 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Natural Science Forum / Physics / Relativity / April 2007Max Planck.
============= Max Planck Nobel Lecture, June 2, 1920 "There is in particular one problem whose exhaustive solution could provide considerable elucidation. What becomes of the energy of a photon after complete emission?" This question still waits for its answer. =============== http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1918/planck-lecture.html > ============= > Max Planck [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > solution could provide considerable elucidation. > What becomes of the energy of a photon after complete emission?" Max, a photon is not an object. > Max, a photon is not an object. ==================== What is it ? a) math image, b) Dirac,s soup of virtual particles, c) ...etc Your Quote: "Can we get back to doing real physics instead of just manipulating math." is seems strange if you think " a photon is not an object ". > On Apr 22, 1:22 pm, maxwell <s...@shaw.ca> wrote:> Max, a photon is not an object. > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > math." > is seems strange if you think " a photon is not an object ". Linguists study nouns & verbs. Physicists study real entities & real processes. A photon is an extended interaction (process) between two electrons (entities). Now get on with it. > > On Apr 22, 1:22 pm, maxwell <s...@shaw.ca> wrote:> Max, a photon is not an object. > > Linguists study nouns & verbs. Physicists study real entities & real > processes. A photon is an extended interaction (process) between two > electrons (entities). Now get on with it. ======================================== It means that you say, that you admit electron and light quanta are real particles. Sorry. I cannot understand your position. > > > On Apr 22, 1:22 pm, maxwell <s...@shaw.ca> wrote:> Max, a photon is not an object. > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Sorry. > I cannot understand your position. First, linguistics. In English all parts of speech can be recast as nouns (nominalization). Just because something is a noun does NOT mean that it is a thing, eg walking, alertness, intelligence, etc. Real things (entities) are what we presume the world to consist of. They must interact (IOW participate in mutual processes - changing the properties of each other) otherwise they would not be part of the participating universe. So, entities persist across a finite time (IOW exist), like you & your spouse (if you are fortunate to have a long-term, interacting, one-on- one relationship). Each of you have independent existence (the key criteria to be considered an entity); this means your existence does not depend on the existence of any other entity (unless you are madly & romantically in love with your spouse when their demise might prompt precipitate action on your behalf!). Processes, events & relationships are dependent existents - they have no independent existence. If your relationship has been legally recognized then you both may claim that you are married. Colloquially, we also say (sloppily) that "your marriage exists". However, should one of you leave the marriage (perhaps by dying) then we will say that the marriage "no longer exists". Notice that the "existence" of the marriage is of a different ontological category than that of you & your spouse. Now, back to physics. Yes, electrons are entities, and as such exist & interact with each other. It has become fashionable to refer to this interaction as an "exchange of photons". So, electrons = you, 'photons' = marriage. Thus, 'photons' do not exist. Calling your marriage a 'virtual entity' just adds a level of confusion to the sloppiness of common language usage (don't go there). QED Does this help? > > > > On Apr 22, 1:22 pm, maxwell <s...@shaw.ca> wrote:> Max, a photon is not an object. > [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > sloppiness of common language usage (don't go there). QED > Does this help? ==================== And what are about Feynman's famous diagrams. > [snip] You asked "And what about Feynman's famous diagrams?" Just a graphical technique to help with a purely mathematical formulation (visualization is always more powerful psychologically than logic). A graph of your bank account does not mean that your cash is rising & falling against gravity. > On Apr 26, 5:55 am, socratus <israel...@bezeqint.net> wrote:> [snip] > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > than logic). A graph of your bank account does not mean that your > cash is rising & falling against gravity. =========== So, you want to say if two electrons go to marry they don't need the priest - photon. ================= But, what about photon in the Michelson's experiment? Is a photon not an object there? ======================== > > So, you want to say if two electrons go to marry > they don't need the priest - photon. > ================= > But, what about photon in the Michelson's experiment? > Is a photon not an object there? > ======================== No, I didn't mention priests. You are confusing the EVENT of the marriage ceremony (which might involve a priest - another entity) with the relationship of marriage, which is an ongoing series of interactions (PROCESS) between the spouses. No, the MMX experiment involves many interactions between source electrons, reflecting electrons in the mirrors & target electrons in the detector. No photons, just interactions between real entities IOW electrons. > No, the MMX experiment involves many interactions between source > electrons, reflecting electrons in the mirrors & target electrons in > the detector. No photons, just interactions between real entities IOW > electrons. =========== Maybe in the Michelson's experiment take part "just interactions between real entities IOW electrons." Maybe in the Michelson's experiment take part " Maxwell's demon", or " Schrödinger's cat ". It is not interesting for me which body jumps between the mirrors and the detector. For me is important the result of the Michelson's experiment: the speed of this entity - object - body is constant : c=1. Your " IOW electrons " cannot have this speed . =========== > > No, the MMX experiment involves many interactions between source > > electrons, reflecting electrons in the mirrors & target electrons in [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Your " IOW electrons " cannot have this speed . > =========== You are correct, the electrons in each part of the MMX do not move THROUGH the equipment but oscillate transversely in their own, local areas. It is this communication of motion between electrons that satifies the equation: delta(X) = c * delta(t). EM interprets this action-at-a-distance equation as the MOVEMENT of something ("light") between the electrons at speed c; it is just the space-time scaling parameter. Since light is not an entity it cannot move. > > > No, the MMX experiment involves many interactions between source > > > electrons, reflecting electrons in the mirrors & target electrons in [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > - Show quoted text - > EM interprets this > > action-at-a-distance equation as the MOVEMENT of something ("light") =============== Not " the MOVEMENT of something ("light") ", but " the MOVEMENT of something ("light quanta " Planck.) ===============. it is just the space-time scaling parameter. Since light is not an entity it cannot move. ================= We are free and independent people. ( ?! ) Everybody can think, interpret and understand the theory in his own way. Two examples. 1.. On the interferometer's field there are many birds. But suddenly came something with the speed c=1. It is very hard and complex to understand what it is. 2. There are many different vegetables on the Jones farm. But only potato can fly with constant speed c=1. Therefore, the clever farmer Jones think that the potato is something special and specific. But not everybody agrees with him. 3. ....etc.... |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2010 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.