The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: What does a photon look like and how does it work?  (Read 1589 times)

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 344
  • Thanked: 53 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #25 on: 15/09/2016 13:40:22 »
: Alex Siqueira
on: Today at 00:08:05
Quote\ 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"\

I do not make a distinction between energy and your term fabric. To me the universe is a sea of energy spin c.

Quote\ 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...\

To me there is no absence of zero point energy nor is there anything related to charge. There is only spin to my way of thinking. A photon being a pure energy propagation frequency on particles of energy spin c. Light is a sphere from a light bulb. Vector directions are a pseudo particle point for measurement.

Quote\  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...\

I view it another way. The rotating electron through the grid structure (fabric to you) jumps to a different shell. That jump sucks energy then pushes energy creating a frequency wave that propagates on the already spinning energy particles. Only the action is propagated and not the particles themselves.

Quote\  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...\

Yes I agree there s a density of energy spin particles. Between galaxies the density is the greatest. In the center of suns the density of fundamental energy is much less. Energy is being used to move and create electrons. Suns create there own fuel (H) from fundamental energy. The energy becomes expanded in mass. Mass is attracted to the more expanded space. This is the cause of gravity. The speed of light is measured to be the same in every frame but the measuring stick in every frame is different. So your measure of a mile is never the same. Light propagates at the same speed through any energy density. Basically light is a standard but our ability to use it as a standard of measurement is compromised by the expansion and contraction of our measuring stick.

Quote\  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"...

To my way of thinking the speed of light does not slow down. The distances light travels changes but the kinetic affect remains constant.


Quote\  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...\

The size difference between an electron path and the proton is like a marble to a football field. Energy exists between them and probably inside the proton to move the electrons (positrons and negatrons both electrons with opposite complimentary spin). Matter and anti- matter in a stable rotation we view as quarks.

Quote\  Can you understand my problem when considering as usuall? Understand what I eman when I say happening in "between space fabric"?\

Yes I can understand it the way you are thinking of it but you are missing the cause of motion. Motion of the electron to the black hole has to have a mechanical mechanism in reality. Of course you could be a non realest like the current main stream Copenhagers. Einstein was a realest as am I.
 
The following users thanked this post: Alex Siqueira

Offline Alex Siqueira

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 148
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #26 on: 15/09/2016 16:20:24 »
No no it's fine, the way you put it, we're on the same frequency, you're just going deeper towards the source, I simple trying to understand what gravity does...
  For some a ray of light as a speed of it's own and it's photons need to be massless...
  For me seems to be possible that the ray of light has no speed, that its momentum is given to it from the medium, space fabric (grid for you)...

 Both of us are in a lake:
 One see a bubble of oxygen comming from towards the surface,
 the other see the lake pushing the static bubble of light towards the lower density, more expanded area...

 Maybe not precisely on those terms, but for me the ray of light, even matter, is existing in between the grid, like the bubble of oxygen inside the lake, the lake does not need to be very dense, in fact a very lower density lake, due spin is possible, would move the same bubble at the "same speed" as the original one, the speed didn't increase or decrease on the reality, only when compared to our perfect pre-determinated speed...
 When I share the concept that the light moves at the speed of light, I trully never consider that the ray ever had any speed, i see a ray of light, or any other high density energy, doesen't really matter the size, as something that is static, not the aether, but the object, the mediun will always fall against this light or matter, and will set both, matter/light and itself in motion... There can't be no static mediun not as long atoms and particles are still present and being able to interact.
 I do believe that even your grid depends on the presence of atomic structure of some kind...

 As my are just toughts, I'd stick with your terms from here on out...
 

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 344
  • Thanked: 53 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #27 on: 16/09/2016 13:26:29 »
Alex,

 You have a very good mind and can think for yourself and create a logical reality. Yes we view things the same. I came at my understanding through Relativity being understood geometrically. When I was in a position to explain it geometrically I found I needed a source to explain the motion of the electron being confounded with speed of light. This is what is missing with main stream. They are like Alice in wonderland. They know the math but not what the math truly represents. So they follow the rabbit and not logic of reality as it relates. They pull up the MMX and conclude there is no (Aether) matrix. That is like trying to do a mechanical job without any tools. You and I are designing the tools to work on the mechanics. It is just a mind, math, motion and construct puzzle game. Relativity is the rules of the game. Mechanical Relativity is fitting all the pieces together for the proper picture. A paradox is when the pieces do not fit in reality. that is when main stream goes into fiction like multiverse, Big Bang and the entire Copenhagen non reality issues. Something from nothing is never a position of reality. Mass is created in suns, from the electron to all of the elements. No need for a big bang. Gravitational red shift can easily explain a more static universe that is not necessarily expanding. It is the dark mass energy rotating with galaxies that gets expanded by mass to create the lensing we view in galaxies. The lensing is the expansion of dark mass energy becoming more diluted in density (less dense). The width of the electron jump is longer and we call that less energetic (red shifted).

