The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: What does a photon look like and how does it work?  (Read 1636 times)

Offline jerrygg38

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
  • Thanked: 27 times
    • View Profile
What does a photon look like and how does it work?

    There are three forms of electrical energy in the universe and three forms of momentum. There are positive, negative, and bipolar electrical energy. There are linear, angular, and spherical momentums. The photon contains bipolar electrical energy. It has a net electrical charge of zero but it does have a magnetic field due to its spin. It has both linear momentum and angular momentum.
   The photon is a bipolar energy oscillation. Since it has no obvious spherical momentum, it does not have the ordinary property of mass. The oscillation of the photon maintains the linear and angular momentum. We notice the photon when the wave is increasing in radius. Prior to this point, the radius was basically zero. As the plane of bipolar energy gains in radius, the outer radius slows down. Thus the spin slows but the angular momentum remains the same. The plane of energy reaches a maximum radius and then decays. As it decays the plane’s rotation speeds up.  This is like an ice skater pulling her arms close to her body.
   Finally a point is reached where the plane of energy is basically a zero size. At this point the spin of the photon is extremely high. In effect the photon has changed into a line of bipolar energy. In effect the photon has changed itself into a singular laser beam. The line will continue to shrink to an almost zero size and then it will start to expand again.
  When the photon is at almost zero radius, it is similar to a high speed particle. It will hit an electron or a sub-particle and impart linear momentum to them.  When the photon is at maximum radius, it will look like a wave. Thus the photon itself looks like a particle wave although it continues to move at the speed of light.
  The photon is a self-contained oscillation. The change from a moving plane to a straight line can be considered like photonic breathing. The photon in expanding and contracting is an electrical motor type mechanism which tends to operate at a constant speed.
   Although the photon is electrostatically neutral it has a magnetic field. Dot-wave energy can exist from a single point to a radius. When we have negative dot wave energy that oscillates we get both an electric field and a magnetic field. The same is true for positive dot-wave energy. The bipolar dot-wave energy configuration has a zero net electric field. However the positive and negative dot-wave energy within the photon has an inner negative and a positive outer. This produces a charged capacitor configuration and a net magnetic field. The same thing happens in the neutron which is electrically neutral but has a magnetic field.
   In general positive and negative dot-wave energy cannot destroy each other since they occupy different dimensions. In addition positive dot-wave energy can be added to positive dot-wave energy to create larger and larger charges. At a distance positive repels positive but close up at zero distances they do not repel. The electron is pure negative dot-wave energy in a spherical oscillation. An alternate way of looking at the electron is a planar oscillation which is rotating in one plane and at the same time the plane itself is rotating at an orthogonal angle. Thus we get a spherical pattern which is required for the property of mass although it is can by perpendicular rotations. The same appears true within the Bohr orbit which produces the fine constant.
 The proton is more complex and consists of both positive and negative dot-wave energy and bipolar dot-wave energy. It contains linear, angular, and spherical momentums.
  The electron when basically stationary contains spherical or dual perpendicular angular momentums. It is the spherical momentum that gives it the property of mass. The complex proton has the property of mass which comes from its quarks spherical momentum plus gyroscopic patterns of linear and orbital momentum of the quarks.
  When we look at the photon’s waveshape it is obvious that we have a perpendicular planar waveshape which goes from a maximum radius to near zero. At the same time in the axial direction we have a waveshape that goes from a maximum toward zero. If we compress the light wave to zero light speed, it will approximate a sphere that is rotating in two axes. Thus when two photons hit each other nearly head on at the proper energy levels, they will produce two spheres which have mass. The bidirectional angular momentum required to produce mass always existed within the photons.
 When we accelerate an electron toward light speed we get Doppler distortions in the spherical energy patterns. This causes the gravitational field of the electron to be stronger in the forward direction and weaker in the rearward direction. At the same time the electron itself is shrinking. This is because the more energy we add into an object the stronger the dot-wave bonds become.  We have converted photonic energy into a higher mass entity. Thus the electron has gained energy and shrunk in all directions. We then have Einstein’s solution which mirrors the gravitational mean of the Doppler solution for the gravitational field of the electron.
   In my book “The Gravitational Wave and the Dot-wave theory” by Gerald Grushow, the equivalent mass of a dot-wave is 1.372E-72Kg and the charge is 1.422E-60 Coulombs. This is the lowest quantum of charge and energy in the universe. The electron has 6.640E40 negative dot-waves. That does not mean that you can find all these dot-waves inside the electron. It just means that the compression of the big bang forced all this quanta of energy into the electron.
   Prior to big bang we had electromagnetic energy which compressed toward a small radius. The compression forced electromagnetic field energy into particles and photons. At some time the gravitational pump produced the electrons and protons. Later gravitational compressions produced the atoms. It is interesting that two photons which contain linear and angular energy collide to produce positrons and electrons. The bipolar photons split into positive and negative dot-wave energy which at the same time has spherical type oscillations. It is the spherical type or bidirectional planar oscillations that produce mass. It is the planar oscillation of the photon that contains all the ingredients necessary to produce mass.
« Last Edit: 08/09/2016 17:55:19 by jerrygg38 »


