if photons in motion have mass and energy why don't they knockstuff over

In article ,
wrote:

In article ,
(Tom Kirke) writes:
wrote:

if photons in motion have mass and energy why don't they knock stuff
over like little things like blades of grass or ants out of a tree

They do. A recent ( last year? ) NOVA had a segment about a guy
in New Mexico who blasted aluminum disks about 20 meters straight
up using a laser DOE had left over from fusion research. He could
keep them up as long as the laser was on and the disk was in the
laser beam.

If he was doing that in air, he wasn't using photon pressure.

Assume photon pressure is responsible.

Assume a 1kg aluminum disk.

Much too heavy, this was a highly polished Al disk about
20cm x 1mm:

10cm^2 x 0.1cm x Pi x 2.7 gm/cc ~ 84 gm = 0.084 kg.

It was in fact a whopping BIG laser, DOE had used it
in fusion research. Also since this is a reflection
effect you multiply by 2, not divide.

...pressure effects induced by those same photons.

What pressure effects, they're in a vacuum. If you
mean the pressure of the photons, then you agree that
they have mass.

tom

--
We have discovered a therapy ( NOT a cure )
for the common cold. Play tuba for an hour.

In article , (Tom Kirke) writes:
In article ,
wrote:

In article ,
(Tom Kirke) writes:
wrote:

if photons in motion have mass and energy why don't they knock stuff
over like little things like blades of grass or ants out of a tree

They do. A recent ( last year? ) NOVA had a segment about a guy
in New Mexico who blasted aluminum disks about 20 meters straight
up using a laser DOE had left over from fusion research. He could
keep them up as long as the laser was on and the disk was in the
laser beam.

If he was doing that in air, he wasn't using photon pressure.

Assume photon pressure is responsible.

Assume a 1kg aluminum disk.

Much too heavy, this was a highly polished Al disk about
20cm x 1mm:

10cm^2 x 0.1cm x Pi x 2.7 gm/cc ~ 84 gm = 0.084 kg.

Still way too much. On total reflection it takes 150 MW per Newton.
So, for the disk above you would need 12.6 MW. That's CW power.
Ain't gone get it.

It was in fact a whopping BIG laser, DOE had used it
in fusion research.

The lasers DOE used in Fusion research were pulsed, not CW.

Also since this is a reflection
effect you multiply by 2, not divide.

...pressure effects induced by those same photons.

What pressure effects, they're in a vacuum.

Eh?

If you mean the pressure of the photons, then you agree that
they have mass.

Nope. They have momentum. They don't have mass.

Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
| chances are he is doing just the same"

"Richard Schumacher" wrote in message
...
| Well, that's a common misconception: actually, photons are knocking things
over
| all the time.

Yep, all you have to do is push on something unstable. Over it goes. With
nothing but photons between your hand and the object.

FrediFizzx

skrev

In article ,
(Tom Kirke) writes:

They do. A recent ( last year? ) NOVA had a segment about a guy
in New Mexico who blasted aluminum disks about 20 meters straight
up using a laser DOE had left over from fusion research. He could
keep them up as long as the laser was on and the disk was in the
laser beam.

If he was doing that in air, he wasn't using photon pressure.


They used an infrared laser to heat air:

http://members.nova.org/~sol/station/planetar.htm

(Fourth-Generation RLV : beam-assisted launch vehicles.)



--
Øystein Olsen, , http://folk.uio.no/oeysteio
Institute of Theoretical Astrophysics, http://www.astro.uio.no
University of Oslo, Norway

"jonathan" wrote in message
...

"OhBrother" wrote in message
...

"jonathan" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
news:4074AA39.32669.141C70C@localhost...

like little things like blades of grass or ants out of a tree


I see from the responses that everyone ...completely... missed
the most important point.


They talk of forces and equations, fields and quantities. Yet
a single pedestrian aspect of photons, such as one
striking the eye and causing it to move, effects almost
every moment of all our days.
What is important is not what things are, their weight, size
or speed, but what they ....do. What their effects and
relationships are to other things. It is the connections
between things that matter most, not what they ...are.

Behavior matters most.

We must unlearn our backwards methods of objective reductionism and
embrace subjectivity and holism. We must strive to expand our
scales of observation first, while turning subjective judgments
into a science.

We must embrace the future and dispense with the Dark Age
mentality that still infects every corner of this world and even
this ng.