And yes I defined your tissue as a grid structure of spinning points to move electrons. Your bubble as a propagated  wave structure that moves itself through space and the structure returns to its original positions. the propagation is at the spin rate of dark mass. Dark mass is the structure like Aether and spin is the energy that gives everything the ability to move. The structure dilates in mass but the spin rate stays the same. You just measure a longer distance with a dilated measuring stick. Relativity only says you measure the same speed of light in every frame. The gamma term in Relativity determines the distance of your measuring stick. The electron distance and the photon distance are confounded.

I could say great minds think alike but most here will consider our view as silly and unrealistic to what the have been taught. We all carry the baggage of our belief system.
 
The following users thanked this post: Alex Siqueira

Offline Alex Siqueira

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 148
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #28 on: 19/09/2016 12:54:06 »
"Dark mass is the structure like Aether and spin is the energy that gives everything the ability to move. The structure dilates in mass but the spin rate stays the same."

Yes I do not quite understand the math, but I can see that frame..
 The acceleration of the mass forces it to become less dense, thin as when close to the source of the rotation, not necessarily an universal infration related to it...
 The spin forces the density of the mass to opens up, local gravity would then be the same process but in reverse, a system that does not require to be close, cause the same thing that is being twisted is the same that is returning to its density...

 Maybe not on those terms, but let me ask you a question, in your toughts, not what a blackhole is, but what does it do? They are made of pure acceleration causing expansion, to the point they can't transfer energy cause they barelly can be touched by space....  Or they are actualy spherical holes where suff actually, "falls inside"...
 I ask simple cause for me there is no hole for dimmensions, only a extreme expansive innercore that does not require to burn anything, nothing more than that, where the spin is so intense that space envelops it, giving it the apearance that the body isn't there anymore, when it is just basicaly "spining so fast that it barely can transfer heat, cause space can't interact with it, but in short terms, no more than a firewall that's not solid, cause matter isn't destroyed by the acceleration, it's molecular structure is destroyed, cause the event horizon makes dark mass become so thin that there can no longer exist matter....
 What do you consider as for BH?
 

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 344
  • Thanked: 53 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #29 on: 21/09/2016 04:00:59 »
Sorry I have been busy. I will work backwards. What is a black Hole? The amount of mass per space is approximately a marble to a football field. The electron motion is the length of the football field to a marble. Mass is produced in stars from fundamental zero point energy or Dark Mass that loses its spin and creates an electron proton pair. This process concludes with a proton or neutron (your fabric). Mass is matter and anti-matter in a stable flow to form the protons and neutrons. The BB is not necessary. Large stars that grow to the point where gravity reaches the speed of light compress all of the marbles together. The BH is the football field full of marbles. Energy can no longer keep the elements apart. The football field was full of energy moving the electron but now no longer holds fundamental zero point energy. Many here will believe my head is full of marbles. I could be correct or incorrect in my conclusions but I am following Relativity.


There is no such thing as heat without mass. Spin energy has no heat just motion. When the electron or proton or neutron causes friction with fundamental energy it adds what we call heat. Mass is a conduit from fundamental energy what we call work energy. Electrons are moved by fundamental energy and rotates through space with the motion of the speed of light but not the vector distance of light. They are confounded in zero point energy to be measured the same in every frame. The dilation of space mathematically maintains distance of electron with  rotation and vector distance of light equally measured the same in every frame.

Since mass has no energy mass is attracted to the least dense area of space energy by the inverse square of the distance. Yes that is why gravity is the reverse of energy.

You have a very logical mind.
 