 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #1 on: 08/09/2016 15:10:34 »
What does a photon look like and how does it work?
    There are three forms of electrical energy in the universe and three forms of momentum. There are positive, negative, and bipolar electrical energy. There are linear, angular, and spherical momentums. The photon contains bipolar electrical energy. It has a net electrical charge of zero but it does have a magnetic field due to its spin. It has both linear momentum and angular momentum.
   The photon is a bipolar energy oscillation. Since it has no spherical momentum, it does not have the property of mass. The oscillation of the photon maintains the linear and angular momentum. We notice the photon when the wave is increasing in radius. Prior to this point, the radius was basically zero. As the plane of bipolar energy gains in radius, the outer radius slows down. Thus the spin slows but the angular momentum remains the same. The plane of energy reaches a maximum radius and then decays. As it decays the plane speeds up.  This is like an ice skater pulling her arms close to her body.
   Finally a point is reached where the plane of energy is basically a zero size. At this point the spin of the photon is extremely high. In effect the photon has changed into a line of bipolar energy. In effect the photon has changed itself into a laser beam. The line will continue to shrink to an almost zero size and then it will start to expand again.
  When the photon is at almost zero radius, it is similar to a high speed particle. It will hit an electron or a sub-particle and impart linear momentum to them.  When the photon is at maximum radius, it will look like a wave. Thus the photon itself looks like a particle wave although it continues to move at the speed of light.
  The photon is a self-contained oscillation. The change from a moving plane to a straight line can be considered like photonic breathing. The photon in expanding and contracting is an electrical motor type mechanism which tends to operate at a constant speed.
   Although the photon is electrostatically neutral it has a magnetic field. Dot-wave energy can exist from a single point to a radius. When we have negative dot wave energy that oscillates we get both an electric field and a magnetic field. The same is true for positive dot-wave energy. The bipolar dot-wave energy configuration has a zero net electric field. However the positive and negative dot-wave energy within the photon has an inner negative and a positive outer. This produces a charged capacitor configuration and a net magnetic field. The same thing happens in the neutron which is electrically neutral but has a magnetic field.
   In general positive and negative dot-wave energy cannot destroy each other since they occupy different dimensions. In addition positive dot-wave energy can be added to positive dot-wave energy to create larger and larger charges. At a distance positive repels positive but close up at zero distances they do not repel. The electron is pure negative dot-wave energy in a spherical oscillation. The proton is more complex and consists of both positive and negative dot-wave energy and bipolar dot-wave energy. It contains linear, angular, and spherical momentums.
  The electron when basically stationary contains spherical and angular momentums. It is the spherical momentum that gives it the property of mass. The complex proton has the property of mass which comes from its spherical momentum plus gyroscopic patterns of linear and orbital momentum. When we accelerate an electron toward light speed we get Doppler distortions in the spherical energy patterns. This causes an equivalent mass which is the combination of spherical and linear momentum.
   In my book “The Gravitational Wave and the Dot-wave theory” by Gerald Grushow, the equivalent mass of a dot-wave is 1.372E-72Kg and the charge is 1.422E-60 Coulombs. This is the lowest quantum of charge and energy in the universe. The electron has 6.640E40 negative dot-waves. That does not mean that you can find all these dot-waves inside the electron. It just means that the compression of the big bang forced all this quanta of energy into the electron.
   Prior to big bang we had electromagnetic energy which compressed toward a small radius. The compression forced electromagnetic field energy into particles and photons. At some time the gravitational pump produced the electrons and protons. Later gravitational compressions produced the atoms. It is interesting that two photons which contain linear and angular energy collide to produce positrons and electrons. The bipolar photons split into positive and negative dot-wave energy which at the same time has spherical oscillations. It is the spherical oscillations that produce mass. Thus the conservation of linear and angular momentum that we observe appears wrong on the surface.  The law is: Spherical Energy +Angular Energy+ Linear Energy are conserved.
  The question is where did the spherical energy come from? The answer is that it always existed within the dot-waves themselves. Each dot-wave has mass because it has a spherical oscillation. When we look at a particle such as an electron or a quark, all the dot-wave spherical oscillations have become the spherical oscillation of the entire structure. Thus we can say that
  Linear momentum, angular momentum, and spherical momentum are conserved.
 

It looks invisible.
 

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 353
  • Thanked: 58 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #2 on: 08/09/2016 15:36:45 »
jerrygg38

    You are suggesting photons have mass. They do not by Relativity mathematics and as you know we have to follow the math. Main stream will never understand what a photon looks like under the current model and understanding. There probably is no such thing as charge in the sense you are using. Electrons rotate through fundamental energy c of space. When an electron rotates up to a different shell it creates a tornado in the fundamental c that propagates at c until something absorbs the tornado we recognize as macro energy in the mass realm. The maxima and minima is the rotation and length of travel for the electron. A sphere in all directions is created unless blocked by absorbing mass.

Main stream suggests a virtual photon particle and a wave. I would suggest a wave on particles of spin c. I have a designed grid structure that move electrons as a rotation and follow Relativity mechanics.

What moves the electron in the main stream model?
 
The following users thanked this post: Alex Siqueira

Offline jerrygg38

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
  • Thanked: 27 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #3 on: 08/09/2016 18:22:24 »
jerrygg38

    You are suggesting photons have mass. They do not by Relativity mathematics and as you know we have to follow the math. Main stream will never understand what a photon looks like under the current model and understanding.

Main stream suggests a virtual photon particle and a wave. I would suggest a wave on particles of spin c.

What moves the electron in the main stream model?
  I just re-posted my article. What are your inclinations, science and math? The mathematician looks at things as if the universe was built upon equations and math. Thus the scientist looks at thing differently than the Engineer. I look at things from pictures that I can see. I believe that we live in a practical universe which is easy to understand from an engineering viewpoint.  I do not believe that the great mathematical mind of Einstein correctly described the universe. I do believe that his mathematical interpretation of how the universe operates produces excellent results. Thus for arguments sake he produced a mathematical model that works well.
   However his model only described general patterns and does not provide us with a basic understanding of what is happening. Your words are nice from a scientific and mathematical perspective but they provide no real understanding of how things work.
  My photon understanding which is only a few days old and written down and revised this morning shows that the photon looks like a particle part of the time when it is reduced to a very small radius and behaves like a wave when it expands to a normal radius. Thus in my mind it is a particle/wave. Yet I have not called it that in many, many years. You ask what makes it move?
   The rise from a zero radius to a maximum radius and the fall back to a zero radius constitutes an entire structure. It is a self-propelled machine of a particular wavelength. It is not an interaction of space such that a perturbation travels along a path. The photon is a machine structure, and that moves in a straight line at the speed C.
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #4 on: 09/09/2016 10:55:54 »

  I just re-posted my article. What are your inclinations, science and math? The mathematician looks at things as if the universe was built upon equations and math. Thus the scientist looks at thing differently than the Engineer.



So true Jerry, Maths is just arbitrary and has no real  meaning in the Universe.
 

Offline jerrygg38

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
  • Thanked: 27 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #5 on: 09/09/2016 13:03:53 »

  I just re-posted my article. What are your inclinations, science and math? The mathematician looks at things as if the universe was built upon equations and math. Thus the scientist looks at thing differently than the Engineer.



So true Jerry, Maths is just arbitrary and has no real  meaning in the Universe.
  Math has a lot of meaning in providing formulas to calculate quantitatively what happens. For example the flight of a shell from a 5 inch gun requires 100 simultaneously equations in a real time computer to aim the gun and hit the target. I designed the hardware for the system but the mathematicians and physicists did the equations and the programming. So you need both. However I believe that it is an engineering universe and not a mathematicians universe. So Einstein comes up with the math and does a great job. Yet he does not tell us what the photon looks like. He does not tell us what causes space to curve and contract. His equations appear to work well but they are only the math and the engineering is missing.
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #6 on: 09/09/2016 14:22:16 »

  I just re-posted my article. What are your inclinations, science and math? The mathematician looks at things as if the universe was built upon equations and math. Thus the scientist looks at thing differently than the Engineer.