Jonathan


Indeed, the real philosophy we should strive toward is the 'nothingness
of
all'. In it, all aspects of the universe are one-ness, and each element
of
the universe is but a projection of all other elements into that
particular
space of nothing-ness and relative nothing-ness.

Let me tutor you a little bit on Buddhist philosophical thought.

Existence then is a function of the fourfold states of matter's
"existance",
JO-JU-E-KU, JO (pronounced "Joe") being birth and increase, JU
(pronounced
"Joo") being stability, E (prounouced "eh") being decrease and KU
(pronounced "Koo") being nothingness or the rest state.

Every "thing" in the corporeal universe then is merely a transcient
projection of KU (nothingness) which in fact is actually the realm of
"true
potential existance" possessing all aspects of everything, and since is
KU
is nothingness, it is everywhere "things" are not. It is all potential.
Read a little bit about the probability event wave and quantum
universes.
Then you 'might' understand why photons don't poke your eye out as
effectively as a RedRyder BB rifle will.

And so, I guess your little philosophical point is then lost in the face
of
Nothingness, since all points are made when nothing is said. Get the
point?


What I "get'' is that you don't understand what I'm saying, that is
not the same as it being meaningless. Unlike the double talk
above my philosophy is not based on whim or dreams, but
on the latest non-linear mathematics. You see, I can test
my philosophy. I can take it out for a spin in the real world
and see if it works. For example, I use the same concepts
to create a stock trading system as a test, to see if the
ideas hold against the cold and unforgiving marketplace.

Go to e-trade and click on the ten day charts of the two
stocks I played last week, abcx, and cpth. My 'philosophy'
told me to buy each last Wednesday morning first thing, I
still don't know what each company sells or their full name.
Such deterministic details are irrelevant.

[snip self-servitude]

Um, stochastics by nature are unpredictable so I'd suggest you not use the
stock market as a test of your theory. Or else, do it, become incredibly
rich as a result and then tout your wisdom. There are as many stock
stochastic theories as there are theorists.

Insofar as my not 'getting it', perhaps you are the one who isn't 'getting
it'. Since you've done the 'math' then you've seen the appearance of
trends, their maturation and decline, but do you see the disappearance and
reappearance and the thread of continuity in each? Simply because you can
count the marbles on the playground doesn't mean you can predict the
trajectory of each trivial move of each.

Of course, since you're agenda has not been laid wide open I guess I've done
my part. Your post was more to publicize your 'new and wonderful theory'
than it is to 'discuss an interesting aspect of the universe'. Sigh! Back
to the pit with you...

O'




Jonathan

s







O'

Tom Kirke wrote:

wrote:

if photons in motion have mass and energy why don't they knock stuff
over like little things like blades of grass or ants out of a tree


They do. A recent ( last year? ) NOVA had a segment about a guy
in New Mexico who blasted aluminum disks about 20 meters straight
up using a laser DOE had left over from fusion research. He could
keep them up as long as the laser was on and the disk was in the
laser beam.

Because of the inefficencies of the process it takes a lot more
than a few mW laser to do this.

The glass spheres lift with few mW because they have only
10um diameter in this case.

Rene
--
Ing.Buero R.Tschaggelar - http://www.ibrtses.com
& commercial newsgroups - http://www.talkto.net

wrote in message news:4074AA39.32669.141C70C@localhost...

like little things like blades of grass or ants out of a tree


I see from the responses that everyone ...completely... missed
the most important point.


They talk of forces and equations, fields and quantities. Yet
a single pedestrian aspect of photons, such as one
striking the eye and causing it to move, effects almost
every moment of all our days.

What is important is not what things are, their weight, size
or speed, but what they ....do. What their effects and
relationships are to other things. It is the connections
between things that matter most, not what they ...are.

Behavior matters most.

We must unlearn our backwards methods of objective reductionism and
embrace subjectivity and holism. We must strive to expand our
scales of observation first, while turning subjective judgments
into a science.

We must embrace the future and dispense with the Dark Age
mentality that still infects every corner of this world and even
this ng.



Jonathan




"PERCEPTION of an
Object costs
Precise the Object's loss.
Perception in itself a gain
Replying to its price;
The Object Absolute is nought,
Perception sets it fair,
And then upbraids a Perfectness
That situates so far"



By E Dickinson



s

"Old Man" wrote in message
...

