|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of individual photons cannot exceed speed of light in avacuum
|
#72
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of individual photons cannot exceed speed of light in avacuum
On 8/4/2011 10:58 PM, Yousuf Khan wrote:
On 04/08/2011 9:40 PM, PD wrote: On 7/31/2011 12:47 AM, Yousuf Khan wrote: On 29/07/2011 10:06 AM, PD wrote: Forgive me for saying this, but this is where you lapse into science fiction, mixing real ideas with disconnected fantasy ideas. For example, you lock everything in terms of Planck lengths and Planck times, which are numbers that applies to our 4 spacetime dimensions, but then you casually toss in "higher dimensions" without any consideration for whether Planck scales even mean anything with the inclusion of those "higher dimensions". Then there is the term "super-energizing one Planck length of space" and I have no idea what you mean by that, not to mention why "super-energizing" anything would build a "causeway" through these "higher dimensions". Well, I don't think I'm doing anything any more or less speculative than what the vast majority of Superstring theorists are doing on a regular basis. To some extent I agree with you, but they do go a little further to actually try to build something you can calculate with. This is of course essential. Well, I think that's their biggest problem, they are so enamoured with the equations that they don't stop to understand the physics anymore. They think if it's got a fabulous equation that seems to fit one set of data, then that equation must be telling them something about the universe, and they should be trying to fit every other piece of data through the same equation. In the case of string theory, you are a little off base. String theory offers no equation that is an empirical fit to data -- if it did that, then it might be on firmer ground. Instead, string theory is based on a physical concept of the modes of a vibrating string in 2D. From here, you can build the analog of Feynman diagrams, which you will recall are highly visual descriptors of the contributions that add up to an interaction between particles. The calculations that come from those Feynman diagrams is what is appealing about string theory, in that they behave a lot better than do the analogous but highly successful ones for electrons and photons in QED. Here, I'm trying to figure out a physical description of the mechanism that can be visualized somewhat in our minds. Here, string theory is actually appealing, as it does have a highly visual mechanism. I think it might be worth your while to understand this aspect of string theory. |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of individual photons cannot exceed speed of light in avacuum
On 05/08/2011 2:35 AM, PD wrote:
On 8/4/2011 10:58 PM, Yousuf Khan wrote: Well, I think that's their biggest problem, they are so enamoured with the equations that they don't stop to understand the physics anymore. They think if it's got a fabulous equation that seems to fit one set of data, then that equation must be telling them something about the universe, and they should be trying to fit every other piece of data through the same equation. In the case of string theory, you are a little off base. String theory offers no equation that is an empirical fit to data -- if it did that, then it might be on firmer ground. No, actually String theory offers us equations that are a fit for all data. Nothing can be falsified, because all you need to do is rejig the parameters and it'll fit the new data. Here, I'm trying to figure out a physical description of the mechanism that can be visualized somewhat in our minds. Here, string theory is actually appealing, as it does have a highly visual mechanism. I think it might be worth your while to understand this aspect of string theory. Yes, I'm familiar with the String theory visualization -- I've found a few uses for it, such as multi-dimensional curling. But I'm leaning more towards the Loop Quantum Gravity visualizations nowadays. I think a combination of String theory and LQG might eventually become the acceptable theory. LQG still requires multi-dimensionality like String does, but it doesn't have to become the focus of that theory. For example, the concept of bosons vs. fermions: fermions cannot occupy the same quantum state, bosons can. How can multiple bosons occupy the same quantum state, unless you visualize bosons occupying different quantum states in dimensions above our 4 dimensions? Also when you get a Bose-Einstein Condensate, you can turn a bunch of fermions into a large super-boson, you definitely need to use multi-dimensions there. Even the concept of point particles, like quarks and leptons having mass requires the energy to loop around within them in virtual dimensions above our own. Yousuf Khan |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of individual photons cannot exceed speed of light in avacuum
On 05/08/2011 12:38 AM, Byron Forbes wrote:
In , says... You could think of it that way. Basically, each unit of Planck Length is a unit of space, and a photon is a transfer of energy from one unit of space to the next. Yousuf Khan That's an aether. "Unit of space" = particle spacing You can think of it that way, sure. But it's not just a unit of space, it's a unit of time too. The continuous flow of these particles creates the events of time. Yousuf Khan |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of individual photons cannot exceed speed of light in avacuum
On 8/5/2011 8:54 PM, Yousuf Khan wrote:
