Re: The physical motions of photons in free space!


<surrealistic-dream@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1131712101.771816.89030@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Harry wrote:
> > "Gerald L. O'Barr" <globarr@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:1131661749.939496.19980@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > The physical motions of photons in free space
> > > are absolutely equal!
> > >
> > > Yes, let us take a fixed inertial line in free
> > > space, and let points A and B be fixed points upon
> > > this line. At point A, let there be two objects
> > > moving upon this line at two different velocities,
> > > positioned such that they will cross point A at the
> > > same instant of time. At the instant they cross
> > > point A, let them both send a photon towards point B.
> > > Both photons will physically reach point B at the
> > > same instant of time.
> > > (Sub note: Each 'object' that simultaneously met at
> > > point A can each actually represent a whole inertial
> > > reference frame, in which they are each at rest. And
> > > we will let each frame extend to both points A and B
> > > and beyond. Thus, each photon emitted by each
> > > object are each traveling in their own different inertial
> > > reference frame at all times.)
> > > Now please note, at any point on this original
> > > line, as measured by any object on this line, no
> > > matter what velocity any object might be moving on
> > > this line, will show that at any meeting of any one
> > > of these photons, will instantaneously include the
> > > meeting of the other photon. Thus, step by step, at
> > > every point, by all observers (by all inertial
> > > frames), moving or not moving one way or the other,
> > > they will all confirm that these two photons, sent by
> > > two differently moving objects, moving in different
> > > reference frames, will be physically moving together
> > > in an absolute way across the space they are using.
> > >
> > > Thus, something exists in this space, that
> > > controls the rate at which all photons physically
> > > move, no matter what their original source might have
> > > been, and no matter what reference frame they are in.
> >
> > Upto here, both Lorentz and Einstein would have agreed.
>
> A photon is a quantum object and nobody knows what it does when it is
> not being observed. All we know in SR kinematics is that its measured
> speed in an inertial frame in a vacuum is the fixed number c. See
> Feynman's QED for more on this.

Sure; nevertheless I'm pretty sure that Lorentz and Einstein would have
agreed that a photon's speed is a property of space, and not of the photon.
Perhaps Einstein even stated that, do you know if he did or not?

> > > This concept is absolute, and it absolutely
> > > tells us that there is an absolute reference that
> > > controls these physical acts.
> >
> > This is where Einstein disagreed, but AFAIK he didn't explain his
reasoning.
>
> You're right. Einstein would not have agreed to any such thing post his
> SR paper.
>
> > Is there someone here who is able to explain Einstein's reasoning on
this?

> Einstein made it very clear in his essays, even if SR books do not. To
> Einstein, such an absolute space (i.e., inertial frame) would imply
> that Nature has arbitrarily selected one inertial frame out of an
> infinite number of them to be special (i.e., the laws of
> electrodynamics are "true" in that frame only because measuring rods
> and clocks are undistorted in that frame). Einstein regarded such a
> possibility as a violation of his philosophic notion of the harmony of
> nature and the egalitarianism of inertial frames (PoR). He also claimed
> that nature does not seem to reveal any such frame in practice: Neither
> the mechanics of Newton nor any experiment in electrodynamics seems to
> reveal that any inertial frame is any different for the invention of
> the laws of physics from any other inertial frame. So, to Einstein, at
> heart Nature acts to rigorously maintain the PoR and the Light
> Principle (locally), but not the dependence of light speed on the
> source's motion. I emphasize that when I say "speed," I mean actual
> measured speed, not some hypothetical, unmeasurable speed.

I also read all that. But what I meant, can you clarify the physical light
propagation model that Einstein had in mind? Don't forget that Einstein
believed that photons really travel from A to B, and that light speed is
dictated by space.

Harald


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Question: Lorenz interpretation of SR v. Einsteins
    ... My understanding of the history of SR is that Lorenz ... > Lorenz treated them as purely a mathematical convenience, while Einstein ... > mechanism that actually follows from classical physics: ... existence of an aether frame and of a slow ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Question:Lorentz interpretation of SR vs to Einsteins
    ... My understanding of the history of SR is that Lorenz ... > Lorenz treated them as purely a mathematical convenience, while Einstein ... > mechanism that actually follows from classical physics: ... existence of an aether frame and of a slow ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: New challenge to Einstein from experiment?
    ... > Einstein never showed why that belief of his was justified. ... > invariant of FoR although its kinetic energy is frame dependent. ... > him as the new mesiah of physics. ... >> word in physics, that they represent Reality. ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: New challenge to Einstein from experiment?
    ... > Einstein never showed why that belief of his was justified. ... > invariant of FoR although its kinetic energy is frame dependent. ... > him as the new mesiah of physics. ... >> word in physics, that they represent Reality. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: The physical motions of photons in free space!
    ... >> Both photons will physically reach point B at the ... >> we will let each frame extend to both points A and B ... > This is where Einstein disagreed, but AFAIK he didn't explain his reasoning. ... The Light Principle is a physical fact, as much as anything in physics ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)