Re: I have an equation for the mass of the photon!

ok you might not like reading this
but ill say it anyway's

the mass of the photon = 0/0
that's a fact :-)
undefined is undefined
i don't care about newton or einstein
they where both wrong
einstein said " i don't believe in math"
however he used it haha
wel i say " i don't believe in einstein " :p
physics is as well solved and understood bye math as chess is.
(so it isnt! )
nobody can explain the measured reality
no model is correct !! there all flawed !!
newton was wrong , maxwell was wrong, thomas young was wrong, einstein was wrong , curie was wrong, bohr was wrong, quantum mechanics is inconsistant with relativity ,feynman was wrong , hawkings was wrong (imaginairy time haha ),
even string theory, superstringtheory ,expansion theory (oh please :p ), quantum hyperfield theory, zeta induction field theory ,M-theory etc etc ALL WRONG !!
we dont even know what gravity is
what is light ?
einstein gives m= 0/0 using his formula
so his theory is based upon light , but its mass is 0/0
this should have been noticed before as a mistake!!
I can't believe it got accepted since it contains contradictions !
bye the way he stole the light speed = max thingy from maxwell's equations
which is strange since they do not apply anymore in relativity (at least not completely )
to be completely honest newtons theorems weren't so bad if ya ask me
lets see the history:
(you probably wont agree but ill say it anyway )
newtons approximations for movement of planets are pretty well and are still used !!! dont believe me ? ask men at NASA !
he also discovered "light stuff" , but he couldnt explain ( and neither can we today )
einstein only gives a "light speed correction " (more or less )
and he used maxwells equations
but he made adjustments so maxwell is disproved too
he (einstein) is also disproved bye e.g. the atom model , the black hole and the cosmological constant.
not to mention the **** about the twin paradox , going back in time , going at lightspeed to live longer etc
neither does he prove or disproof perpetuum mobile.
and his "mindgames" of elevators is wrong too
(nice try but wrong)
"conservation of energy " law is also flawed!
the state of physics is bad srr
what caused the big bang ? why are there 4 fundamental forces ?
is a perpetuum mobile possible ?
( conservation of energy does not decide this !!
actually if energy is conserved in time , you could use it to say that a perp mob exists , or you could say that a perfect battery exists , which is opposite , but both equivalent to the conservation ! so conservation does not proof or disproof ! equivalently for non-conservation !
since non-conservation can mean increasing energy in time!
besides wasn't the big bang against the conservation law ?
what about the borrowing of energy for a short time in QM ? etc etc )
how many dimensions are there ?
was light slower in the past, or faster ? ?
is there always a smaller particle to find ?
what is the supporting filosofy behind gravity and quantum mechanics ?
there are no ways of measuring easilly ! ( without interference + uncertainty principle )
what about anti-energie ?
how about the duality of particle/wave for light ?
or discreet/continu for QM ?
since the photons get 0/0 mass bye einstein , is is more logical to treat them as the slowest in the category "c+ movers" also because light cant be accelereted but does move at light speed , but does not weigh infinity , but can push an object. light gives at least 5 paradoxes bye relativity !
btw gravity
doesnt the difinition of gravity says : everything attracts everything ?
but when it doesnt ? we just say no mass , or no gravity ?
but then isnt gravity more like "magnets"
like magnets attract (electro)magnets and nothing else?
we simply do not understand light nor gravity
so talking about light mass is science fiction :p
we say E=mc²
shouldn't that be E = gravity c² ??
not to mention the vague definition of energy ?
energy is what ? heat ? magnetism ? gravity ? weak nuclear force ? waveamplitude ? spin ? speed ? acceleration ? conductivity ?
and its not force ? or some forces are energy and some are not and just " (quantum) effects " , fields ,vacuum energy ? , magically appearring/disappearing virtual thingies ? or happen spontanously (no energy needed or used but still delivered ? (p mobile ? :p )
these thing/words are used in a way that the equations fits as good as it can , and then still they need new theorems !!
and where do they got the nerve to use matrices in unexplained ways/reasons ?
QUANTUM MECHANICS FEELS PRETTY CONFIDENT ABOUT ITSELF BUT ITS JUST AS BAD AS EINSTEIN OR NEWTON AND JUST AS "CRANKPOT" AS ANCIENT ALCHEMIE
i mean what's the difference ? alchemie spoke about magical effects (bye god OR NOT BYE GOD doesnt matter)
and now we have unexplained ( read "also " super magic"") quantum effects
ok we have particle accelerators and better labs then in those days
but the theorems are still philosofic and magicly.
or worse! , they use something more complicated then tensors , but give no reason for it ! not even philosoficly !!
they just pull it magicly out of their pants.
and sure they understand the math.
but the explaination ?
they just fit the data.
and then they feel smart.
although the theorems still contains mistakes , even if they use 168 dimensions, 405 particles, 87 particles and 36 quantumeffects

but to answer short :p
according to some theorems light has mass
bye others no mass
and other speak of antimass or antienergy

so you can choose the answer you want , since none of the theorems are superier

i dont believe in point particles
and mass of light depends on your interpretation of mass

sincerely
tommy1729

ps why aren't there quantum computers ?
answer : quantums are not understood , or do not exist
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Cyclometers for Unicycling?
    ... even keeps me abreast of daily lotto and racetrack info, ... up to my laptop for lots of other stuff.:cool: ... I recommend it...I recommend ...
    (rec.sport.unicycling)
  • Re: Flaw in Stowe/LeSage Heating
    ... Including binding energy. ... > measure of two units of mass of different chemical compositions. ... So LeSagian interaction couples to binding energy as in GR? ... LeSagian gravity? ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: =?UTF-8?B?RWluc3RlaW7igJlzIEU9bWMyIC4gU2hvdWxkIE5ld3RvbiAsIEQ=?= =?UTF-8?B?ZSBQcmV0dG8gL
    ... concept of inter-conversion of mass and energy has been studied by ... various scientists qualitatively, even before Einstein. ... S. Tolver Preston proposed that a vast amount of energy can be ... Max Planck in 1907 made an in-depth investigation of the energy ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Einsteins E=mc2 Generalized , book published from New York , USA
    ... (light energy mass equivalence), is true under SPECIAL CONDITIONS, ... Einstein knew it was not a general result. ... International Journals and presented in International Conference in ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Mass vs distance
    ... Planck mass are lower at the bottom of the hill, ... In a spacetime with a timelike Killing ... null infinity, and in between them, there is energy radiated ... they climb out of a gravity well. ...
    (sci.physics.research)