Re: gravitational bending of light, surprising?

On 16 mai, 04:49, Dono <sa...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On May 15, 7:19 pm, mluttg...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:



So, if you want to disprove GR (as you keep trying) you cannot use the
WRONG formula and pick it from your "other" much hated theory, SR. :-)

I don't 'hate' SR, I only think it is only valid in absence of masses,
which means, of course, that it is not applicable in the real world.

And I don't try to disprove GR. I only want to make clear, that in
many
situations, GR results can be obtained by classical mechanics extended
by QM concepts.

You mean RELATIVISTIC QM , Lattkes, right? Not classical QM. Try
remembering that next time you try to pull a fast one :-)

Maybe you are evolving a little bit in your old age.
Point is that you can't use E=mc^2 as the kinetic energy of the
photon.

Notice that both are not exclusive, contrary to what
you seemingly believe.

You mean RELATIVISTIC QM and Newtonian mechanics? I'm afraid they are.
Try a new hobby.

Anyhow, I am looking forward to Steve Carlip's overall opinion.

He'll tell you the same thing.

Don't be so sure.
Claiming that the following wiki paragraph is written by someone
with an ax to grind, not a very good physicist, doesn't mean that
it is meaningless.

"The energy of a system that emits a photon is decreased by the
energy E of the photon as measured in the rest frame of the emitting
system, which may result in a reduction in mass in the amount
E / c2.
Similarly, the mass of a system that absorbs a photon is increased
by a corresponding amount. As an application, the energy balance
of nuclear reactions involving photons is commonly written in terms
of the masses of the nuclei involved, and terms of the form E / c2
for the gamma photons (and for other relevant energies, such as the
recoil energy of nuclei).[77]"

Notice that terms of the form E/c^2 correpond to the 'relativistic'
mass of photons.

Marcel Luttgens



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Nobel Prize for David Thomson?!
    ... force will invariably stress the aether to ... >> having zero mass, no electric charge, and an indefinitely long lifetime. ... So indeed, a photon IS energy. ...
    (sci.physics.particle)
  • Re: Nobel Prize for David Thomson?!
    ... force will invariably stress the aether to ... >> having zero mass, no electric charge, and an indefinitely long lifetime. ... So indeed, a photon IS energy. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Nobel Prize for David Thomson?!
    ... force will invariably stress the aether to ... >> having zero mass, no electric charge, and an indefinitely long lifetime. ... So indeed, a photon IS energy. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: "A Snapshot of a Photon"
    ... of the effective mass of the rest of the ... conserve total energy. ... oaf a wave. ... determine what a photon would look like if we had a "godlike" ability to ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Only some energy has mass?
    ... that it has mass of that value. ... with no zero rest mass absorbed the photon. ... arises - a lump of energy is absorbed by another lump of energy ... > matter in motion. ...
    (sci.physics)