So true Jerry, Maths is just arbitrary and has no real  meaning in the Universe.
  Math has a lot of meaning in providing formulas to calculate quantitatively what happens. For example the flight of a shell from a 5 inch gun requires 100 simultaneously equations in a real time computer to aim the gun and hit the target. I designed the hardware for the system but the mathematicians and physicists did the equations and the programming. So you need both. However I believe that it is an engineering universe and not a mathematicians universe. So Einstein comes up with the math and does a great job. Yet he does not tell us what the photon looks like. He does not tell us what causes space to curve and contract. His equations appear to work well but they are only the math and the engineering is missing.

Interesting view on maths, however I can aim my gun and by trial and error with  no maths hit the target. Things happen regardless of maths, for example we can calculate how much force something hits the ground when falling , however the force is there without the maths and the  thing falls regardless of maths.
When a person  thinks of space curving or contracted , it is hard for a  person to imagine what they can't visually see, after all free space is clear and not opaque and prediction is because of this very fact, i.e we can see where things are going too.

Now if you was to say the greatness of maths was for first time precision, then I would agree , but other than that function , maths is not a necessity.  I could fly a rocket to Mercury or likes by just ''steering'' the rocket to the target. No complex calculations or vector analysis.

I could explain a curvature of space quite easily, to imagine a spinning black hole centripetally contracted ''north'' and ''south'' to form a disk like shape, expansions becomes the ''equator'' .

But of course speculation without observation is objectively ''god'' theories.

 

 

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 353
  • Thanked: 58 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #7 on: 09/09/2016 15:49:07 »
jerrygg38, Thebox

     No matter what you think of mathematics theory's have to follow maths valid. You are getting your knowledge from non realists. The Bohr Copenhagen interpretation. Where something comes from nothing and no one even bats an eye. I believe in mechanics that follow math. A photon cannot have mass and follow the equations of Relativity. I believe Relativity is the correct way to interpret our universe. A particle will have entropy. There is no perpetual motion even in light as a particle moving through space. Mechanics have to follow math. If you are trying to explain a photon within the realm of Relativity it cannot be a particle traveling through space. If you disregard Relativity than you can make it anything you want. Or use a weasel word like main stream, a magic virtual particle.

    We know there is c for a photon that will travel until it is interrupted. We know it is always measured to be the same speed in a vacuum. We understand it cannot be a particle by the mathematics of Relativity (unless we invoke magic). We know it transfers energy. We know it acts like a particle and a wave. What are we left with for a design? Only one logical possibility. It is not normal mass because it cannot be a particle from mass as we know it. It has to have its own energy because it is measured to be constant in every frame. Logically you would have to concede that there is a energy from space that not only moves the photon but is the photon. When an electron moves from one shell to another it interrupts the rest state of the energy matrix in the form of a propagated wave. The entire spectrum of fields and waves are interruptions in the rest state of fundamental energy. The cause of time. So all propagated waves of the spectrum travel at the same velocity. Magnetism is just a spin state of fundamental energy. Clockwise going in and clockwise going out. Magnetic properties probably contributed to the DNA helix that created life.

Main stream looks at how each new observation fits into their view rather than realize there view needs to change. Main stream realizes a matrix below what we describe as mass would change main streams concept. The energy of change is a steep uphill battle. When a virtual particle was born as an explanation of a photon magic was the result. They put up the MMX as a wall to defend against all Aether types when it only disproved one type (a stationary one).

    Dark Mass Energy is two aspects of the same thing. Mass as a dimension smaller than the electron (not another dimension but as part of our realm). Energy is the spin state of Dark Mass and is constant. It moves the electrons and photons in a confounded way to measure the same speed of light in a vacuum in all frames.

    The equivalence principle between GR and SR both change the measuring stick used in a frame. GR by dilation of space and SR by visual appearance of the physical measuring stick. Every frame changes the distance you would measure as a mile. More dilation in GR physically increases your measuring sick. Speed in SR increases the visual length of your measuring stick while in the same frame. The frame at rest will view a contraction in length. It all follows the geometry of the finite speed of light in SR and the dilation geometry in GR for equivalence. Once you work it out mathematically Relativity is really a beautiful system. Absolutely no paradox's just a mathematical beauty.
 

Offline jerrygg38

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
  • Thanked: 27 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #8 on: 09/09/2016 22:10:18 »

 

Interesting view on maths, however I can aim my gun and by trial and error with  no maths hit the target. Things happen regardless of maths, for example we can calculate how much force something hits the ground when falling , however the force is there without the maths and the  thing falls regardless of maths.
When a person  thinks of space curving or contracted , it is hard for a  person to imagine what they can't visually see, after all free space is clear and not opaque and prediction is because of this very fact, i.e we can see where things are going too.

Now if you was to say the greatness of maths was for first time precision, then I would agree , but other than that function , maths is not a necessity.  I could fly a rocket to Mercury or likes by just ''steering'' the rocket to the target. No complex calculations or vector analysis.

I could explain a curvature of space quite easily, to imagine a spinning black hole centripetally contracted ''north'' and ''south'' to form a disk like shape, expansions becomes the ''equator'' .

But of course speculation without observation is objectively ''god'' theories.
   You can learn to fire a rifle or a handgun accurately by intuition. Yet if you want to fire a large gun with a 5 inch diameter shell 10 miles and hit a tank moving 20 miles an hour on the seashore, and destroy it in one shot, without a high speed computer, radar images and accurate equations, you would be wasting your time. Unless you made the correct initial calculations for a trip to the moon, all the corrections would amount to nothing at all. In truth extreme accuracy was not necessary as they used slide rules and not fancy computer. And the on board computers were no smarter than an artari set in the early days. And without the math and statistics, there would be no way all the components could have survived the trip and back. So without the math we could never have made it.
 

