Re: Is there a Maximum frequency for light?
- From: bz <bz+spr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 28 May 2007 10:58:47 +0000 (UTC)
socratus <israelsad@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in news:1180342753.850675.27970
@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com:
" bz" wrote:
1.
Not at all. The mass of the observable universe is estimated to be
about
3 x 10^55 g, convert it all to energy and double it for good measure.
That gives 5.6 x 10^69 joules.
=================
The mass of the observable universe is estimated to be about
......0,4 % of " dark mass ".
So, add a couple of orders of magnitude. That would give ~5x10^71 Joules.
Frequency ~8x10^95 GHz
wavelength ~3x10^-101 meters
If you don't like my guess at the maximum energy in the universe make your
own. You can STILL estimate the max possible frequency and minimum possible
wavelength.
2.
Pleas[sic], don't pretend to ask stupid questions.
f = E/h
8x10^93 GHz
Now, do your homework this time and compute the wavelength.
==================
It doesn't have any attitude to : c=1.
I don't know what h is in 'natural units' and not willing to go look it up
right now
3.
Not at all. There are an infinite number of things to know. Our
knowledge
is finite. Each one of us is infinitely ignorant.
================
Sorry.
It is difficult to understand you.
But I will try.
a) There are an infinite number of things.
about each thing there is an infinite number of facts to know.
for example, there is a hydrogen atom in a protein molecule in the finger
nail on the third finger of your left hand.
To know the exact(as closely as could be determined under the Heissenberg
uncertainty principle) location of that atom from the moment of its
creation in the big bang until its distruction when struck by a cosmic ray,
30 minutes from now.... to know all those positions involves an infinite
number of facts.
Do that for each particle in the universe, an infinity of infinities.
b) Our knowledge is (finite) - limited.
Quite true, unless you are more than a just a gesture made by the hand of
god.
Of course, as we are all just self aware bits of star vomit, perhaps we are
less important than we think we are.
c) ( Therefore) Each one of us is infinitely ignorant.
That is my thesis.
I think you mixed two things:
You think. I think you think wrong. I think you mistake things for
knowledge about things.
a) The theory of Nature (itself)
b) And the theory of knowledge the Nature.
These are two different but very connected theories.
One is finite but involves a large number of things.
The second is infinite, just like the number of point on this line _____
Remember, when you use the Socratic method,
"You teach best what you most need to learn".
[a favorite quote of mine, from 'Illusions' by Richard Bach, a book that is
well worth reading.]
--
bz
please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an
infinite set.
bz+spr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap
.
- References:
- Is there a Maximum frequency for light?
- From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Is there a Maximum frequency for light?
- From: guskz@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Is there a Maximum frequency for light?
- From: socratus
- Re: Is there a Maximum frequency for light?
- From: bz
- Re: Is there a Maximum frequency for light?
- From: socratus
- Re: Is there a Maximum frequency for light?
- From: bz
- Re: Is there a Maximum frequency for light?
- From: socratus
- Is there a Maximum frequency for light?
- Prev by Date: Re: E = mc2 is Not Einstein's Discovery
- Next by Date: What is the GR precession per second?
- Previous by thread: Re: Is there a Maximum frequency for light?
- Next by thread: Re: Is there a Maximum frequency for light?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
