![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "ralph sansbury" wrote in message ... Craig, Glad to see you finally realize the value of Maxwell's magnetic explanation of radiation pressure in addition to the conservation of momentum explanation re the Compton effect and other measurments of radiation pressure. The whole reason for defining the photon was that Maxwell's equations could not explain the photoelectric effect. That is, Maxwell's spread out wave could not explain the nanosecond quickness of the UV radiation source imparting enough energy to eject electrons from a photoemissive surface. So Einstein and others said the energy of the radiation, instead of being spread out in a massless wave must be concentrated in a massless particle moving like the massless wave front at the speed of light. So it may not be possible to conflate the two concepts to say the oscillating electric field like the oscillating charge in its source is compressed inside the photon and so can induce oscillating charge in the receiver and at the same time magnetically push on and be pushed by the receiver; and that the photon emitted by the receiver as a result of this induced oscillation would also push on and be pushed by the receiver. I also recall the comment in some text that the photon concept was applicable for UV and above but not for visible light and lower frequencies. No, that's the other part of the reason for invoking photons to explain the photoelectric effect. A photon of red energy does not have enough energy to eject an electron, whereas a UV photon does. The photon concept is still applicable. DaveL Thus it is not obvious to me at the moment which formula to use to assess the magnetic effect of the 10^26Wsun and the 20kW earth transmitter on induced oscillations in the spacecraft or on the 8W oscillations of the spacecraft transmitter. And it is not obvious to me yet the error in the detected frequency of the Doppler shift from Pioneer 10. I feel you and George overstate it and that it may be very small but not as small you as claim. Would it be small enough to detect specifically small pressure effects? Ralph "Craig Markwardt" wrote in message news ![]() "ralph sansbury" writes: [ Markwardt: ] Free atoms are pushed around by laser light. These systems are all small compared to the distance to the radiator. But the magnetic fields of the laser source are strong enough at these distances to produce the observed radiation pressure. I note your continued use of arbitrary terms like "strong enough." Again, your requirements of "weak" and "strong," and "nearby" and "distant," are completely arbitrary, to the extent that you could arbitrarily reject any evidence not to your liking. As you can clearly see from my correction to the above there is nothing arbitrary here. The point is that the source and the receiver must be in the case of weak sources near the receiver and in the case of the sun etc the receiver can be more distant. Without a definition of those terms, your distinction is completely arbitrary. Maxwell's equations do not distinguish between an 8 W transmitter (Pioneer 10), or a 2 x 10^{26} Watt transmitter (the Sun). CM |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Was there a civilization that existed 13 000 years ago? | Paul R. Mays | Astronomy Misc | 554 | November 13th 03 12:15 PM |
Princeton Paleontologist Produces Evidence For New Theory On Dinosaur Extinction | Ron Baalke | Astronomy Misc | 14 | September 28th 03 03:43 PM |
Electric Gravity&Instantaneous Light | ralph sansbury | Astronomy Misc | 8 | August 31st 03 02:53 AM |
"The Eagle has landed" NOT! | Mark McIntyre | Astronomy Misc | 1 | August 16th 03 02:08 AM |
CATACLYSM the Evidence -- MAN AS OLD AS COAL | Ed Conrad | Astronomy Misc | 1 | July 6th 03 12:06 AM |