New book...A DEEPER, DARKER TRUTH

[Albert Rossi]

Some time ago Jack White and i defended Tom Wilson's work on another forum. His life long work and expertise was in detecting flaws in metal ingots at a U.S. Steel's foundry. He used photographic methods in this work, and then later appied the method to analyze photographs. There is nothing mysterious about it, as it is based on scientific principles involving light and its interactions.

Adele

Hi Adele,

Is this discussion still available somewhere? I would like to read it because offhand I would think that there is a difference between using light reflected off a metal surface to determine something about the composition of that surface, and using light reflected off a 2D photographic representation of an object to determine something about the composition of the represented object (not the composition of the photograph itself). I am (earnestly) seeking enlightenment (if you pardon the pun) here ...

Thanks!

Hi, Albert,

That discussion was on the Education Forum some years ago. I don't know if this is available anywhere, unless the Ed Forum was archived. The term "photonics" or "photoptics" (as best as I can recall, probably "photonics") was used to describe Wilson's method. Hope this helps. Try Google for definition.

Sorry to be late in replying, but I am not at my own computer these days.

Adele

P.S. Albert, the correct term is PHOTONICS for Tom Wilson's works. Photoptics refers to the optics involved in vision of the eyes. Photonics involves all forms of electromagetic radiarion, which includes light, and this is a special branch of physics. Google can supply definitions of photonics and examples of this science.

Hi Adele,

Possibly this is the item on the Ed Forum you are talking about.


http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index....ntry173997

Ray

Thanks, Adele, and Ray. I'll give it a look.

[Albert Rossi]

Interesting that a Google search on photonics turned up this recent article:

http://azstarnet.com/news/business/unive...5beea.html

The term is so broad as to encompass practically everything that has to do with quantum-based processing of electromagnetic radiation.

What I am hoping to find is a technical description of the specific procedure closest to what Tom seems to have used. I guess I'll just have to keep looking.


P.S. There is an IEEE sector on photonics as well:

http://www.photonicssociety.org/

[Peter Lemkin]

Interesting that a Google search on photonics turned up this recent article:

http://azstarnet.com/news/business/unive...5beea.html

The term is so broad as to encompass practically everything that has to do with quantum-based processing of electromagnetic radiation.

What I am hoping to find is a technical description of the specific procedure closest to what Tom seems to have used. I guess I'll just have to keep looking.


P.S. There is an IEEE sector on photonics as well:

http://www.photonicssociety.org/

I have not looked, but I think you'll find it very difficult to find any paper or book covering what Wilson was doing - he was 'mixing and matching' from that wide field for what he needed to do. If I wasn't about to loose my flat and sail off into homelessness, I'd spend more time trying to pin this all down...but right now, survival [if that remains an option] is all I have much time for until things get secure again...if they do. Sorry. See if there is a transcript or video of his two ASK lectures for the best available at this time. If I ever get stable again, I have about 200 technical books on photonics and know enough about what T.W. was trying to do to pull out chapters that apply. He was a giant in his field. Red-hot steel products were shooting past his light filter at up to 30-120/min. His 'job' was to see if there were any flaws on the surface - AND if a flaw what kind [size, shape, depth, and chemical nature of*] of the flaw. He adapted that to the JFK photos and evidence after a chance discussion with Wecht [who was a neighbor] on JFK.

* something a human could barely do if given ONE cold piece to study for several hours. His whole system was based on how light behaves. We humans have very limited range of the 'visual' bandwidth, and can not see subtle variations of color, shade, reflection angle, refraction and MANY other factors that his systems could.

[Albert Rossi]

Interesting that a Google search on photonics turned up this recent article:

http://azstarnet.com/news/business/unive...5beea.html

The term is so broad as to encompass practically everything that has to do with quantum-based processing of electromagnetic radiation.

What I am hoping to find is a technical description of the specific procedure closest to what Tom seems to have used. I guess I'll just have to keep looking.


