Re: On Planck's constant
From: Creighton Hogg (wchogg_at_hep.wisc.edu)
Date: 01/12/05
- Next message: Tim Golden: "Re: Polysigned Numbers"
- Previous message: kenseto: "Re: A Doable Experiment to Detect Absolute Motion"
- In reply to: Tim Golden: "Re: On Planck's constant"
- Next in thread: Tim Golden: "Re: On Planck's constant"
- Reply: Tim Golden: "Re: On Planck's constant"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:11:54 -0600
On 12 Jan 2005, Tim Golden wrote:
>
> RP wrote:
> > Torbjorn Larsson wrote:
> >
> > > "all photons are emitted spherically, which is much more apparent
> in
> > > the
> snip
> > the same field. EM fields do however interact with electromagnetic
> > particles, but not with other EM fields; fields only superpose over
> > each other producing constructive and destructive interference
> patterns.
>
> And this is exactly such a great mystery of the photon. How can two
> electromagnetic fields connected to a corpuscle not interact? So when I
> send two laser beams right through each other at perpendicular angles
> how can there be no interaction?
The photon does not have electric charge. There is no three photon vertex
in QED.
> I don't think that the alternating B/E field 90 degrees out of phase
> and orthogonal to each other is a very realistic view of the photon. If
> two photons of this sort are sent on paths near each other attractive
> and repulsive behavior results. The net force has to come out to zero.
> I'm not doing the math, just seeing an answer that is unlikely. The
> model is wonderful for the propagation part of the problem, but once
> the corpuscle is introduced doesn't it screw it up?
>
> The emperical behavior I accept. But does the model really work?
Classical electromagnetism is linear, so what's the problem?
- Next message: Tim Golden: "Re: Polysigned Numbers"
- Previous message: kenseto: "Re: A Doable Experiment to Detect Absolute Motion"
- In reply to: Tim Golden: "Re: On Planck's constant"
- Next in thread: Tim Golden: "Re: On Planck's constant"
- Reply: Tim Golden: "Re: On Planck's constant"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|