PHOTONIC MASS

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Do Do - 01 May 2006 17:10 GMT

Rather than get entangled the silly thread PROOF THAT PHOTONS ARE NOT
MASSLESS, (119 messages) I will cut the Gordian knot and explain the
matter here.

Photons have a frequency (nu). Each element of that frequency has a
mass,
7.37203854 x 10^-48 gr. Let's call that m_q.

Therefore, m_q x nu = mass of the photon, (m_p)

m_p x c = momentum of the photon (P) = h nu/c

m_p x c^2 = energy of the photon (E) = h nu.

Notice that's E = mc^2

Electrons, protons, and neutrons also have frequencies.
m_q x their respective frequencies will yield their masses also.

THIS SHOWS THAT MASS AND RADIATION ARE COMPOSED OF THE SAME FREQUENCY
ELEMENT. What is that element? I call it THE quantum and describe it in
my
monograph entitled On the Quantum as a Physical Entity. It can be read
on
http://www.wbabin.net (The General Science Journal) under author
Vertner Vergon.

Reply to this Message

tony fleming - 02 May 2006 02:16 GMT

photon mass is a crucial question affecting the development of
mathematical physics.

self-field theory accepts the mass of the photon as reality and goes on
to predict a photon chemistry which sits BELOW the atomic structure
created by the larger particles such as electrons, protons, and
neutrons. it sees planck's constant as NOT a constant but a variable
of motion; and sees the particle/field system as fractal

www.unifiedphysics.com

if we knew WHAT the mass was we would be able to go ahead and predict
the spectropscopy of the photon, and hence we would be able to
experimentally tie in photon chemistry with the energy levels
associated with photon emissions from DNA such as observed by Popp and
Van Wijk.

http://www.biophotonen-online.de/abstract/abs2000-14.htm

the best estimate of the photon's lower limit is around 10^(-51) kgs
(see Lakes)
so any mass bigger than this seems implausible.

http://silver.neep.wisc.edu/~lakes/mu.html

Reply to this Message

Do Do - 03 May 2006 08:05 GMT

TONY
photon mass is a crucial question affecting the development of
mathematical physics.

self-field theory accepts the mass of the photon as reality and goes on

to predict a photon chemistry

VERGON
What is photon chemistry?

TOM
which sits BELOW the atomic structure
created by the larger particles such as electrons, protons, and
neutrons. it sees planck's constant as NOT a constant but a variable
of motion;

VERGON
So then h goes out the window as a constant? Where is the experimental
proof that a change in velocity changes h?

TOM
and sees the particle/field system as fractal

VERGON
In my theory, the entire universe is a fractal construction by a
sub-particle particle.

As to the mass of the photon, I reveal that in another current post.
It's the frequency number times 7.37203854 x 10^-48 gr. (Note how close
that is to
10^-51 kgs)

Now you say that's too large according to experiments that PURPORT to
ascertain the mass of the photon.

What they were really doing was obtaining the mass of a SINGLE static
field (Nieto & Goldhaber). This mass is the mass I have theoretically
obtained (given above) and is the mass of each element of frequency.In
other words, the mass ascertained was that of a photon of frequency 1.

Use the photonic mass I have given you and see if you can make your
predictions.

I'll tell you somethng of interest. Take the mass and multiply it by
the frequency numbers of the electron, proton, and neutron -- and you
will get the mass of each of them. This shows that radiation is a
fourth state of matter.

TOM
www.unifiedphysics.com

if we knew WHAT the mass was we would be able to go ahead and predict
the spectropscopy of the photon, and hence we would be able to
experimentally tie in photon chemistry with the energy levels
associated with photon emissions from DNA such as observed by Popp and
Van Wijk.

http://www.biophotonen-online.de/abstract/abs2000-14.htm

the best estimate of the photon's lower limit is around 10^(-51) kgs
(see Lakes)
so any mass bigger than this seems implausible.

Reply to this Message

The Real Chris - 07 May 2006 08:45 GMT

Hello, down there in hell.

A photon carries momentum and pointing vector says it has energy. So since
a photon is a short wavetrain then the total energy can be worked out from
hf where h is planck's constant and f is the frequency, since energy=mc^2
then the mass of the photon is =hf/c^2.

Simple.

When a atoms changes its energy level it also changes mass that is carried
away in the photon.

Hubbard said so first and stated all mass is energy. Einstien is another
philosopher who came to the same conclusion and made an accurate calculation
as a by-product of special relativity, not predicted before the calculation
of total energy.

Look at http://www.chrisscrazyideas.co.uk for some other ideas.

Chris.

> TONY
> photon mass is a crucial question affecting the development of
[quoted text clipped - 59 lines]
> (see Lakes)
> so any mass bigger than this seems implausible.

Reply to this Message

grisly - 07 May 2006 21:43 GMT

> Rather than get entangled the silly thread PROOF THAT PHOTONS ARE NOT
> MASSLESS, (119 messages) I will cut the Gordian knot and explain the
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> http://www.wbabin.net (The General Science Journal) under author
> Vertner Vergon.

"SPHERICITY:
When fully expanded the diameter of the sphere is one light
second (LS), 2.9979254 x 10^10 cm. When fully contracted it may be
considered a point. The transition rate is c."
have not seen a good reason other than anthropic that light must be
measured in seconds.

Reply to this Message

Do Do - 09 May 2006 07:19 GMT

have not seen a good reason other than anthropic that light must be
measured in seconds.

Mikelson spent a lifetime measuring the speed of light -- and he used
seconds as a matter of convenience.

Reply to this Message

Natural Science Forum / Physics / Particle Physics / May 2006

PHOTONIC MASS