Re: PHOTON MASS -- A FACT. MASSLESS PARTICLES -- NOT FACT.


Randy Poe wrote:
Vert wrote:
So I repeat (for the 40th time)

Yes you do, but there is no N such that N repetitions will convert
a false statement into a true one.

Since p = mv,

False premise. p is not mv.

explain momentum without mass.Let's
see how you dodge that.

I don't know what the deeper definition of momentum is that includes
both gamma*m*v for particles with mass and h/lambda for photons.
Probably something in terms of wavenumber k, which is the natural
conjugate variable to position. "Momentum wave function" in QM
is the wavefunction in terms of k, IIRC.

Without the deeper mathematical connection, you could think
of it as an operational definition: p is *defined* as gamma*m*v
for particles which don't move at c, and hbar*k for particles
which do. The definition would be motivated by conservation
of momentum: what momentum does a particle get in a
collision with a photon? If you use hbar*k as the momentum
of the photon and assume conservation of momentum, you get
the right behavior of the massive particle.

(And we see here who's ignorant.)

Interesting comment, since you are making your answers up
in the absence of education on the related definitions.

Unlike you, I will admit ignorance: I'm pretty sure there is a
definition that encompasses all particles, but offhand I don't know
that I've ever seen it. hbar*k seems the most likely candidate
based on conjugate variable grounds.

You on the other hand, are also ignorant in the same sense of
having never seen the unified definition, but choose to make
up your own, or pretend that there never has been such a
definition, rather than actually investigate.

As for p =hk, don't explain k.

I've actually heard k referred to as momentum (in Solid State
physics, in connection with phonons), though more commonly
it is called the wavenumber. It's the Fourier Transform of
position, in the same way that frequency is the FT of time.

- Randy
VERGON
You're missing the whole point. The question is, does the photon have
mass? The minute you introduce h, you introduce mass.

As to hbar * k transfering the correct momentum, not according to the
Compton experiment.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Field Quanta
    ... Fock states are vectors in a Hilbert space, Feynman diagrams are not. ... with n particles". ... Q: What's their total momentum? ... linear momentum isn't zero, the photon is off-shell, then by definition ...
    (sci.physics.research)
  • Re: If electromagnetism is photons, why dont light bulbs attract each other?
    ... Virtual particles are really not just like classical bullets." ... I read this as saying they aren't carriers of momentum. ... Feynman diagrams insist that momentum and energy are locally ... represented is that photon is coming toward the positron from the left ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: PHOTON MASS -- A FACT. MASSLESS PARTICLES -- NOT FACT.
    ... a false statement into a true one. ... both gamma*m*v for particles with mass and h/lambda for photons. ... "Momentum wave function" in QM ... of the photon and assume conservation of momentum, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Cherenkov Radiation false if light is the smallest mass (quanta)??
    ... That's not a proper definition of momentum. ... That's the 2nd law. ... an electron is not a wave only. ... Here PD magically converts particles into magical ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: negative light pressure
    ... >The conservation of linear momentum tells that the only way this can ... >work is if the departing particles have more momentum than the ... But does the amount of energy provided by a photon ... You can tack through the solar wind, but it relies on gravity to provide ...
    (rec.puzzles)