 

Offline Alex Siqueira

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 148
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #30 on: 21/09/2016 16:37:10 »
As I said before, I'd stick with the math side of the coin, your explanation I have to say that I agree, follows the rules, although as logical, there's already plenty of people following this line, so I'm trying to deny the fundamental base, not it's math, but the most basic concepts as being a misinterpretation of factors, no hope for me to be able to proof for blackholes, you described perfectly what they are...
 I more interested in what they do, comparing with what we consider that they do, how they affect space, not the symptoms but the source... In my point of view the shrieked neutron star, did not compacted itself over itself, at the point the acceleration it produces was able to go as fast as the speed of light, (I consider speed of light as being the speed of the density of the medium, with the energy possessing zero speed)...
 So I just trying another point of view, that when the BH rotation speeds up to the (speed of light velocity), means that its effect over the medium on the surrounding areas is greater than the density of the "whole" medium that was over it...
 The same principle as an ordinary star, or planet, the only difference is that the neutron star by friction wouldn't require gas to burn or crost to conserve heat, revealing to us the blackhole event, one of expansion, the similar I tend to believe that is happening inside pretty much each spherical like object out there, although, planets wouldn't be able to behave as blackholes only similar, they have a crost that do not allows the direct interaction with the medium to influence to much it's density and speed, for suns this seems to be happening all the time, but a sun is less dense and is still burning fuel, it does interact with the medium causing a greater acceleration, only not big enough to nova due mass..

 I agree for heat to be present there must be mass, I do accept that the super nova occurred expanding the exterior and compressing the interior, if the mass is right, the own compression over the inner core creates the neutron star when the nova occurs, and the due limits its the own neutron star that shrinks over its own expansion, on the medium...  My neutron star is still there, but I do believe since its acceleration now surpassing the density of the medium, it was able to opens up much further, desproportional to its new size, the mass still and the acceleration stood, for me is that there would be mass present on the interior, and the spherical whole is just an ordinary envelop that will occurs wherever the black hole is sailing trough the cosmos...
 The radiation, heat, energy, electromagnetism, whatever sun, neutrons star are doing out there to release energy producing mass, the neutron star at the blackhole is not being able to release, indeed resembling something like a whole to other dimensions due dilatation of space time, but I do believe that it is just an effect of the space around of it, inside there is isolated from the "space" itself, due its acceleration it is existing completely "between" the fabric, barely no contact as long as the acceleration holds on...

 We're basically on the same result, but for some is a actual infinity whole on space, and for me is a simple envelop that can't be reached, where every single matter that has when the horizon, never failed in, nothing can, he horizon is the true villain there the density of the medium is so thin that matter can't simple exist, it is than decomposed and ejected in form of radiation, but most of it become what space seems to have being in the first place, matter, not the other hand...
 This starts with a universe that was of pure matter or energy, somehow got unbalanced acquired speed and when nova, much as a big bang, but before existence, the effect started singularities inside the universe, and now the empty space is what was already undone, and the matter there is still present is the parts that where re-gathered by gravity, the same gravity those wholes started.
 See gravity is a force resultant of interaction but it does come from space, a whole universe of energy as a whole would not require gravity in large scale as planets does...

 My point, galaxies seems to have being super massive planets and stars that when nova, and before lets say the great attractor, and before, and before until the first singularity, a "reverse" time line from the beginning to the future, but not as a whole, as local, there must be universal inflation in parallel to local gravity, thus local time. What I mean is, there must be a general base acceleration of the whole, constant where it is happening, always adapting with the dilatation to make sure that is still constant, what we experience on planets seems to be local gravity, granting us local acceleration, a correlation, that will lead us to local time, not speed but time, occurrence, despise the speed of light...
 That could be the paradox behind existence of life, as a necessity, see my body, if this is correct is submitted to time, so I do exist in time, and things can only happens at the speed they can happen, although the body is just a container of our minds, and the mind seems to be the answers, the conscious being, what I mean is, I do not know why the necessity to be able to think, but wonder a simple question, what is the only think that can violate the most logical rules, of with a rock serves, thoughts, this goes for all living things, some not so ready but it take time to evolve,...
 Wherever its hard to think against what you believe, as for the record, for now, I agree with your version, as one simple change on the bases reacts on all the other scenarios, it's very hard to try to adapt it's your own mind trying to convince itself to believe it's wrong to make sure was right...
 That is the only think that concerns me about relativity, it seems to good to be true, as everything else there will be a break point even to it, for me always will happens due the "local" occurrence of everything probabilities, everything interacts with everything, nothing remains the same, could even be that outside heliosphere the universe is away different from what we see from space..
 Anyway is a subcontinent sum, a gut filing that we're all correct, that back there we made a simple misinterpretation, the math be correct is the only reason why things are still working...