Offline jerrygg38

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
  • Thanked: 27 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #9 on: 09/09/2016 22:26:41 »
jerrygg38, Thebox

     No matter what you think of mathematics theory's have to follow maths valid. You are getting your knowledge from non realists. The Bohr Copenhagen interpretation. Where something comes from nothing and no one even bats an eye. I believe in mechanics that follow math. A photon cannot have mass and follow the equations of Relativity. I believe Relativity is the correct way to interpret our universe. A particle will have entropy. There is no perpetual motion even in light as a particle moving through space. Mechanics have to follow math. If you are trying to explain a photon within the realm of Relativity it cannot be a particle traveling through space. If you disregard Relativity than you can make it anything you want. Or use a weasel word like main stream, a magic virtual particle.
   Relativity is like religion. Some are relativity theists and others are relativity atheists. I am a middle of the road person. To me relativity is a mathematical tool to describe various aspects of the universe. It has many followers. You are a follower. I doubt very much that the strange math of Albert Einstein is more than a first order approximation to the universe. All the beautiful electrical laws that we produce ultimately are merely approximations. They never work perfectly. The Engineer always has to make corrections to them to get things to work. Thus art must be added to science since the laws never work perfectly. So now you believe that Albert Einstein has so perfect a mind that he correctly defined the universe. Yet 1000 years from now he will be long forgotten. His theory will be in the ash heap of science. Future man will laugh at how silly his ideas were.In fact future man will never even have heard of him except in the museum of ancient thoughts.
 

Offline jerrygg38

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
  • Thanked: 27 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #10 on: 10/09/2016 12:02:54 »
jerrygg38, Thebox

      There is no perpetual motion even in light as a particle moving through space. Mechanics have to follow math. If you are trying to explain a photon within the realm of Relativity it cannot be a particle traveling through space. If you disregard Relativity than you can make it anything you want. Or use a weasel word like main stream, a magic virtual particle.

    We know there is c for a photon that will travel until it is interrupted. We know it is always measured to be the same speed in a vacuum. We understand it cannot be a particle by the mathematics of Relativity (unless we invoke magic). We know it transfers energy. We know it acts like a particle and a wave. What are we left with for a design? Only one logical possibility. It is not normal mass because it cannot be a particle from mass as we know it. It has to have its own energy because it is measured to be constant in every frame.
  You approach things from a mathematical perspective. You say a photon cannot have mass but two high energy photons hitting each other produce electrons and positrons which have mass. Therefore photons have the substance within them that produces mass. What is mass? It is a spherical configuration of energy which makes it like a three dimensional gyroscope. What is a photon? It tends to be a linear wave that at times looks like a particle when the wave is basically zero transverse radius and like a wave when the transverse radius is at a maximum. Thus we are dealing with geometry and not relativity. Relativity describes the effects of gravitational fields and velocity upon the geometric structures of the photon and the particles. Yet it is only an approximation.
 

Offline Spring Theory

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 29
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #11 on: 10/09/2016 13:15:37 »
To picture what a photon looks like, you have to first picture what it has:

1. Electrical fields both positive and negative in opposite directions.
2. Magnetic fields both positive and negative in opposite directions.

Maybe it would look something like this:



When the photons "collide" to become matter, they don't change, they just get trapped into orbit around each other to create what we perceive of as matter.
 

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 353
  • Thanked: 58 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #12 on: 10/09/2016 14:10:35 »
 jerrygg38
« on: Today at 12:02:54 »
quote/You approach things from a mathematical perspective. You say a photon cannot have mass but two high energy photons hitting each other produce electrons and positrons which have mass. Therefore photons have the substance within them that produces mass.\
By Relativity math it cannot have mass. Two high energy photons collide and we measure the result as mass. (old school electrons were both negatrons and positrons by opposite spin directions). This measurement does not prove mass being created only the measurement equal to electron motion was measured. We have a measurement. What you conclude from that measurement is up for debate. Depending on your understanding the measurement will be a particle pair or motion in space equal to the pair production by measurement.

Quote\What is mass? It is a spherical configuration of energy which makes it like a three dimensional gyroscope.\
To my mind and understanding it is more in tune with compressed energy similar to a black hole. this black hole is being moved by energy of space that has not been compressed. Depending on your understanding the conclusions to which you believe will have been formed.

Quote\ What is a photon? It tends to be a linear wave that at times looks like a particle when the wave is basically zero transverse radius and like a wave when the transverse radius is at a maximum. Thus we are dealing with geometry and not relativity.\
Relativity is geometry. The idea of a particle came from its ability to transfer energy. The idea of a wave came from the dual slit experiments causing interference. The logical conclusion is a wave on particles with the energy of c spin. You cannot get around the fact the electron and photon are confounded in every frame by measurement.

Quote\Relativity describes the effects of gravitational fields and velocity upon the geometric structures of the photon and the particles. Yet it is only an approximation.\
More like a ratio being the same in every frame. Your understanding only allows for an approximation. The beauty of relativity is the ratio being the same in every frame. Your measuring stick is not the same in every frame but your tick rate to distance measured as a ratio remains the same.

Spring Theory
« on: Today at 13:15:37 »
Quote\When the photons "collide" to become matter, they don't change, they just get trapped into orbit around each other to create what we perceive of as matter.\
What we measure as a brief force equal to an electron moving through space is not necessarily pair production. When we shoot electrons it may not be the physical electron traveling through space but the representative spectrum of the electron. This would explain the electron dual slit interference same as a photon of light wave length. The representation moves at the speed of light so cannot be the particle itself but rather the wave o fundamental energy. You can chose a fractured understanding based on  main stream concepts or logic based on observations. Theory has to follow math but math cannot prove a theory correct.
 

Offline jerrygg38

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
  • Thanked: 27 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #13 on: 10/09/2016 22:22:40 »
To picture what a photon looks like, you have to first picture what it has:

1. Electrical fields both positive and negative in opposite directions.
2. Magnetic fields both positive and negative in opposite directions.

Maybe it would look something like this:



When the photons "collide" to become matter, they don't change, they just get trapped into orbit around each other to create what we perceive of as matter.
  If you have negative electric charges spinning in a plane positive electric charges spinning in the same direction in an adjacent plane, the magnetic fields perpendicular to the plane will cancel. If they spin in opposite directions they will add. Your pictures shows them separated but I believe that they occupy the same distance from the center axis.
 

