# The Naked Scientists Forum

### Author Topic: What is the driving force behind photons?  (Read 42505 times)

#### kancha

• First timers
• Posts: 6
##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #50 on: 28/12/2008 18:36:45 »
Let us go back to Newton's law :- A moving body continues to be in motion at the same speed unless acted upon by external forces. So, initially photons get energy from the source from which they are created(for example they are continuously being formed in our sun). Then the photons continue to be at their own velocity as they travel in the space as space is vacuum meaning there is nothing to hinder its motion. Notice that speed of light decreases as it passes through denser medium. So that should basically answer your question.

#### yor_on

• Naked Science Forum GOD!
• Posts: 12001
• Thanked: 4 times
• (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #51 on: 28/12/2008 22:38:51 »

#### Mr. Scientist

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 1451
• Thanked: 2 times
##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #52 on: 28/12/2008 22:53:33 »
As far as I know Newtonian mechanics do not explain photons.
Why do you say that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon_polarization#States.2C_probability_amplitudes.2C_unitary_and_Hermitian_operators.2C_and_eigenvectors

That's right. Newtonian Physics fail in the New Physics, because F=Ma has a variable which is not considered constant M. Plus, photons do not have a mass, so F=Ma fails generally.

#### Mr. Scientist

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 1451
• Thanked: 2 times
##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #53 on: 28/12/2008 22:54:44 »
One does not know how to interpret this.
If one said that the arrow of time just was a function of 'expectations' based on the imposing of others 'views'.
What would that make ones 'free choice'?

I like your thinking but have definite problems 'gripping' that?
As for 'time' i do see it as a 'expression' of spacetime.
But in a way I can't help but wonder if it and our 'reference frames' are the same.
As it seems that 'time' is 'reference frames':)

And i will refuse (for now:) to discuss if 'time' is a 'flow' or 'events'.
Why?

Well, I'm yellow:)
or at least in the black.

wandering into blue.

But as I say, you seem to have thought about it.
and even if you people find me flippant, I'm not.
Not really, just questioning.

Nothing is holy, not even I.
Do you get it?

-----

Just one thing.
you are the first I know of, except GoodElf and me that 'admits' that consciousness can't be 'counted out' if one want to create a TOE.
Thats crucial, and to my eyes rather brave:)

So I will expect you to have a lot of 'ground' under your feet here:)
But I believe you have.

so I'm listening.

Difficult to answer this post. There isn't really any direct questions.

#### Mr. Scientist

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 1451
• Thanked: 2 times
##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #54 on: 28/12/2008 22:57:19 »
You say
"We also have a sense of time, also known as the psychological arrow of time. There are several arrows in cosmology, and this psychological arrow represents a forward directionality in time, as do all the arrows.

We believe this is caused because there was a very small amount of entropy at the beginning of the universe, and the gradual displacement of matter throughout the universe would imply an increasing chaotic system of particles, which we just so happen to call it entropy."

Do you define this as a 'psychological arrow of time'?
Entropy and time goes hand in hand to me?

And will do so when I'm long dead and gone too??
So to me its an 'objective arrow of time' in that I don't direct it.
Spacetime does, not me as far as I know:)

So how do you define it?
Like I do, or is there something more you add into it when defining it.

I don't personally detail this as times directional definition, but it is the general opinion of most scientists, such as Dr Hawking.

Instead, i believe physical and material functions of the human brain can filter out relativistic laws, and create the illusion of a past and future by specificating an illusionary flow of the perception of time. In much the same sense, time in the way we understand it may not even exist.

#### lyner

• Guest
##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #55 on: 29/12/2008 00:09:42 »
Do you mean that our perception of time is, somehow, an artificial construct which allows us to function?

That's a bit Zen, isn't it?
How can we consider time 'before' the arrival of homo sapiens?

#### Mr. Scientist

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 1451
• Thanked: 2 times
##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #56 on: 29/12/2008 00:18:03 »
Do you mean that our perception of time is, somehow, an artificial construct which allows us to function?

That's a bit Zen, isn't it?
How can we consider time 'before' the arrival of homo sapiens?

I never quite said that, however, one could say that time as we know, it remains a subjective phenomena, which is purely pyschological. The time we experience, may be very different from any physical time dimension that is objective.

In fact, as far as we can tell concerning the time dimension as described by relativity, a past and a future does not exist... however, subjectively we know from our experiences that there is some kind of distinction of a past and a future, hence again, the illusionary construct of the mind.

Well, there may not have even been one, in the sense of time as we now know it. But this does leave open a second ineterpretation of time, which means it could have existed, but again, never in the sense that we come to call time a distinction of past and future, where we are stuck in the present.

#### yor_on

• Naked Science Forum GOD!
• Posts: 12001
• Thanked: 4 times
• (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #57 on: 29/12/2008 00:45:14 »
Got to admit that I had come home after ah, having a slightly 'humid' dinner writing that first post.
I should stay away at such times :)
You guys and gals are to sharp for me::))

But that's what new years resolutions is for, right?
to better one responses.
It was more of a 'reflection' actually, as introducing 'consciousness' as a direct influence of our arrow of time seems to go in to so many other ideas 'we' have.

What will it do to our 'observations' for example and to those experiments we've done.
You are questioning where 'time' comes from if I get it right.
And you see it much like photons, defined differently depending on circumstances?

But you see a 'physical' definition that is 'objective'?
As well as a part that is purely a 'construct' of living 'consciousnesses'?
And where should the line be drawn?
We are all animals :)
And we have a fauna too that 'lives' and breaths.

So yes, it is difficult to encompass, as it seems to have so far reaching effects
Can you link us to some experiments differing between those cases of 'time'.
As for living in the 'now'.
We don't, everything we react to by thinking or otherwise 'treat' is a result of events already passed to me.

But I think you mean that 'instant now' that ticks by at all 'times' even though we won't 'notice' it until after its passed.

#### Mr. Scientist

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 1451
• Thanked: 2 times
##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #58 on: 29/12/2008 00:52:13 »
Yes you will find similar thoughts to mine by:

Stuart Hammeroff;

you will find an interview of him on youtube, i think under ''time''

#### yor_on

• Naked Science Forum GOD!
• Posts: 12001
• Thanked: 4 times
• (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #59 on: 29/12/2008 01:22:54 »
:)

#### Mr. Scientist

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 1451
• Thanked: 2 times
##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #60 on: 29/12/2008 01:45:05 »
By the way, i don't think i have ever answered the OP's question.

The answer to what is the driving force of a photon, is that fundamentally speaking, it has energy and momentum, but has a zero-invariant mass.

This is why.

#### yor_on

• Naked Science Forum GOD!
• Posts: 12001
• Thanked: 4 times
• (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #61 on: 29/12/2008 02:07:20 »
Stuart Hammeroff is interesting.

I remember reading about "microtubules, tiny tubes constructed out of a protein called tubulin that make up the skeletons of our cells, including neurons. Tubulin proteins can take at least two different shapes--extended and contracted--so, in theory, they might be able to take both states at once." some years ago? It was interesting but then it seemed to 'die out'.

Now I found an article telling of a guy that have tried to 'count' on the probability of it.

"In the February issue of Physical Review E, Tegmark presents calculations showing just what a terrible environment the brain is for quantum computation. Combining data about the brain's temperature, the sizes of various proposed quantum objects, and disturbances caused by such things as nearby ions, Tegmark calculated how long microtubules and other possible quantum computers within the brain might remain in superposition before they decohere. His answer: The superpositions disappear in 10**-13 to 10**-20 seconds. Because the fastest neurons tend to operate on a time scale of 10**-3 seconds or so, Tegmark concludes that whatever the brain's quantum nature is, it decoheres far too rapidly for the neurons to take advantage of it."

But then on the other hand do one really need a 'quantum computer' for explaining the brain?
A analog signal contains so much more 'information' than a digital, and the brain is definitely not digital.
Also it works both chemically and electro-magnetically.
Maybe one could see it as three information highways interacting?

Wouldn't that quantum computer always win when you flipped that coin?
We don't :) so I think the brains capacity have more to do with its analogue structure than anything else

#### Mr. Scientist

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 1451
• Thanked: 2 times
##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #62 on: 29/12/2008 02:48:00 »
I may not agree with the Tubulin Theory, however, i do believe that quantum mechanics is adiquate, if not complicated to explain an equally complicated subject as human awareness.

#### lightarrow

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 4586
• Thanked: 7 times
##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #63 on: 30/12/2008 14:46:11 »
As far as I know Newtonian mechanics do not explain photons.
Why do you say that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon_polarization#States.2C_probability_amplitudes.2C_unitary_and_Hermitian_operators.2C_and_eigenvectors

That's right. Newtonian Physics fail in the New Physics, because F=Ma has a variable which is not considered constant M. Plus, photons do not have a mass, so F=Ma fails generally.
Newtonian mechanics can't even explain classical light...there is no need to talk about photons.
Furthermore, the reason why photons are not explained by classical physics is certainly much more complex than this. Have you ever heard "Blackbody spectrum", "Photoelectric effect" "Compton effect" ecc. ? Did you notice that an entire new big theory, that is "Quantum Mechanics" had to be developed to explain those phenomena?

