A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

mass is light.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #621  
Old January 8th 07, 07:34 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.philosophy.tech,sci.astro,rec.org.mensa
tomcat
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 620
Default mass is light.


Brad Guth wrote:
"John Griffin" wrote in message
. 1.4

Funny infomercial spewing boy again, arnt we.

I bet you or your kind laughed and pointed with a silly ass grin at
Christ on that stick, just the way you'd do it again and again if you
had the opportunity of sustaining the status quo at all cost.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG





On "Coast to Coast" it was mentioned that 'light' or 'photons' are
timeless. Not that they last a long time but, rather, that they don't
exist in time at all. This is based on Einstein's theory that objects
at exactly the speed of light do not age or change.

This is yet another peculiarity of 'light'. Certainly strange stuff.

It was also brought out that the probability functions relating to the
'uncertainty principle' may be explained by this photonic timelessness.
If time doesn't exist for photons then they could be thought of -- or
perhaps really do -- exist everywhere at once. Maybe the zillions upon
zillions of photons are really just one photon!

Our inability to understand existence without time, the 4th dimension,
may be the reason for our difficulties combining gravity with the
electromagnetic spectrum. Our perspective is that of everything
changing. But reality may turn out to be . . . a single photon that is
everyplace at once!


tomcat

  #622  
Old January 8th 07, 01:12 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.philosophy.tech,sci.astro,rec.org.mensa
Brad Guth[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,941
Default mass is light.

"tomcat" wrote in message
oups.com

So what?

Thus far you're nothing but a waste of good toilet paper. In other
words; show me the money.

You'll believe in or otherwise suck up to anything that doesn't rock
your silly pro-mainstream status quo boat.

You really don't give a tinkers damn about science, physics or much less
as to our badly failing environment and of its sequestered humanity.

Tomcat is still w/o remorse, and apparently w/o an honest soul because,
your's has been bought and paid for.

Please let us know whenever you decide to actually accomplish
something/anything for the greater good of the lower 99.9% worth of
humanity, or that of salvaging our environment that yourself and others
of your kind have only raped and trashed from the very get go.

You and others of your kind are more than smart enough to damn well know
of what's right, from what's wrong, yet your course of denial hasn't
altered one degree, has it.

Is there even a dim light at the end of the "tomcat" tunnel?
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
  #623  
Old January 8th 07, 01:37 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.philosophy.tech,sci.astro,rec.org.mensa
Rand Simberg[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,311
Default mass is light.

On 7 Jan 2007 22:34:32 -0800, in a place far, far away, "tomcat"
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:

On "Coast to Coast" it was mentioned that 'light' or 'photons' are
timeless.


Well, if Art Bell says so, it must be right.
  #624  
Old January 8th 07, 04:11 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.philosophy.tech,sci.astro,rec.org.mensa
tomcat
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 620
Default mass is light.


Rand Simberg wrote:
On 7 Jan 2007 22:34:32 -0800, in a place far, far away, "tomcat"
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:

On "Coast to Coast" it was mentioned that 'light' or 'photons' are
timeless.


Well, if Art Bell says so, it must be right.





There is more to our World than meets the eye. How can anything be?
How can even a drop of water exist? -- Perhaps it doesn't.

Perhaps, when everything is taken into account it all equals exactly .
.. . zero. It is this 'twist' that might mean a 'single photon'
duplicates because of many lesser 'twists'.

Somehow nothing becomes everything. And this process of becoming, but
never really existing in an absolute sense, is precisely what physics,
science, and engineering are all about whether or not physicists,
scientists, or engineers realize it or not.

The necessary of 'twist' of nothing into everything must involve very
strange mechanics. And, with quantum mechanics, we certainly do have
very strange mechanics, indeed. Are photons massless? If so then how
can they interact with matter? How could a truly massless object
impinge itself on our senses. And then, of course, you have that silly
little solar engine spinning round and round because photons hit the
paddles with . . . force. That 'force' must mean mass. And, YOU, know
it.

Is everything composed of photons? Well, if light is such a strange
phenomena, being timeless and whatnot, then perhaps it is the
fundamental building block of our Universe.


tomcat

  #625  
Old January 9th 07, 05:08 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.philosophy.tech,sci.astro,rec.org.mensa
pete[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 104
Default mass is light.

In sci.space.policy, on Mon, 08 Jan 2007 12:37:31 GMT,
Rand Simberg sez:

On 7 Jan 2007 22:34:32 -0800, in a place far, far away, "tomcat"
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:


On "Coast to Coast" it was mentioned that 'light' or 'photons' are
timeless.