Offline jerrygg38

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 781
  • Thanked: 27 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #14 on: 10/09/2016 22:40:38 »
jerrygg38
« on: Today at 12:02:54 »
Quote The beauty of relativity is the ratio being the same in every frame. Your measuring stick is not the same in every frame but your tick rate to distance measured as a ratio remains the same.
   Right now I am restudying relativity as a mathematical understanding of how the universe works. I am looking for a nuts and bolts understanding but it appears to me that the math solution yields good answers. It is true that my measuring stick is not the same. As I move toward a high density gravitational field, my measuring stick shrinks. Most likely if I have an XYZ spherical ruler it appears that it will shrink equally in all directions.
   What still confuses me is the tick rate to distance measured. My ball has shrunk and my energy level has increased with increasing gravitational pressure. So my clock is running faster.
   Now if I move my clock with velocity, more energy will be added to it and it will shrink. then the clock will run faster again but it appears that this is contrary to relativity. That is the question I put up on the science forum. How would you explain this?
 

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 353
  • Thanked: 58 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #15 on: 11/09/2016 05:00:51 »
 jerrygg38
« on: 10/09/2016 22:40:38 »
Quote\ As I move toward a high density gravitational field, my measuring stick shrinks. Most likely if I have an XYZ spherical ruler it appears that it will shrink equally in all directions.\

No your measuring stick expands in GR dilation!! The closer to the center of mass the lower the potential energy and more expanded the mass in the dilated space. Galaxies have visual dilation of space. Einstein's gamma term is expansion with diluted potential energy. Many go the wrong direction as you just did in confusing it with length contraction. Length contraction is SR. When we use the space ship with light moving forward and back part of the ship moves forward while the light is moving backward. That is the source of length contraction from an observer at rest with SR. Yes in dilation the entire measuring stick increases to measure a longer mile while the clock tick rate slows down to measure the distance light traveled in a vacuum the same in every frame. One caveat the dilation is a gradient to the center of mass. Many make that same mistake as you. Its no wonder most are confused with Relativity.

Quote\Now if I move my clock with velocity, more energy will be added to it and it will shrink. then the clock will run faster again but it appears that this is contrary to relativity. That is the question I put up on the science forum. How would you explain this?\

Energy in a clock is being removed with speed Not added. c is a limit of zero point energy and is constant. As you approach c less energy is available. If mass could go c all the energy would be used for vector speed. In SR your measuring stick appears longer than at relative rest where it appears length contracted. It is the finite speed of light that causes the contracted view. Consider a light source moving towards a ship going 1/2 the speed of light. When the light wave first hits the front of the ship the rear of the ship is moving forward by 1/3 its length so the ship would only reflect 2/3rds of its actual size. Now wit light moving with the ship the ship will appear (by reflection) twice its physical size. So the visual and the physical length are never on the same page using light at relativistic speeds. But your measurement of time and your measurement of distance measure the speed of light in a vacuum the same in all frames. What is amazing, dilation in GR is mathematically equivalent to speed in SR.

Here is an interesting tid bit. Gravity = acceleration + deceleration. In acceleration your clock slows with gravity. In deceleration your clock speeds up with gravity. So gravity is not what affects your tick rate. Zero point energy is affected by SR speed and GR dilation.

Lets say you are in the same region of the Earth. The Earth's radius is about 4,000 miles. if you had a ship that cold instantly go from 32 ft/s/s acceleration down to zero acceleration in 4,000 miles by the inverse sq. your clock would rick at the same rate as the center of the Earth. Equivalence of GR and SR.

You have to understand the meaning of your math as it relates to your environment. Otherwise you are just doing rabbit hole math. Relativity is a beautiful description of our universe when you understand it correctly.

 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #16 on: 11/09/2016 10:41:39 »
jerrygg38, Thebox

     No matter what you think of mathematics theory's have to follow maths valid.

Well Goc, I thought you would understand the basic principles of science, maths does not come before the theory/idea, the maths has to follow the theory/idea , it is the other way around, if you want an example , Faraday/Maxwell , Maxwell added the maths to Faraday's ''work'' much later in time. In fact several years later.

Mathematics is made to fit the theory or measured to fit the theory, it is not something that exists on its own merit.

 

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 353
  • Thanked: 58 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #17 on: 11/09/2016 15:24:41 »
Thebox,

   I have been working in the field of science since was eighteen. I suspect I know some principles of science. Math cannot prove a theory but it can disprove one if it does not follow math.

The postulates of Relativity agree with geometry of the finite speed of light. The Lorentz contraction while correct for the view does not represent the physical object as being contracted. Simple geometry will follow the visual contraction. Light being independent of the source creates a Pythagoras style geometry with the speed of light. This follows the observations of Relativity.

    Relativity is not my theory. I spent years trying to understand Relativity. I finally reverse engineered the geometry of the postulates of Relativity to finally understand Relativity. Many believe they understand Relativity because they know the math of Relativity. The math equations will give you a rabbit hole understanding of Relativity. It's only when you put in the work of following the postulates with geometry that you get out of the rabbit hole to understand the observations.  I can explain it to you but all of us have a natural bias that no one could have a better understanding than yourself. So we block off our ability to learn. You are a prime example of this issue.

Quote\ Well Goc, I thought you would understand the basic principles of science, maths does not come before the theory/idea,\

Relativity postulates came first than the math. None of this is my theory it is Einstein's. I just took the time to learn Relativity through geometry.

What I realized about Relativity is main stream's view of nothing to impede the photon in space is illogical. The electron jumping to a different shell slower than the speed of light would not produce a particle moving faster than the electron motion. The electron moving slower than the fundamental energy of space is the actual reason for light. the resistance caused by the rotating electron creates a wave frequency propagated by the energy already in space as a disturbance. The disturbance on one side is the opposite at 180 degrees. The rotation on one side is towards a observer while the other side the observer it moves away. Mirror images of the wave. This is entanglement when you measure one side the entangled partner is the opposite spin. It is not a particle but a wave on particles. This removes any paradoxes. Energy of space moves the electrons so the photon and electron are confounded.
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #18 on: 11/09/2016 15:36:38 »
Thebox,

   I have been working in the field of science since was eighteen. I suspect I know some principles of science. Math cannot prove a theory but it can disprove one if it does not follow math.

The postulates of Relativity agree with geometry of the finite speed of light. The Lorentz contraction while correct for the view does not represent the physical object as being contracted. Simple geometry will follow the visual contraction. Light being independent of the source creates a Pythagoras style geometry with the speed of light. This follows the observations of Relativity.

    Relativity is not my theory. I spent years trying to understand Relativity. I finally reverse engineered the geometry of the postulates of Relativity to finally understand Relativity. Many believe they understand Relativity because they know the math of Relativity. The math equations will give you a rabbit hole understanding of Relativity. It's only when you put in the work of following the postulates with geometry that you get out of the rabbit hole to understand the observations.  I can explain it to you but all of us have a natural bias that no one could have a better understanding than yourself. So we block off our ability to learn. You are a prime example of this issue.