P.S. There is an IEEE sector on photonics as well:

http://www.photonicssociety.org/

I have not looked, but I think you'll find it very difficult to find any paper or book covering what Wilson was doing - he was 'mixing and matching' from that wide field for what he needed to do. If I wasn't about to loose my flat and sail off into homelessness, I'd spend more time trying to pin this all down...but right now, survival [if that remains an option] is all I have much time for until things get secure again...if they do. Sorry. See if there is a transcript or video of his two ASK lectures for the best available at this time. If I ever get stable again, I have about 200 technical books on photonics and know enough about what T.W. was trying to do to pull out chapters that apply. He was a giant in his field. Red-hot steel products were shooting past his light filter at up to 30-120/min. His 'job' was to see if there were any flaws on the surface - AND if a flaw what kind [size, shape and chemical nature of] of the flaw. He adapted that to the JFK photos and evidence after a chance discussion with Wecht [who was a neighbor] on JFK.

Thanks, Peter. Sorry to hear of your difficulties -- hang tight and all the best. -Al

[Peter Lemkin]

Yes, that was one of, if memory serves me, two threads on Wilson on the EF. As Phil has pointed out any post I made [and there were many long ones relating about interactions and discussions I actually HAD with Tom Wilson about his technique and his work on some photos for me [for which he DEMANDED] the best possible quality, non-copied version possible!] - now 'air-brushed' out, as Phil put it. The book on Tom Wilson's life has many deficiencies IMO. First, the author had never before researched or written about things related to JFK's assassination. How the Wilson family chose him, I do not know. Second, it had been decided NOT to include the highly technical photonics, scientific theory and data - as well as the MANY applications for which it is used in science, industry, intelligence and other places. It was a book for the average person without a scientific background and on that it fell short, IMO, on explaining sufficiently the techniques, the databases he used, and the theory behind it. As stated earlier, Dr. Wecht would likely be the best person to inform about Wilson as an often used expert witness in Court. He was never successfully challenged and removed as such. Photonics is not an easy to explain science. Modern computers and optical input devices can detect several tens of millions of colors and more shades of grey than the eye can. Other data from the reflected photons from a real object or a photo/image/video can be determined, which the eye/brain can not discern. Especially when matched against calibrated databases [which Wilson constructed over many years], these can produce information not normally thought to be obtainable in photos/images. When Wilson retired from USS [as their photonics, and thus, surface quality control engineer for the steel produced] instead of being given a watch he was given what at the time was a mini-mainframe computer, which he used for his work. Lucky for us, computers have gotten more powerful over time. I especially custom built the computer I currently have with REPRODUCING Wilson's work in mind. I have been [along with everyone else] access to his materials. I also had a man break into my flat and smash this computer to pieces and abscond with most of my hard drives. It is now rebuilt [taking a year's work], with some loss of data.

Peter, Don Phillips is an accomplished author (see http://www.amazon.com/Donald-T.-Phillips/e/B000APF2BM)

In the book, he says that Tom Wilson asked him to take up the project.

What I should have said [and failed to] was if he was 'such an accomplished author' - with quality over quantity being the measure - why isn't the book rife with technical references and citations to the photonics literature that would not have left so MANY serious researchers scratching their heads or skeptical?!?!?!

[Phil Dragoo]

Peter

When you say

if he was 'such an accomplished author' - with quality over quantity being the measure - why isn't the book rife with technical references and citations to the photonics literature that would not have left so MANY serious researchers scratching their heads or skeptical?!?!?!

is it to imply Phillips intentionally presented a Houdini treatise on spiritualism

I found Jack White's concise description of photography to be of use

Absent a pedestrian explanation of cosmology

would USA Today have told Carl Sagan

"You don't know Uranus"?

[Albert Rossi]

Peter

When you say

if he was 'such an accomplished author' - with quality over quantity being the measure - why isn't the book rife with technical references and citations to the photonics literature that would not have left so MANY serious researchers scratching their heads or skeptical?!?!?!

is it to imply Phillips intentionally presented a Houdini treatise on spiritualism

I found Jack White's concise description of photography to be of use

Absent a pedestrian explanation of cosmology

would USA Today have told Carl Sagan

"You don't know Uranus"?

Billions and billions of photons? :lol: