

In the beginning z= ((wavelength observed)-(wavelength emitted))/(wavelength emitted). Which becomes : z= ((wavelength observed)/(wavelength emitted))-1. Thus red shift would result in negative numbers and blue in positive numbers. Also Lorentz γ. which is another symbol overload from ( α β γ ).

In a case where there is a preferred frame of reference, like the ocean, and there is a source which produces a periodic wave and travels with respect to the medium, the formula would be 1/w-v transmitted and received w-v by something at the same velocity and direction. The product is 1. In this case, the velocity of the waves varies by density, temperature and the nature of the medium.

The emission and absorption lines of stars serve as a means to observe the shift in specific absorption lines, such as Lyman α. By using a prism or equivalent, it is possible to produce an energy series with missing wavelengths.

Some of the things I plan to discuss and resolve are the twin paradox and photoelectric effect.

When I was first introduced to physics, it was obvious that the explanation of these effects was incorrect. It seems in reading Wikipedia, that some of this ambiguity has been removed. The twin paradox was explained as being due to acceleration, which is absurd, however a double acceleration is another case all together. I was not aware that some of these problems had already been corrected. There seem to be almost as many bad interpretations as there are people who discuss it.

Some concepts are presented in more convoluted fashion than needs be, it seems to me. Like the Riemannian manifold, Metric space or Quaternion. Since I have developed many of these things independently, perhaps it is just the symbols they use and the way in which it is presented that gives me pause.

This is purely introduction and is not intended to be complete, as it introduces some extremely complex subjects like space-time manifolds. I suppose the best place to start is at the beginnings of science and cover that which is foundational to understanding things as they are known today. I have yet to see gravitational magnetism, but I would not be surprised to see that particular thing appear in some of these equations. It is difficult to deal with the symbol overloading sometimes and one that gets me in this case is Z. I may learn Chinese, just to have a better alphabet. ζ

At the end this will integrate all of this to give a coherent explanation of how all these things relate. Certainly chemistry, nuclear physics, astronomy, electronics, and many other things integrate to be a coherent expression of the underlying structure.