Re: How Can Light NOT be Ballistic?
- From: "Hexenmeister" <vanquish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 21:32:56 GMT
"Sue..." <suzysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1145904011.598513.125320@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
| Henri Wilson wrote:
| > A remote atom in space emits a package of energy, as one of its electrons moves
| > to a different energy level. The package moves away from the atom in a
| > particular direction and continues on through space as ONE single unit.
| >
| > We could just as easily replace the single 'photon' with a brief pulse of laser
| > light...or a sudden burst of light from a star.
| >
| > We know that such a pulse retains its character as it travels across vast
| > distances. Its eventual target, if any, is unknown. We also know that we could
| > set up an experiment to show that it takes a finite amount of time to travel
| > between any two points in space.
| >
| > In fact, the pulse behaves exactly like any other missile. It is ballistic.
|
| Missiles that split four ways ?
Nah... seven.
You are way out of date (as usual).
Russia Crosses Warheads
Kommersant, Russia - 8 hours ago
.... a post-boost platform, on which up to six nuclear warheads can be
http://tinyurl.com/nunhl
Androcles.
| http://www.eso.org/projects/vlti/
|
| <<Now, does not the prize to Einstein imply
| that the Academy recognised the particle
| nature of light? The Nobel Committee says
| that Einstein had found that the energy exchange
| between matter and ether occurs by atoms emitting
| or absorbing a quantum of energy,hv .
|
| As a consequence of the new concept of light quanta
| (in modern terminology photons) Einstein proposed the
| law that an electron emitted from a substance by
| monochromatic light with the frequency has to have
| a maximum energy of E=hv-p, where p is the energy needed to
| remove the electron from the substance. Robert Andrews
| Millikan carried out a series of measurements over a
| period of 10 years, finally confirming the validity of this
| law in 1916 with great accuracy. Millikan had, however,
| found the idea of light quanta to be unfamiliar and strange.
|
| The Nobel Committee avoids committing itself to the
| particle concept. Light-quanta or with modern terminology,
| photons, were explicitly mentioned in the reports on
| which the prize decision rested only in connection with
| emission and absorption processes. The Committee says
| that the most important application of Einstein's photoelectric
| law and also its most convincing confirmation has come from
| the use Bohr made of it in his theory of atoms, which explains
| a vast amount of spectroscopic data. >>
| http://nobelprize.org/physics/articles/ekspong/index.html
|
| http://nobelprize.org/physics/laureates/1965/feynman-lecture.html
|
|
| Sue...
|
| >
| >
| > HW.
| > www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
| >
| > Appropriate message snipping is considerate and painless.
|
.
- References:
- Re: How Can Light NOT be Ballistic?
- From: Sue...
- Re: How Can Light NOT be Ballistic?
- Prev by Date: Re: How Can Light NOT be Ballistic?
- Next by Date: Re: How Can Light NOT be Ballistic?
- Previous by thread: Re: How Can Light NOT be Ballistic?
- Next by thread: Re: How Can Light NOT be Ballistic?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
