Re: What is light?

Richard Feynman talks about light
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjHJ7FmV0M4&feature=related


--
Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
Best Regards!


<mluttgens@xxxxxxxxx> kirjoitti
viestissä:a59eb252-d209-4897-a915-0763fdcc264a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 2 mai, 17:38, RP <no_mail_no_s...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On May 2, 7:22 am, mluttg...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:





On 2 mai, 05:48, RP <no_mail_no_s...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On May 1, 3:27 pm, mluttg...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

On 1 mai, 20:57, RP <no_mail_no_s...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On May 1, 1:34 pm, mluttg...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

On 1 mai, 19:42, RP <no_mail_no_s...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On May 1, 12:15 pm, mluttg...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

On 1 mai, 18:57, RP <no_mail_no_s...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On May 1, 11:55 am, RP <no_mail_no_s...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On May 1, 11:28 am, mluttg...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

What is light?
Does a light pulse extends to infinity?

See Wikipedia, Bell's theorem

"Theoretical challenges

Some advocates of the hidden variables idea believe
that experiments
have ruled out
local hidden variables. They are ready to give up
locality, explaining
the violation of Bell's
inequality by means of a "non-local" hidden variable
theory, in which
the particles
exchange information about their states. This is the
basis of the Bohm
interpretation
of quantum mechanics, which requires that all
particles in the
universe be able to
*instantaneously* exchange information with all
others. A recent
experiment
ruled out a large class of non-Bohmian "non-local"
hidden variable
theories.[16]

If the hidden variables can communicate with each
other faster than
light,
Bell's inequality can easily be violated."

See Wikipedia, Salart et al (2008) Separation in a
Bell Test

"This experiment filled a loophole by providing an 18
km separation
between
detectors, which is sufficient to allow the completion
of the quantum
state
measurements before any information could have
traveled between the
two
detectors. The test confirmed the non-local nature of
quantum
correlations.[3][4]"

Marcel Luttgens

The polarization doesn't change. It's the same when
detected as it was
when it was emitted. So called rotation of the
polarization is just
the superposition of other wave(s) over the source
wave(s). The
resultant polarization is a vector sum of the em fields.
Light doesn't
exist. Einstein was right one this one, they were
talking total
nonsense.

On the other hand their confusion was ultimately his
fault. He was the
one who convinced them of the existence of photons

Light doesn't exist? What do you exactly mean?
What about GR and its daughter, SRT?

Marcel Luttgens

What about direct particle interation theories. One of those
produced
by Feynman, photon master.

Special relativity, in the case of Feynman's absorber theory,
is not
only adhered to, but is a requirement of the theory. It is via
interaction through spacetime (vs space) that the classical
Maxwellian
waves are proved to be redundant. In fact there is a good deal
of
resemblance between the warping of spacetime by masses (GR)
and the
method by which charges interact in Feynman's theory. Light is
an
effect, not a thing in its own right. Any other perspective
contains
superfluous entities, that like pixies, can't be disproven, so
must
exist. Of course this isn't valid logic is it?

That light doesn't exist by itself, iow that it could be a mere
interaction effect, could perhaps explain communication faster
than light, thanks to some "warping of spacetime".

I will carefully think of this when 'sun-bathing' in a Mexican
resort, regardless of valid logic.

But a dummy's conclusion is that nobody has a real clue about
the nature of light, especially about the origin of its
properties.

Marcel Luttgens- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Then Feynman admitted to being dummy, because he agreed with that
conclusion. :) I guess that makes me a dummy too.

Nice honest reaction.

But I am still wondering about how an interaction effect could
be transmitted faster than c in a so-called "warped" spacetime,
as even the "speed of gravity" cannot exceed c.

Marcel Luttgens- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I don't know about any interactions that occur faster than c and
didn't propose any.

If gravitational interactions, which involve a time delay equal to r/
c, can occur without a medium or exchange particles to carry the
forces back and forth, per the general theory of relativity, then why
should electromagnetic interactions require either of these to carry
the forces back and forth? Do these events not occur in precisely the
same spacetime manifold?

Consider the interaction of two massive point charges. Charge A is
deflected by some incoming influence, either gravitational or
electromagnetic, doesn't matter which. The result will be that an
outgoing em wave is generated by the acceleration of the point charge.
At a time r/c later another point charge (B) jiggles in response to
the jiggle of A. Two forces are transmitted from A to B, one
gravitational (gravitational wave), and one electromagnetic (em wave).
Both are emitted simulataneously and both detected simultanesously.
Where in this picture can it be concluded that one of these forces
requires either a medium or exchange particles while the other force
requires neither a medium nor exchange particles?

