Natural Science Forum / Physics / New Theories / June 2007

"A Snapshot of a Photon"

    The photon has been viewed as a somewhat mysterious entity which
sometimes has the properties of a particle and sometimes has the properties
oaf a wave. It would seem interesting to see, therefore, whether we can
determine what a photon would look like if we had a "godlike" ability to
"see" it without the restrictions imposed by our limits of observation.

    Since the photon is electromagnetic in nature, perhaps the best place
to start is by examining the nature of an electromagnetic wave emitted by a
dipole, such as the antenna of a radio transmitter. There is no question
that this radiation consists of crossed electric and magnetic fields having
a 90 degree phase relationship to each other. These fields are readily
observed and allow us to use them for communication over distance.
http://einsteinhoax.com/cf131.gif. We also know by observation that this
wave is actually composed of discrete "lumps" of energy called photons
because it is noisy. The noise energy of the wave varies in proportion to
the square root of its total energy. As a result, the signal (energy in the
wave) to noise (energy in the wave components) ratio of the wave itself
varies inversely with the square root of the waves strength. The effect is
well described in handbooks on electromagnetic communication and seems
beyond challenge.

    If we attenuate the wave sufficiently, it becomes a parade of the
individual particles (photons) appearing as separate entities which may be
detected separately. The question to be answered is what the nature of these
particles must be so that in the aggregate they can form a smooth continuous
wave. To meet this requirement, the photons in the wave must be coherent.
This means that they must have the same polarization and be appropriately
phased so that they can add properly. (In lasers this coherency is defined
as the distance of millions of cycles over which the phase and polarization
match is maintained.)

    The question to be answered is what form does the photon have to be in
order to be capable of combining with other wavelets to form the coherent
wave. The answer is probably provided by the "Impulse Function", 1/(e*x^2).
Multiplying the continuous wave by this function provides, for the photons
which compose the wave. a shape shown by http://einsteinhoax.com/cf133.gif.
One only need to imagine the electric and magnetic components of this
construction propagating along its axis at the velocity of light to envision
what a photon "looks like".

    When one combines this shape with the quantum coupling between photons
which has been demonstrated by the work of Quantum Physicists, one finds
that he describes the kind of entity that has the dual wave and particle
properties we associate with a photon. The only question left is why the
nature of the photon is considered to be mysterious.

    The source material for this posting may be found in
http://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm (1997); http://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm 
(1987); and http://einsteinhoax.com/relcor.htm (1997). EVERYTHING WHICH WE
ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING ELSE WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS
TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OBSERVATIONS, AND IT MUST BE
MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT ALWAYS MEET THIS
REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF WORKMANSHIP FROM
THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.

    All of the Newsposts made by this site may be viewed at the
http://einsteinhoax.com/postinglog.htm.

    Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not monitored on
a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same courtesy
as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our parts,
please do not raise objections that are not related to material that you
have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary.

    E-mail:- einsteinhoax@isp.com. If you wish a reply, be sure that your
mail reception is not blocked.

    The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 8
years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF THE
MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by
individuals who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without
questioning it. If anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be
objectively answered, the material at the Website will be withdrawn.
Challenges to date have revealed only the responder's inadequacy with one
exception for which a correction was provided.