On 05/08/2011 2:35 AM, PD wrote: On 8/4/2011 10:58 PM, Yousuf Khan wrote: Well, I think that's their biggest problem, they are so enamoured with the equations that they don't stop to understand the physics anymore. They think if it's got a fabulous equation that seems to fit one set of data, then that equation must be telling them something about the universe, and they should be trying to fit every other piece of data through the same equation. In the case of string theory, you are a little off base. String theory offers no equation that is an empirical fit to data -- if it did that, then it might be on firmer ground. No, actually String theory offers us equations that are a fit for all data. Nothing can be falsified, because all you need to do is rejig the parameters and it'll fit the new data. More or less, yes. Here, I'm trying to figure out a physical description of the mechanism that can be visualized somewhat in our minds. Here, string theory is actually appealing, as it does have a highly visual mechanism. I think it might be worth your while to understand this aspect of string theory. Yes, I'm familiar with the String theory visualization -- I've found a few uses for it, such as multi-dimensional curling. But I'm leaning more towards the Loop Quantum Gravity visualizations nowadays. I think a combination of String theory and LQG might eventually become the acceptable theory. LQG still requires multi-dimensionality like String does, but it doesn't have to become the focus of that theory. For example, the concept of bosons vs. fermions: fermions cannot occupy the same quantum state, bosons can. How can multiple bosons occupy the same quantum state, unless you visualize bosons occupying different quantum states in dimensions above our 4 dimensions? Also when you get a Bose-Einstein Condensate, you can turn a bunch of fermions into a large super-boson, you definitely need to use multi-dimensions there. I see two muddlings going on here. First of all you have confused "quantum state" with "region of space". Secondly, you are assuming the validity of the ancient Greek notion that no two physical objects can occupy the same region of space at the same time. Even the concept of point particles, like quarks and leptons having mass requires the energy to loop around within them in virtual dimensions above our own. Yousuf Khan |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of individual photons cannot exceed speed of light in avacuum
On 06/08/2011 4:25 AM, PD wrote:
On 8/5/2011 8:54 PM, Yousuf Khan wrote: For example, the concept of bosons vs. fermions: fermions cannot occupy the same quantum state, bosons can. How can multiple bosons occupy the same quantum state, unless you visualize bosons occupying different quantum states in dimensions above our 4 dimensions? Also when you get a Bose-Einstein Condensate, you can turn a bunch of fermions into a large super-boson, you definitely need to use multi-dimensions there. I see two muddlings going on here. First of all you have confused "quantum state" with "region of space". Secondly, you are assuming the validity of the ancient Greek notion that no two physical objects can occupy the same region of space at the same time. No, I haven't confused them, I have _deliberately_ equated them. There's a difference here. I'm saying quantum states equate to something physical in higher dimensions. We already talk about quantum states as mapping to something in the so-called Hilbert Space. Hilbert Space is assumed to be a virtual mathematical construct, but what if it's an actual construct? Yousuf Khan |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of individual photons cannot exceed speed of light in avacuum
On Aug 4, 4:17*pm, Yousuf Khan wrote:
On 04/08/2011 3:01 PM, Brad Guth wrote: Photons tell atoms to align, spin up or spin down. *That's pretty damn intelligent. Or that's simply their jobs, no intelligence required. We don't, but it doesn't matter, as long as we get a wash of electrons from one end of the conductor to the other. Does it matter to you if the molecules of water that drown you in a tidal wave actually travelled all of the way from Japan, or if they were actually the water molecules sitting near your home? It matters a great deal. *If photons do not actually move, tells us what? It tells us that it's an energy transfer mechanism. The electrons may be sitting there, but photons cannot sit anywhere. Photons are either moving, or they are non-existent. Yousuf Khan I can't buy that interpretation. *Photons associated with a black hole are not moving. Photons inside a blackhole are still moving, just inside its event horizon. |
#78
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of individual photons cannot exceed speed of light in avacuum
On 8/10/11 9:25 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
If a medium is photon friendly or conductive, then perhaps the individual photon doesn't have to actually move. Are you confusing photons and current? From the quantum mechanical perspective, all photons travel at c. 1. photons are emitted (by charged particles) 2. *photons propagate at c* 3. photons are absorbed (by charged particles) Photon momentum p = hν/c = h/λ Photon Energy E = hν |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
Speed of individual photons cannot exceed speed of light in avacuum
On 10/08/2011 10:38 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
On Aug 4, 4:21 pm, Yousuf wrote: On 04/08/2011 3:16 PM, Brad Guth wrote: Planks are acting as photon transponder nodes? You could think of it that way. Basically, each unit of Planck Length is a unit of space, and a photon is a transfer of energy from one unit of space to the next. Yousuf Khan Then why couldn't a plank unit of space simply instruct the next available photon, and/or create the next photon, and so-forth? What do you mean by "instruct"? A photon is just a passage of energy through the space-time medium. What are plancks made of? "Plancks" aren't made of anything, they are just the measurement of something. They are the length and time scale of an individual space-time quanta, an atomic unit of aether some people might call it. 1.6163e-35 m seems long enough to put lots of point source stuff into. Seems like a plank node would need a quantum circular FIFO XYZ +/-V buffer and processor. Whatever. Yousuf Khan |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
DARK ENERGY OR TIRED LIGHT (DECREASED SPEED OF PHOTONS)? | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 12 | October 4th 09 05:37 AM |
Is speed of sound higher then the speed of light??? | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 1 | September 9th 08 12:48 AM |
Article: Photons flout the light speed limit | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 0 | August 19th 07 05:05 PM |
Does total speed of light in vacuum change in a gravity field? | Asimov | Astronomy Misc | 6 | February 26th 05 11:32 PM |
Photons, Speed of Light and Why Am I Not Liquified? | BenignVanilla | Misc | 10 | February 7th 04 06:53 AM |