In the 4D spacetime manifold of Minkowski, time is the derived element
rather than one of the fundamental elements. Speed and distance are
fundamental, time is a derived value, and different observers will
derive different time values for the separation of two events. An
observer moving at a speed approaching c would derive time values
approching zero between any two lightlike events occuring along his
path. If there were any particles moving along beside him carrying
energy and momentum, then in his frame of reference these particles
will have propagated instantly from one electron to another, and thus
with no delay, and will have travelled nowhere, since there is no
spatial displacement between the two events, all of that space having
Lorentz contracted so much that it simply disappears. So light, if it
consisted of moving projectiles of any sort, would exist nowhere and
nowhen. It would be equivlent to pixies.

So from such a frame of reference (that of the hypothetical light
particle) any delay between the lightlike events as measured by an
observer at rest wrt the source of the light pulse, would have to be
just a measurement artifact produced by 4D spacetime geometry. In
particular because of a preconcieved notion about the absoluteness of
time.

The inevitable conclusion is that particles interact directly through
time. Because of this the question "what happens in the space between
during the instants in time occuring between the times of emission and
absorption?" becomes a moot question. For the interacting particles
there are no moments in time between the events. The events are
simultaneous. This hopscotching back and forth through time is what
actually powers the mechanism of time. Without it the universe would
be frozen in a single instant, moving nowhere, never changing, static,
frozen, for all practical purposes nonexistent. Existence cannot
possibly be defined as all of the events occuring at the present
instant in time. Velocity requires a minimum of two instants in time
to define, and thus to lend reality to it. For acceleration the number
of instants required is no less than three. Etc. etc. for as many
higher derivitives as you care to list. Thus these instants in time
must coexist with each other. What links these instants together in
the 4D block universe is the lightlike events that we were just
speaking of.

Feynman probably does a better job of explaining this, but this is
essentially a paraphrasing of his own account of the matter. My
interpretation may differ a bit, but there you go.

In the experimenthttp://www.physorg.com/news132830327.html

"In an attempt to rule out any kind of communication between entangled
particles, physicists from the University of Geneva
have sent two entangled photons traveling to different towns
located 18 km apart - the longest distance for this type of
quantum measurement.
The distance enabled the physicists to completely finish performing
their quantum measurements at each detector before any information
could have time to travel between the two towns."

The "quantum measurements" part is where the solution is found.
Incorrect assumptions about light are applied, which in turn yeild
incorrect conclusions. Let's get rid of "photons" and look at the
problem from the perspective of retarded potentials. The entire
premise of the experiment vanishes. There are no entangled photons,
there are just retarded potentials.


Could your intepretation apply to entangled electrons?

I found a recent experiment about them, but I am a bit skeptical
about its validity. Anyhow, new experiments will be made, which
will once again vindicate QM.

Hereafter is a reference to that experiment:

"Intercontinental Quantum Liaisons Between Entangled Electrons

The experiments reported in this paper were carried out
with space-separated entangled crystals in Baton Rouge,
Louisiane (USA) and Givarlais (France) distant of 8,182 km.
Samples of doped lithium fluoride, an excellent TLD material
used industrially have been irradiated together at one
location in order to create entangled traps in spatially
collocated TLD chips via simultaneous Bremsstrahlung
irradiation of a medical accelerator on spatially collocated
pairs of TLD chips. One of the chips was then mailed to Baton
Rouge and its entangled counterpart was kept in Givarlais.
Thermally heating the sample located in Baton Rouge has
produced in the corresponding entangled sample measured under
a photomultiplier in Givarlais at ambient temperature,
correlated signals while he TLD temperature was increased
and then allowed to decrease by turning off the TLD
heating oven in Baton Rouge. The instant that maximum
temperature of the TLD is attained in Baton Rouge corresponds
exactly with the instant of maximum correlation of PMT
signal recorded in Givarlais."

Marcel Luttgens







This raises two questions:

- Is there a limit to such distance?

plus de détails »


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: What is light?
    ... which requires that all particles in the ... which is sufficient to allow the completion of the quantum ... measurements before any information could have traveled between the ... Velocity requires a minimum of two instants in time ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Hobbas misconceptions
    ... |>> to prove any such thing with respect to identical particles. ... |>Non-identical particles are a quantum effect of fields. ... |>> The problem appears to be you and bohmian mechanics. ... If two operators commute with a third one, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Hobbas misconceptions
    ... >> to prove any such thing with respect to identical particles. ... >Non-identical particles are a quantum effect of fields. ... >> The problem appears to be you and bohmian mechanics. ... If two operators commute with a third one, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The time it takes to emit one photon
    ... The only thing is that quantum fields are not necessary ... Particles are excitations of fields". ... Some property that may look obscure in one formulation may be completely ... >> many photons, and the light intensity appears continuous on the screen. ...
    (sci.physics.research)
  • Re: Download a new book on quantum mechanics and relativity.
    ... But corrections to the Lorentz ... >>rods and clocks used for the measurements. ... >>particle observables, such as position, momentum, spin, velocity, mass. ... for massive particles the spectrum of V is the interior of the ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)