HW@....(Henri Wilson) wrote in
:

On Fri, 11 May 2007 02:37:40 +0000 (UTC), bz
wrote:

HW@....(Henri Wilson) wrote in
m:

On Thu, 10 May 2007 13:00:28 +0000 (UTC), bz
wrote:

HW@....(Henri Wilson) wrote in
m:

I don't agree. I say they each emit randomly but the RATE at which
they emit is governed by the signal. The carrier 'frequency' relates
to varying photon density.


The carrier frequency is directly related to the energy of the
individual quanta and inversely proportional to the wavelength.

That doesn't conflict with what I said.

'the carrier "frequency" relates to varying photon density' is in direct
conflict with 'the carrier frequency is directly related to the
energy...'.

Of course a beam made of a
million identical photons will be a million times more intense than a
single photon.

The 'density' is proportional to the intensity and, for a single
frequency CW signal, does not vary.

No conflict there...

You seem to confuse intensity, energy, and density.

You seem generally confused Bob.

you said:
I don't agree. I say they each emit randomly but the RATE at which
they emit is governed by the signal. The carrier 'frequency' relates
to varying photon density.

I pointed out that was wrong and why.

You then said:
That doesn't conflict with what I said.

And now you think _I_ am confused!

Henri, why don't you just admit that you said something that was wrong?




--
bz

please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an
infinite set.

remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap