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

On Thu, 30 Aug 2007 12:31:39 +0000 (UTC), bz
wrote:

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

not solid rubber ones.....that's what I'm talking about.

Whatever.

Is that all you can say...'whatever' when we're discussing the basis
of my 'K factor' theory..?


Henri, your 'K factor' theory died some time back when I pointed out
that a 'K factor' compression of photons implies observable effects that
are not observed.

......but they are
That is why brightness and velocity curves are usually similar in shape
but different in magnituge change.

Any effect on photons causing them to compress when crowded together
would show up as shifts in wavelength and frequency of the emission from
high intensity sources, such as lasers.

...but photon density isn't actually what CAUSES them to compress. It
just happens to occur concurrently.Photons compress if their source is
accelerating or if they change speed during travel...but they're kind of
'damped' so the movement doesn't go on forever.

Photons 'change speed' during travel when they go from one medium to
another. Yet we see no sign of photon "compression" taking place, even
when the speed change is drastic, the groups of photons and the photons
themselves change 'length' by exactly the same percentage, as George has
repeatedly pointed out. The widths of pulses from pulsars, the spacing
between the pulses and the frequencies of the pulses change by the exactly
the same amounts, likewise laser pulses traveling along optical fibers


Also, 'as the pressure goes down, the photons would decompress' just
like the rubber ball springs back when removed from the depths. Surely
the weak streams of photons we receive from those distant stars have
insufficient 'pressure' to keep the photons compressed.

You can't propose a 'non elastic compression', where the photons stay
compressed because they are already 'highly compressed' at the time of
emission by the star.

the K factor is small. maybe 10^-4

No matter what it is, it must be observed and if it is truly a 'K'
'factor', it must be constant. Perhaps it is a 'D' factor and proportional
to the density of the waether.

Also lasers can operate at very low emission rates (in fact, there are
single photon lasers) and any such effect would show up as drastic
shifts in the emission band as the laser's output power was varied.

Give up on your 'K'. It is disproved daily by millions of laser diodes
used for gigabyte fiber optical data transmission.

no Bob you have it all wrong...

A 'K' won't work because it doesn't work.


If the photons 'bunched up' the way you propose, it would cause very
strong phase shifts and keying transients, making it impossible to push
data down those fibers at the rates data is sent, every day.

If you ever have heard a radio-telegraph transmitters that has chirp
(frequency shift during turn-on) and clicks (wide keying sidebands due
to too sharp turn-on/turn-off), you will know that such a transmitter
can cause interference with communications across a wide portion of the
radio spectrum. Any attempt to transmit data at a high data rate, with
such a transmitter, would fail.

That is exactly why your 'K' factor 'photon compression' idea is dead.

You have entirely the wrong impression...

Then tell me how your 'rubber cars' look now.




--
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