"jonathan" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
news:4074AA39.32669.141C70C@localhost...

like little things like blades of grass or ants out of a tree

I see from the responses that everyone ...completely... missed
the most important point.

In sci.physics, regardless of the OP's expectations, the point
is always physics, and there's plenty of that in this thread.
Jonathan is requested to peddle his cracked pottery elsewhere.

[Old Man]

[snip diarrhea]


"The aim of science is not things themselves, as the dogmatists
in their simplicity imagine, but the relations among things; outside
these relations there is no reality knowable."

Henri Poincaré, Science and Hypothesis, 1905


I am talking on-topic. You simply can't recognize that fact
since you're so out of date. Tell me, what's it like living at
the turn of the nineteenth century?

Jonathan

s







Jonathan

"OhBrother" wrote in message
...

"jonathan" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
news:4074AA39.32669.141C70C@localhost...

like little things like blades of grass or ants out of a tree


I see from the responses that everyone ...completely... missed
the most important point.


They talk of forces and equations, fields and quantities. Yet
a single pedestrian aspect of photons, such as one
striking the eye and causing it to move, effects almost
every moment of all our days.
What is important is not what things are, their weight, size
or speed, but what they ....do. What their effects and
relationships are to other things. It is the connections
between things that matter most, not what they ...are.

Behavior matters most.

We must unlearn our backwards methods of objective reductionism and
embrace subjectivity and holism. We must strive to expand our
scales of observation first, while turning subjective judgments
into a science.

We must embrace the future and dispense with the Dark Age
mentality that still infects every corner of this world and even
this ng.



Jonathan


Indeed, the real philosophy we should strive toward is the 'nothingness of
all'. In it, all aspects of the universe are one-ness, and each element of
the universe is but a projection of all other elements into that particular
space of nothing-ness and relative nothing-ness.

Let me tutor you a little bit on Buddhist philosophical thought.

Existence then is a function of the fourfold states of matter's "existance",
JO-JU-E-KU, JO (pronounced "Joe") being birth and increase, JU (pronounced
"Joo") being stability, E (prounouced "eh") being decrease and KU
(pronounced "Koo") being nothingness or the rest state.

Every "thing" in the corporeal universe then is merely a transcient
projection of KU (nothingness) which in fact is actually the realm of "true
potential existance" possessing all aspects of everything, and since is KU
is nothingness, it is everywhere "things" are not. It is all potential.
Read a little bit about the probability event wave and quantum universes.
Then you 'might' understand why photons don't poke your eye out as
effectively as a RedRyder BB rifle will.

And so, I guess your little philosophical point is then lost in the face of
Nothingness, since all points are made when nothing is said. Get the point?


What I "get'' is that you don't understand what I'm saying, that is
not the same as it being meaningless. Unlike the double talk
above my philosophy is not based on whim or dreams, but
on the latest non-linear mathematics. You see, I can test
my philosophy. I can take it out for a spin in the real world
and see if it works. For example, I use the same concepts
to create a stock trading system as a test, to see if the
ideas hold against the cold and unforgiving marketplace.

Go to e-trade and click on the ten day charts of the two
stocks I played last week, abcx, and cpth. My 'philosophy'
told me to buy each last Wednesday morning first thing, I
still don't know what each company sells or their full name.
Such deterministic details are irrelevant.

How did I know when to buy, because complexity science
tells me how to model a thunderstorm abstractly.
When a far from equilibrium system is about to undergo
a phase change. You see, far from equilibrium systems
display universal behavior at the edge of chaos. It doesn't
matter if one is talking about a religion, or a stock chart.
All 'interesting' order in the universe exists far from
equilibrium, things such as life, galaxies and intelligence.

Objective science requires steady states, repeatability.
Such conditions are far from reality and far from what
truly effects or improves our lives.

I can use these concepts for Mars, religion or the market
as they are interdisciplinary, universal. They work everywhere
and for everything. Click the following links and see for
yourself. I'm not making this stuff up, I only preach them.


I've done the homework.


http://chaos.ph.utexas.edu/
http://www.necsi.org/publications/dcs/
http://www.pscs.umich.edu/
http://www-chaos.umd.edu/

http://www.calresco.org/sos/sosfaq.htm
http://www.santafe.edu/sfi/People/ka...tigations.html
http://www.calresco.org/milov/ymtemcss.htm




Jonathan

s







O'