Re: Is Photon = no mass because its a wave?? Electron is a wave with mass?
- From: "tomgee" <tyropress@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 6 Jun 2006 13:03:14 -0700
Igor wrote:
guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:That is an illogical conclusion. A transverse wave causes
Is the answer simply because a photon cannot reach "c" velocity and
have a mass or is it because Bilge is bald??
The photon has no mass because it corresponds to a transverse wave.
The quantum of a wave can only possess mass if the wave has a
longitudinal component. Electron has it, photon doesn't appear to have
it.
crosswise disturbances of a medium making it vibrate at
right angles to the direction of its travel. That should be
proof enough for all that light moves in a medium, but nooo
they continue to argue foolishly that light needs no medium.
Why do you say that a particle of a wave can have mass
IF and ONLY IF (IFF) the wave is a longitudinal wave? A
wave is a disturbance of a medium and as such it can have
no massive particles as a component to it. We are simply
describing the effects we observe when we say particles
exhibit wave characteristics and vice-versa. It is a paradox
that such an effect is observed. Just like time dilation, it is
the effect that is paradoxical, not the cause of the effect.
Physicists have built upon those same effects to provide
explanations that are as illogical as yours and only mire
physics deeper into the mud of the bog it has again gotten
itself into since the mid-20th century.
There is only one logical explanation for time dilation and
only one for the dual nature of light, and both are suggested
by my model of the universe. Emr is supposedly radiation
of particles into space, but that is the same as heat flowing
from a warm place to a cooler place. In both instances, it
is em waves moving through a medium at c, a speed at
which massive particles cannot travel.
It looks to us as if quantum particles of energy are moving
at c because when we measure light we can also observe
photon particles. But that does not mean the particles are
moving along with the light waves. It only means that when-
ever we observe light we can also observe particles of that
light. We naturally assume that those particles are moving
at c along with the em waves. However, my model suggests
otherwise.
I think that the particles do not move along with the em wave,
but that they are in place when the wave moves through them.
They are the media for light to move in. The ether made of
Gamow's universal sea of particles that exist as Dirac's neg-
ative mass invisible particles, or what we today call Dark
Matter. The readers must ask themselves, "What can I do
with this new idea? Should I not try to find a way to over-
throw it that is as logical as the idea itself? How long and how
far should I go to fight this new idea before I can turn around
and try to understand it better? Why do I not want to accept
it? What if it turns out he's right and we're wrong, like history
shows that has often happened to move science along?"
Personal opinions without logical or other valid support are
NOT solicited here. If you can't support your opinion, you
are not capable of reasonable thought, and you are a waste
of time.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Is Photon = no mass because its a wave?? Electron is a wave with mass?
- From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Is Photon = no mass because its a wave?? Electron is a wave with mass?
- From: Igor
- Is Photon = no mass because its a wave?? Electron is a wave with mass?
- Prev by Date: Re: Length Contraction Fully Explained
- Next by Date: Re: Length Contraction Fully Explained
- Previous by thread: Re: Is Photon = no mass because its a wave?? Electron is a wave with mass?
- Next by thread: Re: Is Photon = no mass because its a wave?? Electron is a wave with mass?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