 The relation I made with this is because I do believe that life is ordinary, but the ability of be able to have thoughts, the conscious, must be somehow in a way we still do not comprehend related with all this, not the fact of being alive but be able to think. There is no purpose to a being to evolve to understand thinks beyond the natural world where it lives, humans are beyond survival, there must be a reason for why is possible to travel trough space using math and technology, I do not think it is only causality, seems logical to exist a reason for us, humans, to be able to do this, otherwise living thinks could still exist but without the necessity of thoughts, only instinct... Developing a culture is no ordinary thing and shouldn't be only based on causality...

 The relevance all this have with your question about the photons, is because I think that our mistake was right there, science must be correct about most contend related with particles cause the technology built over it does work, but as Einstein can be the case that we are producing our own personal math, that even being incorrect as when claimed to be the reality... Somehow, at least for me, photons what they are, what they weren't, if incorrect would bring total chaos to math and science, explaining many other things as speed of light and the existence of time, and also gravity, with such answers humanity would finally be able to completely understand what we see out there and most important how...
 Sounds naive but I do believe that if "the photon traveling" was to be proof wrong and so becoming an incorrect answers, everything we built over it, witch includes most of our culture and technological limitations would be boundless and I'm not sure if this would be a good thing in the world we live... Also seems logical to assume that most would agree with this, increasing the possibilities that out there are indeed people sharing and protecting much data, keeping things as they are... For more one devote his time and life to relativity, the equation itself is still based over what we do come to believe that we know...

  As for the black holes as being only result of a acceleration that surpassed the density of the medium (speed of light), I got a few  draws, but talking more about a structure that has layers, in function of the mass on the center of course, but layers on space, all this inside the exterior of the black hole, this because considering the outside of the blackholes as being the interior of it, and the isolated neutron star the exterior... I always end up picturing a star that reached a specific temperature or electromagnetic limit, that when converted into acceleration when trying to release, surpasses the density of the medium, for this the medium is no longer able to physically get near the mass, some sort of spherical thin sphere of very dilated space, with would be the almost the same a surrounding spherical area of thin space around the neutron star, not a static zone cause it is still pulling space near to it and subsequently ejecting cause space with its normal density never gets near the star to cause a direct interaction with the sphere in the center, resulting in presence of heat, electromagnetism and radiation that is self contained on the interior of the sphere, only a little faction of very thin dilateded medium pass near and only for a fraction of a second on a constant cycle... The black hole on the exterior, the one we imagine as being space feeling the "whole" on its  3D fabric and is constantly applying over it the same force it is appling over planets and stars, gravity, the most significant different is that planets and stars do have size, the event horizon show its symptoms but hardly acquire enough acceleration to enter nova...
 So you have space pushing itself over a neutron star that is sipping so fast that was able to surpass the density of the medium, with would than result again in the same result for us, the same black hole, but one moves towards infinity, the other is for a few details the same thing as innercore that by specific composition is producing a planet made lets say of space due acceleration, more the reason why I do wonder that inside the center of the inercore of each celestial body something equal is occurring in lower scale, the only big difference, is that a black hole is subjected to gravity and is interacting directly with the medium, inside a dense material object it would be interacting with matter, the engine is still the same but it would substitute a solid innercore to make the outhercore act like a dynamo...
 Such scenario would not be able to possible exist when considering black holes the way one, including me, does, for now cause it would devour the mass on the surroundings, my blackhole does not devour only exits the surroundings, the think that has the power to destroy matter is the horizon that only occurs when in directly interaction with the medium.
 My concept of blackholes, would theoretic allowed one to exist inside massive objects that are submitted to gravity, we use to think planets as being a whole object but their are actually far from it, a black hole that occurs based on heat, electromagnetism and constant pressure, could partially happen apart from the whole as a internal layer, and the excitement of the absorption of this acceleration would simulate the same process we consider that produces our magnetosphere, a correlation between all the forces not to work as parallel of each other but as for components of a mechanism, meanings to an end this result for its own existence, reshaping and readapting all the components, everything no matter how beautiful and bright a aleatory attempt to reproduce a singularity, over and over again every time in lower scale as a general dilatation(inflation) still expanding... Reason why I consider that in the past, milkway was a super mssive whole body at a time in dilatation such bodies could exist and hold, as for the great attractor a massive star, a sun. As the inflation continues such bodies can no longer hold and enter nova, so I believe was the case of our milkway, all this galaxy a big broken egg... The same scenarios, the hypothesis of bodies in such scale to have existed, raised the question why not, once upon a time, or lets say once upon a gravity, all this whole universe could have being a universal body, much smaller when compared for now with all that empty space out there, but if was possible, the inflation could be result as for some supernova for all this bodies including the universe... Big bang came from nothing, my seems to have occurred from inside out something that was already there and occurred in function of this that was already there, and now is repeating itself over and over again...

