Photons May Emit Faster-Than-Light Particles!

"If photons do break down, the results of such decay must be even lighter particles, ones that would travel even faster than photons. Assuming photons have mass, "there is only one particle we know from the Standard Model of particle physics that might be even lighter -- the lightest of the three neutrinos," Heeck said.

Neutrinos are ghostly particles that only very rarely interact with normal matter. Countless neutrinos rush through everyone on Earth every day with no effect.

"It might well be that the neutrino is lighter than the photon," Heeck said.. In principle, each photon might decay into two of the lightest neutrinos.

"The lightest neutrino, being lighter than light, would then actually travel faster than photons," Heeck said.

The idea of neutrinos that move faster than photons would seem to violate the notion, based on Einstein's theory of relativity, that nothing can travel faster than light. However, this assumption is based on the idea of the photon not having any mass. Einstein's theory of relativity "just states that no particle can travel faster than a massless particle," Heeck said."

http://www.livescience.com/38533-pho...particles.html

I've been saying for years that photons have mass!

Double-A

In article ,
Double-A wrote:

http://www.livescience.com/38533-pho...ight-particles.
html

Photons having mass would result in other observables none of which have yet
been observed.

--
:- Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
Icke's razor: Given two equally plausible explanations, choose the weirder.

On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 5:38:18 PM UTC-7, Siri Crews wrote:
In article ,

Double-A wrote:



http://www.livescience.com/38533-pho...ight-particles.

html



Photons having mass would result in other observables none of which have yet

been observed.



--

:- Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.

'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'

Icke's razor: Given two equally plausible explanations, choose the weirder.

Only entangled photons can represent/create mass.

On Thursday, July 17, 2014 8:18:32 AM UTC-7, Brad Guth wrote:
On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 5:38:18 PM UTC-7, Siri Crews wrote:

In article ,



Double-A wrote:







http://www.livescience.com/38533-pho...ight-particles.



html







Photons having mass would result in other observables none of which have yet



been observed.







--



:- Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.



'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'



Icke's razor: Given two equally plausible explanations, choose the weirder.



Only entangled photons can represent/create mass.


Every other particle has mass, so why not the photon. I came to that conclusion after reading Feynman's book on QED. As far as quantum properties are concerned, there is nothing special about the photon. Only a matter of degree.

Double-A

On Thursday, July 17, 2014 3:45:38 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:

Every other particle has mass, so why not the photon. I came to that conclusion after reading Feynman's book on QED. As far as quantum properties are concerned, there is nothing special about the photon. Only a matter of degree.

Double-A

That's very sensible. After all, something has to be making up the mass of an electron. I like the interpretations by mpc755, as to everything (including photons) displacing aether.

On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 5:26:18 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:
"If photons do break down, the results of such decay must be even lighter particles, ones that would travel even faster than photons. Assuming photons have mass, "there is only one particle we know from the Standard Model of particle physics that might be even lighter -- the lightest of the three neutrinos," Heeck said.



Neutrinos are ghostly particles that only very rarely interact with normal matter. Countless neutrinos rush through everyone on Earth every day with no effect.



"It might well be that the neutrino is lighter than the photon," Heeck said. In principle, each photon might decay into two of the lightest neutrinos.



"The lightest neutrino, being lighter than light, would then actually travel faster than photons," Heeck said.



The idea of neutrinos that move faster than photons would seem to violate the notion, based on Einstein's theory of relativity, that nothing can travel faster than light. However, this assumption is based on the idea of the photon not having any mass. Einstein's theory of relativity "just states that no particle can travel faster than a massless particle," Heeck said."



http://www.livescience.com/38533-pho...particles.html



I've been saying for years that photons have mass!



Double-A

AA If it goes faster than light begs the question. "Where does it get this extra energy? Also faster than light is not permitted by two of my best theories. TreBert

On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 5:26:18 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:
"If photons do break down, the results of such decay must be even lighter particles, ones that would travel even faster than photons. Assuming photons have mass, "there is only one particle we know from the Standard Model of particle physics that might be even lighter -- the lightest of the three neutrinos," Heeck said.
Photons never break down.Photons go with quantum spin that is in my SPIN THEORY
Parts of atoms never break down. PERIOD TreBert

Neutrinos are ghostly particles that only very rarely interact with normal matter. Countless neutrinos rush through everyone on Earth every day with no effect.