Quote\ Well Goc, I thought you would understand the basic principles of science, maths does not come before the theory/idea,\

Relativity postulates came first than the math. None of this is my theory it is Einstein's. I just took the time to learn Relativity through geometry.

What I realized about Relativity is main stream's view of nothing to impede the photon in space is illogical. The electron jumping to a different shell slower than the speed of light would not produce a particle moving faster than the electron motion. The electron moving slower than the fundamental energy of space is the actual reason for light. the resistance caused by the rotating electron creates a wave frequency propagated by the energy already in space as a disturbance. The disturbance on one side is the opposite at 180 degrees. The rotation on one side is towards a observer while the other side the observer it moves away. Mirror images of the wave. This is entanglement when you measure one side the entangled partner is the opposite spin. It is not a particle but a wave on particles. This removes any paradoxes. Energy of space moves the electrons so the photon and electron are confounded.

The reason for light is sight, there is nothing to say that what we observe externally is not black in colour or I prefer green as I have witnessed the gin clear of free space become green by staring at a specific lcd heat lamp.

Relativity is easy to understand if you change the context slightly to -  Relativity is that which two or more observers must agree on from their geometrical position.

In most of Einsteins ideas he only looks at one observer being the ''center'' of the Universe ignoring the Universe is 3 dimensional (although this is only arbitrary).

When we consider more observers, ''things'' of present fall apart. The angled laser etc, all not really fact and poor logic.

The simple view of space in my opinion is that maybe two photons can not occupy the same space but can be compressed in a space to form wave like qualities.

The electromagnetism being maybe a separate entity and an existing ''aether'' of space with a value that reads 0 but is not actually zero.

There is a big similarity to magnetic bottling and plasma fields when considering the vacuum of space.

The Sun seems to be bottled really ''tight''.

The speed of light being an emit rate of ''dots''.  All the dots will be pushed by the other dots from source.








« Last Edit: 11/09/2016 15:45:05 by Thebox »
 

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 353
  • Thanked: 58 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #19 on: 11/09/2016 17:28:32 »
Thebox
« on: Today at 15:36:38 »
Quote\ The reason for light is sight, there is nothing to say that what we observe externally is not black in colour or I prefer green as I have witnessed the gin clear of free space become green by staring at a specific lcd heat lamp.\

The reason we view objects is because of waves. Our brains interpret waves in the visual length as color. Our brains create color out of waves. The waves are there regardless of anything viewing them. Our brain is not a good detector of reality.

Quote\  Relativity is easy to understand if you change the context slightly to -  Relativity is that which two or more observers must agree on from their geometrical position. \

I guess it is nice to sum up your interpretation of Relativity in one sentence. I find the depth of Relativity requires much more than a sentence. And no one would agree on the geometrical position from their observation.

Quote\ In most of Einsteins ideas he only looks at one observer being the ''center'' of the Universe ignoring the Universe is 3 dimensional (although this is only arbitrary).\

Do either of us have the ability to know how Einstein viewed an observer?

Quote\ When we consider more observers, ''things'' of present fall apart. The angled laser etc, all not really fact and poor logic.

Logic depends on the depth of knowledge. Time changes all things but is the basis for life and math logic.

Quote\ The simple view of space in my opinion is that maybe two photons can not occupy the same space but can be compressed in a space to form wave like qualities. \

I agree it is a simple view.

Quote\ The electromagnetism being maybe a separate entity and an existing ''aether'' of space with a value that reads 0 but is not actually zero.\

c is the value of space. 0 is main stream's measurement understanding.

Quote\ There is a big similarity to magnetic bottling and plasma fields when considering the vacuum of space.

The Sun seems to be bottled really ''tight''.\

Yes gravity works.

Quote\ The speed of light being an emit rate of ''dots''.  All the dots will be pushed by the other dots from source.

see that is a magic statement. It does not include expansion nor does it give a mechanism for a particle push. How do you push a virtual particle? A fundamental energy of spin c which creates a wave pattern is a more logical representation of the observation that includes the dual slit experiment.




 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3164
  • Thanked: 47 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #20 on: 11/09/2016 18:16:39 »


I guess it is nice to sum up your interpretation of Relativity in one sentence. I find the depth of Relativity requires much more than a sentence. And no one would agree on the geometrical position from their observation.
I said relativity is the agreement of two observers from their position, not that they can agree on position, position is relative to each observers position.


Quote
Do either of us have the ability to know how Einstein viewed an observer?

Well! I understand his thoughts about ''things'', I can quite easily ''see'' the Universe,  however the Universe is not how ''you'' see it.

Quote
Logic depends on the depth of knowledge. Time changes all things but is the basis for life and math logic.

Logic does not depend on knowledge, it depends on the ability to make a ''picture'' that reflects reality.

Example - It is logic to presume an object falls to the ground if dropped from the hand.   No knowledge needed it is observed.

Quote
see that is a magic statement. It does not include expansion nor does it give a mechanism for a particle push. How do you push a virtual particle? A fundamental energy of spin c which creates a wave pattern is a more logical representation of the observation that includes the dual slit experiment.

A greater magnitude of likewise charge = expansion, there is nothing complicated about the entropy of a system or systems components.

Minus charge = contraction


Very simple and in experiment such as metal expansion, surely must be true.


We could use hf rather than charge, not sure on that.





« Last Edit: 11/09/2016 18:25:14 by Thebox »
 

Offline Spring Theory

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 29
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #21 on: 13/09/2016 11:57:25 »
To picture what a photon looks like, you have to first picture what it has:

1. Electrical fields both positive and negative in opposite directions.
2. Magnetic fields both positive and negative in opposite directions.

Maybe it would look something like this:



When the photons "collide" to become matter, they don't change, they just get trapped into orbit around each other to create what we perceive of as matter.
  If you have negative electric charges spinning in a plane positive electric charges spinning in the same direction in an adjacent plane, the magnetic fields perpendicular to the plane will cancel. If they spin in opposite directions they will add. Your pictures shows them separated but I believe that they occupy the same distance from the center axis.

This is a photon pictured when coupled with other photons, like what would happen in a ray of light or photons orbiting each other.  If you had a single photon it would look more like a wave packet or be modeled as a compression of space at it's center with decompression of space at it's perimeter that extends to infinity.