#### Mr. Scientist

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 1451
• Thanked: 2 times
##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #64 on: 31/12/2008 04:31:36 »
As far as I know Newtonian mechanics do not explain photons.
Why do you say that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon_polarization#States.2C_probability_amplitudes.2C_unitary_and_Hermitian_operators.2C_and_eigenvectors

That's right. Newtonian Physics fail in the New Physics, because F=Ma has a variable which is not considered constant M. Plus, photons do not have a mass, so F=Ma fails generally.
Newtonian mechanics can't even explain classical light...there is no need to talk about photons.
Furthermore, the reason why photons are not explained by classical physics is certainly much more complex than this. Have you ever heard "Blackbody spectrum", "Photoelectric effect" "Compton effect" ecc. ? Did you notice that an entire new big theory, that is "Quantum Mechanics" had to be developed to explain those phenomena?

Of course i know all these. I was simply showing that F=Ma failed in relativistic math; we needed new math, which Newtonian math could not explain.

#### lightarrow

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 4586
• Thanked: 7 times
##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #65 on: 31/12/2008 12:27:05 »
Of course i know all these. I was simply showing that F=Ma failed in relativistic math; we needed new math, which Newtonian math could not explain.
Ok. I just wanted to point that Newtonian Physics doesn't fail in the New Physics only because F=Ma has a variable which is not considered constant M.

#### JukriS

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 115
##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #66 on: 03/02/2009 08:50:12 »
Idea of expanding atoms!

Onesimpleprinciple

New model of an atom

The atomcores expand three-dimentionally, opening up energywaves that have
the nature of electron and photon.

So, also photons expanding and emit expanding energy and thats why we have a old light who is redshifting!
« Last Edit: 05/05/2009 23:06:23 by BenV »

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #67 on: 22/02/2009 13:42:13 »
In reviewing old threads, I came across this one. I'm surprised that among all the very good answers, none really pin pointed the direct cause of the speed of light being c. My view is that it is a fundamental property of space; actually two properties of space. Those properties are electric permittivity and magnetic permeability. James Clerk Maxwell wrote down the equations that compute the speed of light using those properties.

Somebody said that it was a property of space-time. My own speculation is that it is properties of space alone. Time is a fixed independent parameter and not a variable as we are recently coming to realize. Albeit kicking and screaming in opposition as we are forced to do so.
« Last Edit: 22/02/2009 14:05:29 by Vern »

#### Ethos

• Guest
##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #68 on: 24/04/2009 02:39:07 »
My view is that it is a fundamental property of space; actually two properties of space. Those properties are electric permittivity and magnetic permeability. James Clerk Maxwell wrote down the equations that compute the speed of light using those properties.
I agree with this position Vern but that raises a few questions that need to be answered. For one; If c is determined by the character of space itself, then wouldn't an expanding universe cause c to be a variable unit changing with the passage of the expansion? And; If c appears to be constant throughout the observable universe, doesn't that suggest a static universe and not the expanding one we are lead to believe in?

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #69 on: 24/04/2009 14:08:50 »
Exactly, Ethos. That is why I like the idea of a static non-expanding classic flat space-time. Tie that together with the notion that: The final irreducible constituent of all physical reality is the electromagnetic field. and you are forced to imagine a universe such as I have imagined it.

That notion is so restrictive that it should be easily disposed of. However, it has never been disposed of and it has been around well over a hundred years. It is a fact that every physical reality that has ever been observed can be easily explained without deviating from the notion that, again, the final irreducible constituent of all physical reality is the electromagnetic field.

Now, given that and the application of Occum's razor, we would expect that different notions would prevail over the notions that have prevailed during these dark ages of Quantamania.

« Last Edit: 24/04/2009 14:14:50 by Vern »

#### Ethos

• Guest
##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #70 on: 24/04/2009 20:20:18 »
Exactly, Ethos. That is why I like the idea of a static non-expanding classic flat space-time. Tie that together with the notion that: The final irreducible constituent of all physical reality is the electromagnetic field. and you are forced to imagine a universe such as I have imagined it.

This idea is one that has been floating around in my imagination for a while now. I'm going to start a new thread where we can research this topic Vern, and I would appreciate your participation. The title will be: Is our universe static and infinite?

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #71 on: 24/04/2009 21:03:24 »
I'll look for it.

#### The Naked Scientists Forum

##### What is the driving force behind photons?
« Reply #71 on: 24/04/2009 21:03:24 »