"It might well be that the neutrino is lighter than the photon," Heeck said. In principle, each photon might decay into two of the lightest neutrinos.



"The lightest neutrino, being lighter than light, would then actually travel faster than photons," Heeck said.



The idea of neutrinos that move faster than photons would seem to violate the notion, based on Einstein's theory of relativity, that nothing can travel faster than light. However, this assumption is based on the idea of the photon not having any mass. Einstein's theory of relativity "just states that no particle can travel faster than a massless particle," Heeck said."



http://www.livescience.com/38533-pho...particles.html



I've been saying for years that photons have mass!



Double-A

On Friday, July 18, 2014 11:16:28 AM UTC-7, G=EMC^2TreBert wrote:
On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 5:26:18 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:

"If photons do break down, the results of such decay must be even lighter particles, ones that would travel even faster than photons. Assuming photons have mass, "there is only one particle we know from the Standard Model of particle physics that might be even lighter -- the lightest of the three neutrinos," Heeck said.

Photons never break down.Photons go with quantum spin that is in my SPIN THEORY

Parts of atoms never break down. PERIOD TreBert



Neutrinos are ghostly particles that only very rarely interact with normal matter. Countless neutrinos rush through everyone on Earth every day with no effect.







"It might well be that the neutrino is lighter than the photon," Heeck said. In principle, each photon might decay into two of the lightest neutrinos.







"The lightest neutrino, being lighter than light, would then actually travel faster than photons," Heeck said.







The idea of neutrinos that move faster than photons would seem to violate the notion, based on Einstein's theory of relativity, that nothing can travel faster than light. However, this assumption is based on the idea of the photon not having any mass. Einstein's theory of relativity "just states that no particle can travel faster than a massless particle," Heeck said."







http://www.livescience.com/38533-pho...particles.html







I've been saying for years that photons have mass!



Double-A

So, how many photons does it take to make an electron?

On Friday, July 18, 2014 11:11:44 AM UTC-7, G=EMC^2TreBert wrote:
On Tuesday, July 15, 2014 5:26:18 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:

"If photons do break down, the results of such decay must be even lighter particles, ones that would travel even faster than photons. Assuming photons have mass, "there is only one particle we know from the Standard Model of particle physics that might be even lighter -- the lightest of the three neutrinos," Heeck said.







Neutrinos are ghostly particles that only very rarely interact with normal matter. Countless neutrinos rush through everyone on Earth every day with no effect.







"It might well be that the neutrino is lighter than the photon," Heeck said. In principle, each photon might decay into two of the lightest neutrinos.







"The lightest neutrino, being lighter than light, would then actually travel faster than photons," Heeck said.







The idea of neutrinos that move faster than photons would seem to violate the notion, based on Einstein's theory of relativity, that nothing can travel faster than light. However, this assumption is based on the idea of the photon not having any mass. Einstein's theory of relativity "just states that no particle can travel faster than a massless particle," Heeck said."







http://www.livescience.com/38533-pho...particles.html







I've been saying for years that photons have mass!







Double-A



AA If it goes faster than light begs the question. "Where does it get this extra energy? Also faster than light is not permitted by two of my best theories. TreBert


E = mv^2. The energy remains the same, but with less mass than the photon, it has greater speed.

Double-A

On Saturday, July 19, 2014 6:28:35 AM UTC-7, HVAC wrote:
On 7/15/2014 8:26 PM, Double-A wrote:





I've been saying for years that photons have mass!





Ya, but you are a homeless alcoholic. No one gives a **** what you have

to say. No offense of course.


But that's like saying Heaviside was a mere telegraph operator, Einstein was a mere patent clerk, and Hitler was a mere starving artist.

Double-A