Re: photons


"Dr ***" <paulpsremove@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1113835501.25609.0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "sue jahn" <susysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:4263b9c8$0$79457$14726298@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "Dr ***" <paulpsremove@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1113824495.32126.2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > "sue jahn" <susysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:4262e2d9$0$79466$14726298@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > "Dr ***" <paulpsremove@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:1113770068.30810.0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > >
> > > What is *waving* ?
> > > dr
> > > The vacuum state.
> >
> > OK... your term for Coulomb force.
> >
> > > s
> > > Hint: tiny loop antennaa and 1/ r^3.
> > > dr
> > > Hang on the photon I'm taking about has just come from another galaxy so
> > > 1/r^3 died of ages ago.
> > dr
> > And as the it is only a shadow of its former self having been spread out
> by
> > 1/r^2 it only a very feeble photon.
> > s
> > Anything like a spinning charge just resurrected it.
> > dr
> > Yep out of bits of other photons, a spinning charge can be seen in some
> > cases as a cosmic vortex dustbin that all the little old bits of Electric
> > field of the right shape get sucked into to make new photons.
> s
> I must confess, I have an unfounded aversion to whirlpool
> vortex types of models. From Ampere, Maxwell right on
> through Tomasz Radozycki's recent paper it proves a useful
> tool. Where there is smoke the must be fire so I intend to
> study those aspects a bit more.
> Dr
> I do agree that much confusion can be created by these effects even more
> than rotation, although vortex in the sense that I used it may not be the
> same as others. For example if a passing field fragment is of sufficient
> attraction to the atom via it resonance's, energy, polarity and vector it
> might get draw in to contribute to the structure of the atom and latter
> produce a photon. This I see as
> a vortex it is not something that exists without the necessary components
> being supplied by both the atom and the field fragment. Mind you magnetic
> effects generate a circular polarisation that translates in to a helix
> effect due to combined vectors but this I prefer to see as different effect
> to try to avoid confusion. IMHO.

That is a lot of words to say a jiggling atom can gain or loose
a chunk of energy. But yes... the possible mechanims could
be as numerous as the critters in the standard model menagerie.


> >
> > > > s
> > > > In the first case, the quantum would no longer be in the
> > > > position to concentrate energy upon a single point in
> > > > space in such a way as to release an electron from its
> > > > atomic bond, and in the second case, the main triumph
> > > > of the Maxwell theory - the continuity between the static
> > > > and the dynamic fields and, with it, the complete
> > > > understanding we have enjoyed, until now, of the fully
> > > > investigated interference phenomena - would have to be
> > > > sacrificed, both being very unhappy consequences for
> > > > today's theoreticians. >>
> > dr
> > Question answered ?
> s
> No... Those aren't the only two possibilities. They're Just an
> excuse to throw unknowns into a holding bin and call it "duality".
> dr
> Try me with some unknows if you please.:-)
cosmic radiation, cell phones, leaky radio ovens, gammas
and X's from the doctor's office next door, CMBR ect ect ect.

All these influences get to cast a vote too when an atom decides
whether to absorb or emit a chunk of energy or "stand pat"

>
> >
> > > > http://nobelprize.org/physics/laureates/1918/planck-lecture.html
> > > >
>
> > Eh! You should have tho't of that before ya huffed out of "Tensor
> > Torquers Club" Suzy's pub only has three brands, x,y and z and
> > we keep a sharp eye on the clock... especially near closing time
> > when the rowdys like set it back claiming Prof. Einstein just ordered
> > a round for the house.
> > dr
> > Ye it was a tough choice but your lot seemed much more fun:-)
> > s
> > Fair warning, those "tensor torquers" get so tang-tongueled checking
> > everything for invariance, you might have a tough time transforming
> > anything back to 3D space that is qualitativly meaningful.
> > dr
> > Ye I clued into that after a few swipes at my head so I think I will
> > continue to let them play mind games untill they are feed up with them and
> > are prepared to talk my language but thats up to them.
> s
> They are no more "mind games" than is a Smith-chart or an
> impedance plot. The confusion, just as in Hilbert space, is caused
> by forgetting that some bold and quite abstract assumptions are
> made to create the calculating-space. Assumptions must be either
> proven or undone in the interpretation.
> dr
> Fine if they are prepared to demonstrate their abstract assumptions are not
> abstract and real effects and that the language they have invented to
> support their abstraction is not a valid tool for proving it then fine but I
> think most supporters of this methodology are *abstract* mind game players
> against real mind game players and the criteria for success in the former is
> ego size were in the latter it can be social benefit even if its personal
> social benefit as the former tends to be constrained to the individual
> whereas the latter tends to rub off on others. End social lecture :-) I
> liked you page of quotes, they nearly called the white coates in to take me
> away:-)

I agree with your demographics. That doesn't make the
formalism invalid for the space it operates in. Neither does
it allow the potpourri selection of properties. If you want
to combine time and space on an axis, then your justification
has to be something similar to Einstein's clock that goes as
it is judged. That is metaphysics. He can't be flogged for
failing to label it as metaphysics, you can. ;-)

Sue...

>
> > s
> > IOW... this is a beer and ale pub.
> > No mixed drinks. :-)
> > dr
> > I have a machine that lets you poor all the drinks into one big barrel and
> > on it are marked beer, better beer, ale, red wine, white wine etc . Do you
> > want one for your pub ? it works by distillation on a cosmic scale.
>
> Thank you but I expect I can get the entire U.S. Star Wars II
> fuel system for about three cents on the dollar.
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2566843.stm
>
> I'd only be risking that the execssive government testing
> consumed the stores.
> http://www.willthomas.net/911/Bush/
>
> > Relative velocity = voltage: Relative area = current: Relative depth =
> > duration: All in a relativly total vacuum.
> s
> That is stretching fluidic analogy past the breaking point.
> dr
> You need some better elastic:-) elastic vely cheap nickers not fall down in
> public:-)
> Dr ***
> Sue...
>
>
>
>


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: photons
    ... >>> Hang on the photon I'm taking about has just come from another galaxy ... > attraction to the atom via it resonance's, energy, polarity and vector it ... > think most supporters of this methodology are *abstract* mind game players ... might name real space this being a space that includes all virtual space. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Speed Of Light Question
    ... Along with the fairy dust, ... |>I'll start at the atom that emitted the electric field in all ... |>is one cycle called a photon, not a wavy train that you drew. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: speed, size, time
    ... the bouncing photon and the scissors stuff ... I am down to the atom or molecular level in believing they ... > calculate what the moving frame would measure. ... We know how many electrons in au ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Speed Of Light Question
    ... Sue brought it up, one atom per cc. ... I'll take your DNA molecule imagination with a pinch of fairy dust. ... energy state and produced a single emission "line" which is only ... is one cycle called a photon, not a wavy train that you drew. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: photons
    ... >> Hang on the photon I'm taking about has just come from another galaxy so ... vortex types of models. ... For example if a passing field fragment is of sufficient ... They are no more "mind games" than is a Smith-chart or an ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Quantcast