When coupled with other photons, the group forms a wave where the magnetic and electrical poles are clearly offset based on electromagnetic wave characteristics.

The spin effect I show is perpendicular to its propagation direction which I postulate is similar to the Coriolis effect in seismic waves that creates the electrical and magnetic fields.

As far as spin on its axis of rotation - this can be looked at from two different perspectives:
1. The photon doesn't spin, it is the sum of two photons in superposition but with orthogonal electrical and magnetic fields and one delayed in phase behind the other.  This would appear to be a spinning electrical and magnetic field.
2. All photons spin, photons that are measured without spin are the sum of two spinning photons in superposition but with orthogonal electrical and magnetic fields and one delayed in phase behind the other. This electric and magnetic fields would appear to be always pointing in the same direction.

I'm leaning to the first simpler model to create stable photon orbits.
 

Online Alex Siqueira

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 157
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #22 on: 14/09/2016 00:39:49 »
As for myself I tend to agree with matematicians, they make more sense to our understandment of reality, walking step by step...
  But there is some true in the fact of "need to follow the current math", I mean if someone missed ugly back there on those expirements, the results could match the math, but missing the factors...

 I do tend to believe, when thinking about wave-particle duality, that the problem, our problem, it comes down to try to concieve "A photon"...
 For me, I wondering a long time already, that there was never such thing as "a photon", as a real particle with charges and no mass. The only reson it do not posses mass is to explain how it's able to travel at C, for me "a photon" can be correctly interpreteded and compreeend when framed as "a portion".... Photon being a state of space when carring information, "a photon" as being like a bubble of oxygen that is being propeled straigth forward under water...
  You see, the bubble is accelerating, and along with it the liquid on the surrownding areas, forming waves, waves "on the water", not on the bubble, the bubble in this scenario being the energy being transfered "troguht" space...

 If it's not clear, "a photon" is everywhere, everytime, after and even before any energy was present, it is a tessue, frabric of space... Wherever forms space fabric, it's prety obvious that "it" cant transpass atomic structure and energy... It can flow between the spaces hardly, but when the things come down to a celestial body density it, "space fabric" can't defnetly penetrate the density...
 So it must be with energy, the ray is moving freely and seems to be transpasing trough the cosmos, freely with no mass, it's indeed the only possible the same math, but not only the possible scenario...
  Math can achieve the correct result, blaming the wrong factors, can be the case that the photon is a "construction of space", a temporary, volatile, without shape, the pseudo shape should be a spheres moving on a straight line, like particles, the waves are from space itself due the acceleration the "act of carring enegy" is producing, such acceleration is able to disrupt the space opn the surrounding areas, and each disruption, copy-cat the acceleration of the original ray of light, resulting in bi-polarity, as a mirror of information....

 One could of course isolate a photon using a controled experiment, but due the fact there they like to apear and desapear, and the fact that you can vaccum a experiment, but one cannot remove the vaccum from existence, and by that I mean you cannot produce a experiment without the presense of space fabric, so how one can be so sure, that one is isolating "a photon, or the photons", and not simple isolating "a controled portion of information being carried by space, trough a no real construction, and "empty area", empty from space, cause it's filled with energy", one sure can siolate it using electromagnetism as always, but the very observation and measurement itself make the experiment invalid, for our purposes....

 For me "C" is the maximum time in with light can "be" traveled, "trough and within the "density of space fabric", for this reason alone C would be not constant and its acceleration randomly subjected to the density of the "sphere" where the observer is, in our case, heliosphere...
 Sun's heliosphere, produce solar winds on space, such as sun is bending space sending away information on the horizon, on its plate, we, planets, become caugth on this disk, locked on it, but sun is also moving, so the plate is the lock on, but as sun is moving, we are literaly chasing it, everytime we fall beind the pull gets strong and slingshot us back to the disk, our on mass add acceleration when the plate is reached and we transpass further, this goes for all the planets direct realated with their masses, we can't move away from sun's plate, and we fall back tot he plate, and again our own mass push us behind the plate. Now one need to add the vertical axe, the poles nort and sout as for the spining, of the plate, we orbit the sun, cause sun's horizon produces this plate, so we are not orbiting the mass, we're orbiting the "effect its mass produces, "on space"", the velocity witch this occurs, agaian, "due sun mass", determinate the acceleration inside the heliosphere, again "sun's mass "in function of space density", space determinates time speed due the mass of the star, cause time is proportional to C, and C proportional to the density of space inside heliosphere, again, determinated by the sun mass....

 If not clear, we could measure many "star spheres" and reach a simbolic number to be the value of C, maximun and minimal, altough this would not mean that C is constant everywhere...

 We can measure the light comming from the galaxy B, herein the galaxy A:
 Imagine that inside the starphere of B, C occurs at "x", than on the empty space between B and A, C become "y", and when reaching the limits of our heliosphere, C becomes "Z"...
 Accepting that C changes randomly from galaxy to galaxy, when nearby massive celestial bodies or dense gass clouds, no matter, to where you look, if you pre-determinate, that the speed of C = "Same", doesn't really matter to where you observe "from inside our heliosphere", the speed of light would always seem to be "Same", seems to be not a question of math, nor theory, but a simple change of perspective...

 I stick with math, cause there are so many possible outcomes, that the better is to keep following the tangible result, if too much become based on theories, one mistake during the past and all future could become wrong, numbers even if they fail prefent this to happen, cause as I say if not, numbers, math will fail, seems more reliable...

 There is much to consider to even consider this, but try this "the mass of a photon is directly related with the density of space on where the photon exists, and the speed of C is dirrectly related with that speed...