Well, if Art Bell says so, it must be right.


Curiously enough, in spite of both the immediate and indirect
sources here, that statement is correct. There is probably
some deep imlication to the fact that cosmic background
photons represent a direct instantaneous channel from an instant
shortly after the BB to the receiving atom in the present.


--
================================================== ========================
Pete Vincent
Disclaimer: all I know I learned from reading Usenet.
  #626  
Old February 13th 07, 04:27 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.philosophy.tech,sci.astro,rec.org.mensa
Brad Guth[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,941
Default mass is light.

"tomcat" wrote in message
oups.com

There is more to our World than meets the eye. How can anything be?
How can even a drop of water exist? -- Perhaps it doesn't.


Acording to Usenet's Old Testament physics, nothing is for real, unless
it supports their status quo of whatever agenda suits their mainstream
ulterior motives, which I believe has something to do with ****ology.


Somehow nothing becomes everything. And this process of becoming, but
never really existing in an absolute sense, is precisely what physics,
science, and engineering are all about whether or not physicists,
scientists, or engineers realize it or not.


As long as you take to excluding most everything that's Einstein, and
stick with utilizing only Usenet's hocus-pocus conditional physics.

Physics should work the same on our moon as Venus, yet according to all
the wise lords and rusemaster wizards of this Old Testament moderated
Usenet from hell, apparently their one and only form of conditional
physics is strictly a terrestrial thing (much like their Jewish white
god is only a terrestrial god that likes to hord loot and otherwise be
in charge of damn near everything that matters).


Is everything composed of photons? Well, if light is such a strange
phenomena, being timeless and whatnot, then perhaps it is the
fundamental building block of our Universe.


I think so, as there are perhaps 1e100 complex (quantum string like)
photons/atom, with continually more of the same little 2D things on the
way, while there's still the every exact same amount of atoms as in the
beginning of whatever created our mostly heathen and of now mostly
dumbfounded populated universe of pagan fools, telling the rest of us
exactly what to believe or not.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
  #627  
Old February 14th 07, 12:52 AM posted to rec.org.mensa,sci.space.policy,sci.philosophy.tech,sci.astro
Brad Guth[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,941
Default mass is light.

"tomcat" wrote in message
oups.com

tomcat,
I consider the photon as being roughly as near to a God particle as
we're going to get.

A photon is pretty much the one and only known item of physics or
whatever scientific realm that's safe to coexist along with matter
and/or anti-matter, or viable as a safe buffer medium for coexisting
between matter and anti-matter.

A photon seems nearly if not somewhat AI worthy.

A photon is much like the DNA of matter or anti-matter.

A photon seems to be the very binder or fabric of spinning atoms.

There is a fixed number of atoms, but an unlimited number of photons.

A photon can somehow align the few and far between atoms of deep space,
and if need be a stream or flow of such wussy 2D (quantum string like)
photons can somehow manage to spin up a given 0.0~ K atom, as to
accommodating the migration of the photon that seems to command atoms
into providing a node by node packet transfer of light speed, or perhaps
even capable of a much faster velocity as long as it's not hauling a
zeptogram of matter.
-
Brad guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
  #628  
Old February 14th 07, 01:40 AM posted to rec.org.mensa,sci.space.policy,sci.philosophy.tech,sci.astro
Brad Guth[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,941
Default mass is light.

"pete" wrote in message


Curiously enough, in spite of both the immediate and indirect
sources here, that statement is correct. There is probably
some deep imlication to the fact that cosmic background
photons represent a direct instantaneous channel from an instant
shortly after the BB to the receiving atom in the present.


A BB from what? (from nothing?) (from God?) (from another universe?)
(from another dimension?)

Why not lots of little bangs? (such as from merging cosmic Oort clouds,
or even via relatively nearby stellar Oort clouds)

How about lots of absolutely horrific bangs from the retro mergings of
multiple universes?

What about our very own 225 million year galactic clock cycles? (of
which we've obviously survived any number of, at least thus far)

Why not cosmic cycles, along with a few unavoidable bangs along the way?
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[sci.astro] Galaxies (Astronomy Frequently Asked Questions) (8/9) [email protected] Astronomy Misc 0 May 3rd 06 12:35 PM
[sci.astro] Stars (Astronomy Frequently Asked Questions) (7/9) [email protected] Astronomy Misc 0 May 3rd 06 12:35 PM
UFO Activities from Biblical Times Kazmer Ujvarosy Astronomy Misc 0 December 25th 03 06:21 AM
Electric Gravity&Instantaneous Light ralph sansbury Astronomy Misc 8 August 31st 03 02:53 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.