As a practical answers measurement is required to observe the possible shape of the photon, the very measurement uses machines and anything that is made of matter, matter is in correlation to all the rest on the surrounding areas, so a photon can only presumed by logic, not directly observed, only theorized, if we misinterpreted that, we're indeed producing our own personal answers... Math will always readapting itself even from the mistakes, at some point it must, that's why I'll stick with a mathematical universe, it's the only one we would ever be able to understand....
« Last Edit: 22/09/2016 00:25:05 by Alex Siqueira »
 

Offline PmbPhy

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2762
  • Thanked: 38 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #31 on: 22/09/2016 07:10:25 »
Quote from: GoC
jerrygg38

    You are suggesting photons have mass. They do not by Relativity mathematics and as you know we have to follow the math.
Depending on what one means when they use the term mass that's not necessarily true. In relativity inertial mass (as opposed to gravitational mass) is defined as the quantity m such that p = mv where p is 3-momentum and v is 3-velocity. Defined in this way the mass is referred to either as inertial mass, relativistic mass or simply mass. This means that anything that has momentum also has mass. Since a photon has a well-defined momentum it also has a well-defined mass.

For all the gory details please see: http://www.newenglandphysics.org/physics_world/sr/inertial_mass.htm
I.e. what you referred to as Relativity mathematics. This topic is addressed in the Usenet FAQ at:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/ParticleAndNuclear/photon_mass.html
Quote
In special relativity, it turns out that we are still able to define a particle's momentum p such that it behaves in well-defined ways that are an extension of the newtonian case.  Although p and v still point in the same direction, it turns out that they are no longer proportional; the best we can do is relate them via the particle's "relativistic mass" mrel.
 

Offline GoC

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 344
  • Thanked: 53 times
    • View Profile
Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #32 on: 07/10/2016 16:08:24 »
   Let us look at the defined amount of mass as the equivalency of SR and GR. On the surface of the moon a mass has a certain acceleration by gravity. In the center of the moon there is no acceleration while the mass remains the same. Clocks tick slower in the center of the moon due to dilation of mass. Mass is expanded but the mass remains the same amount of electrons, protons and neutrons. What is relativistic mass? Mass moving through space no difference than being in the center of the moon. Clocks can tick at the same rate as the center of the moon but the electrons, protons and neutrons remain the same. Mass remains the same but the math increases the assumed weight increase as an increase in mass. This is a reduction of space time energy related to c. There is no space time energy in black holes and they are the weightiest things in the universe. Loss of space time energy in mass is associated with an increase in weight when it is actually a decrease in energy related to c.

Relativity math as understood by main stream does not allow a photon to have mass. If the photon had mass relativity does not work by its math. This suggests mass and energy are different items. Mass does not include energy. Energy is given to mass by moving their electrons while photons are propagation of energy waves through space at c.

pmbphy

You are confused by what you were taught. Main stream subjective beliefs cause virtual photons (weasel words) to maintain their view. You seem to understand photons have to consist of something but at the same time you miss the point relativity math does not work if the photon is part of mass. Understanding will stay stagnant while we concoct weasel words when the observations do not follow our subjective understanding.

Photons have to have micro mass (dark mass energy) separate from macro mass to allow relativity math to work properly.

Math cannot prove a theory but if a theory does not follow math it proves the theory is incorrect. If the photon has mass as you understand mass relativity math does not work. I believe relativity is correct. Your position suggests you do not believe in relativity.
 
The following users thanked this post: Alex Siqueira

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: What does a photon look like and how does it work?
« Reply #32 on: 07/10/2016 16:08:24 »

 

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