 On our actual math we consider to exist "a photon" as a particle, that is mass less to explain how it can travel at C.
 If we consider that there never where something like "a photon" as a real particle but as a construction of a tissue that has little density but has, than "the photon traveling always to the speed of light for being mass less" would not be required to match the math..
 If "the photon" is a momentum existing where the energy is, at any moment in time, C speed would also be reduced when traveling a massive gas cloud as for example, but as soon the information have pass trought that density, the speed would be reajusted to the constant one, simple cause "the photon" wouldn't be travveling though those areas on space, basicaly light would have a constant speed "where it is", determined by the density of  that area, this is not the same as loss of speed, but a simple ajustement of C where it is occuring, as soon as it leaves that area to a clear one, it would self readquire it's new speed, readjusting itself, is possible cause there would be no "photon" as a particle finding barriers along the way, but the density on the area temperarly being subjecting the information being carried to the proper speed due the density of such area...
 In a simple version light, C is constant on space, but space would be the thing that is not being constant... The speed of C on galaxy B was the same as the speed of C on the galaxy A, and also in between, but space density is never the same, altoguh the same photon that was on galaxy B is the same photon that is in galaxy A and in between, the only thing that was moving at constant was light, the photon never had to move.
 If the medium is not moving, the only possible result would be that light would be moved using a straigth line, and once in movement would affect the medium seeming to be causing waves, and those waves actually being a infinity amounght of straight lines, and each one resonating on the tissue, as the ray of light keeps existing, the acceleration of space around of it, would replicate a infinite numbers copies of that acceleration, in all possible directions...
« Last Edit: 14/09/2016 01:47:02 by Alex Siqueira »
 

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 353
  • Thanked: 58 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #23 on: 14/09/2016 14:24:21 »
Alex Siqueira
« on: Today at 00:39:49 »
Quote\  There is much to consider to even consider this, but try this "the mass of a photon is directly related with the density of space on where the photon exists, and the speed of C is dirrectly related with that speed...\

Very good thinking for your self. But c is always the same speed. It is the distances that change due to dilation of space. Look to the lensing of galaxies. It is dilation of energy fabric increasing the distance between fabric particles. Gravity red shift shows the increased distances where light is created. You can still follow Relativity. The speed of light is the same but your measuring stick has expanded. This causes you to measure the same speed of light in a vacuum. You measure a longer distance with a slower clock.

Quote]
 On our actual math we consider to exist "a photon" as a particle, that is mass less to explain how it can travel at C.
 If we consider that there never where something like "a photon" as a real particle but as a construction of a tissue that has little density but has, than "the photon traveling always to the speed of light for being mass less" would not be required to match the math\

The measuring stick is always confounded with the speed of light distance. Always follows the math.

Quote\If "the photon" is a momentum existing where the energy is, at any moment in time, C speed would also be reduced when traveling a massive gas cloud as for example, but as soon the information have pass trought that density, the speed would be reajusted to the constant one, simple cause "the photon" wouldn't be travveling though those areas on space, basicaly light would have a constant speed "where it is", determined by the density of  that area, this is not the same as loss of speed, but a simple ajustement of C where it is occuring, as soon as it leaves that area to a clear one, it would self readquire it's new speed, readjusting itself, is possible cause there would be no "photon" as a particle finding barriers along the way, but the density on the area temperarly being subjecting the information being carried to the proper speed due the density of such area...
 In a simple version light, C is constant on space, but space would be the thing that is not being constant... The speed of C on galaxy B was the same as the speed of C on the galaxy A, and also in between, but space density is never the same, altoguh the same photon that was on galaxy B is the same photon that is in galaxy A and in between, the only thing that was moving at constant was light, the photon never had to move.
 If the medium is not moving, the only possible result would be that light would be moved using a straigth line, and once in movement would affect the medium seeming to be causing waves, and those waves actually being a infinity amounght of straight lines, and each one resonating on the tissue, as the ray of light keeps existing, the acceleration of space around of it, would replicate a infinite numbers copies of that acceleration, in all possible directions...

Energy=time=motion. Energy is the carrier of the photon.


 

Online Alex Siqueira

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 157
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #24 on: 15/09/2016 00:08:05 »
Energy=time=motion. Energy is the carrier of the photon.

Yes, I'm not very resorcefull with words, but I always agree the speed of light is contantant...
 And your atestment above I consider to be precise too...
"Energy is the carrier of the photon"
"Photon is a construction of the photonic space, that will be present and recieve a particle like shape whenever atomic structure/ energy is presented. If there is none it re-turn, to become a tissue, a fabric, as a whole"

 Photons are right there beneath our feets, cause and as long exists something as beneath and our feets, in the absence of energy, the photon as particle will return to become what it was in the absence of charges, a fabric...

 See I not atesting anything, just realy on to the reviews that light and matter may not be traveling "trought" nor even coexisting "over" this tissue, space. Instead any energy/matter as being like a bubble of oxigen under a liquid, that is pushed to the surface in a straight line, because the bubble is existing in "between" the liquid... There is compression and a limit where the liquid cannot enter the buble, it cant ocupy the same place that the bubble, intead the liquid fall over the bubble on the attempt to it, with the whole density of the lake, the bubble is "pushing back" the lake...

 For a ray of light, it has energy, space is trying to fill the place where it exist, it can't penetrate, coexit, so light is occuring not over the fabric, but in between, the compression over the energy slingshot the energy on a straig line as it does with the bubble, momentum happen and waves are being formed on the mediun...
 For this interpretation the speed of ligh still being constant, but subjected, and provinient only of and from "the density of the medium that is 'falling' over it", almost the same result goes for matter.. Altough matter different from ligh has high density, can be shaped into spherical shapes, and sperical can also be pushed in a straight line, but is disrupted by equals, and one start to chase the other, even being orbiting it is not a static circle, but inddeed a straight line path along with the sun, the fact that we, planets are orbiting it's plate in a eliptical orbit, does not mean anything, for the dirrection that matter, planets and sun are still being moved on a straight line, not as perfect as light, but still...

 Speed of ligh being constant, but if the are where it is occuring is more dense, the "Whole" system will slow down, not a real slow down, but as we determinate a velocity on a perfect medium, we can't accept a speed of light that slow down, it can't, at least shoudn't... But as for a speed of light, where the speed is coming from the density of the medium and not from the ray of light, than of the density of the medium increase or decrease the speed of light will still be constant, not constant to the measurement we made, but constant to the density of the area in space light is occuring...
 The ray starts with one speed, the density changes the speed of light will be lower than the original, but if we start to consider the density of the field, the speed of light never reduced it's own speed, it had none, the speed is being given to the ray from the density of the mediun, so we are sharing the same speeds, same math, but one is considering the speed of the ray as of its own, and the other considering the same results but considering that the speed of the ray is given to it from the density the space where the ray is occuring "between"...

 Much failures, but I'm focused on the idea where matter/energy and space fabric, never can share the same place, wherever matter or energy is occuring on space, is not trully within or trough it, matter and energy are constantly occuring between space, homogeniously recieven compression proportional to the place that they ocupy in space, and for this as small something get, stronger it becomes...
 Can you understand my problem when considering as usuall? Understand what I eman when I say happening in "between space fabric"?
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #24 on: 15/09/2016 00:08:05 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums