0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Of course - it speeds up in rest frame of the ball... Why do you ask questions, which one can expect from a 10yo kid, who can't grasp the basic premise of relative motion and thinks about photons, as about tiny and shiny balls of light?
And maybe you should become just slightly interested in the progress of science after 1920 or so...
Only you're missing here one key difference between protons and photons - as for today photons seem to be unable of pernamently becomming protons.
Actually that's not true. If the wavelenght is bigger than the volume of cavity, then EM wave emitted by an outside source of radiation won't be able to enter the cavity, while a source inside that cavity won't be able to emit radiation:
So, if you'll still want to defend the idea of a "Kugelblitz" formation in a cavity, you have no other option, than sticking to a standing EM wave - sorry
Sorry, but until today I was missing the proper term, to describe my idea - I guess it should be non-propagating photons. By "X-stationary" I ment a particle-like quanta of photon field, which remains fixed in 2D X,Y space in all rest frames
1. If due to an interaction with matter, photon changes it's energy state and path of propagation, is it still the same photon, or one that was only emitted by the interacting matter?
Is the sunlight made of a singe family of "sunlight photons", or is it made of a bunch of different photons, characteristic for each frequency band of the sunlight?
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 20/06/2021 08:47:14Of course - it speeds up in rest frame of the ball... Why do you ask questions, which one can expect from a 10yo kid, who can't grasp the basic premise of relative motion and thinks about photons, as about tiny and shiny balls of light?I ask questions like that because you answer them in the manner of a 10 year old.So, since you are pretending that putting sciencey words into an answer is helpful.Do you still suffer from the delusion that it speeds up from the point of view of the batsman?Because, while photons do strange things, they aren't that strange.If you bounce them off something they push on that thing; they don't pull on it as you claimed.
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 20/06/2021 08:11:58Only you're missing here one key difference between protons and photons - as for today photons seem to be unable of pernamently becomming protons. Where did the protons come from?At the time of the BB there was a lot of energy and very little space.Some of that energy "condensed" into the matter of the universe.My contention is that the process proceeds via photons.If yours differs then you need to explain the "missing link".
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 20/06/2021 05:58:16Actually that's not true. If the wavelenght is bigger than the volume of cavity, then EM wave emitted by an outside source of radiation won't be able to enter the cavity, while a source inside that cavity won't be able to emit radiation:Ture, but irrelevant.The light in my microwave oven works fine.But my point is that there's no requirement for that light to form standing waves in the oven.In fact, because the uncertainty principle says that the wavelength is uncertain, it is impossible for it to be exactly the right size for the chamber.
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 20/06/2021 05:58:16So, if you'll still want to defend the idea of a "Kugelblitz" formation in a cavity, you have no other option, than sticking to a standing EM wave - sorryIf I got bored, I could calculate the mass of light in this room, but it isn't a resonant cavity.
You keep trying to sledgehammer in the idea that the length (or diameter) of the cavity must be an integer multiple of the wavelength.
Well, for a start that wavelength isn't defined, so you must be wrong, but the more important point is that nobody ever came up with a reason why it should be resonant.
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 20/06/2021 08:11:58Sorry, but until today I was missing the proper term, to describe my idea - I guess it should be non-propagating photons. By "X-stationary" I ment a particle-like quanta of photon field, which remains fixed in 2D X,Y space in all rest framesI see...You mean something else which breaks the uncertainty principle.(If it fits in the cavity precisely then we know its wavelength and can calculate its momentum precisely, but that would require an infinite imprecision in our knowledge of the position, yet we know where it is- it's in the cavity- which is a contradiction).
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 20/06/2021 08:11:581. If due to an interaction with matter, photon changes it's energy state and path of propagation, is it still the same photon, or one that was only emitted by the interacting matter?A long time ago, I remember a lecturer pointing out that "you can't paint an electron purple".His point was that the electrons in an atom are equivalent; it make no sense to try to consider what 1 of them does.The same applies to photons. you can't tell if "it's the same photon" because you can't have a photon called George and a photon called Henry.You can say the the photon has different properties- notably wavelength and direction.
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 20/06/2021 08:11:58 Is the sunlight made of a singe family of "sunlight photons", or is it made of a bunch of different photons, characteristic for each frequency band of the sunlight?Neither sunlight, nor French monkeys are relevant to the discussion.If you would like to clarify the point you tried to make then we might get somewhere.
Huh? Each kind of EM radiation has a defined wavelenght...
This is quantum physics - incoming ball can be deflected as multiple balls, pass directly through the batsman and hit someone, who stands behind him, or disappear and reappear multiple times before he will even hit it with the bat ...
Of course, that it IS a resonant cavity for multiple EM waves with the proper wavelenght (if you didn't paint your walls in the color of absolute black)
does sunlight propagate as one kind of particles or as a bunch of multiple different particles? It's a simple question...
Oh, really?
What I do. is to describe the existing physical reality - there's NO ONE on this planet, who can know, what actually happened in the beginning of our Universe. For me your story is just as reliable, as Sumerian mythology (maybe even less)...
their momentum is growing
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 20/06/2021 11:45:37Huh? Each kind of EM radiation has a defined wavelenght...Do you even know what the uncertainty principle is?
QuoteWhat I do. is to describe the existing physical reality - there's NO ONE on this planet, who can know, what actually happened in the beginning of our Universe. For me your story is just as reliable, as Sumerian mythology (maybe even less)...You failed to answer the question.
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 20/06/2021 11:45:37This is quantum physics - incoming ball can be deflected as multiple balls, pass directly through the batsman and hit someone, who stands behind him, or disappear and reappear multiple times before he will even hit it with the bat ...Yes.or it could bounce off the bat- which is what it will usually do if the bat is a perfect reflector.The other outcomes wouldn't relate to the bat bouncing off the ball.And that's the case in which we are interested.Now answer the question, do you really think that the bat moves faster after it is hit than before?Because that's what you said earlier
Yes really.For a start...https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Residential-microwave-oven-spectrum-15_fig3_39432921
They are Lambertian white.And you re still wrong.When I buy a light bulb, nobody asks me what the dimensions of the room are.
NoThe process follows the momentum (and mass/ energy) conservation laws. It's only you who is seeking to say otherwise
Of course! Because of the momentum conservation, when the ball is being hit by the bat, their relative velocity can be higher, than before their collision
from the point of view of the batsman?
Yes.... And each kind of EM radiation has a specific and measurable wavelenght... So...?
So I did and I don't care - this thread is about the quantization of EM fields and not about some mythology about the genesis of Universe...
It's hard to believe, how often you're making statements, that are completely inconsistent even with the mainstream science..
Maybe because you don't care about having the best possible illumination in your room...
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 20/06/2021 11:45:37does sunlight propagate as one kind of particles or as a bunch of multiple different particles? It's a simple question...Yes, it's too simple.There are lots of green things growing in my garden.Are they all the same thing?They are all "one kind of thing"- they are plantsThey are "multiple different" things; some are grass and some are shrubs.Stop asking badly worded questions.
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 20/06/2021 13:11:24Maybe because you don't care about having the best possible illumination in your room...Well, maybe, but maybe it's because they know that they don't need to match the emitted wavelengths to the dimensions of the roomBecause only you believe that.
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 20/06/2021 13:11:24Yes.... And each kind of EM radiation has a specific and measurable wavelenght... So...?So... you say "yes", but you mean "no".
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 20/06/2021 13:11:24So I did and I don't care - this thread is about the quantization of EM fields and not about some mythology about the genesis of Universe...If you start talking about the creation of particles from... wherever then it's related to the early universe where particles were created.That's the biggest "particle creation" event ever.And you did raise the issue.If you didn't want to discuss it, why did you raise it?
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 20/06/2021 11:45:37 their momentum is growingNoThe process follows the momentum (and mass/ energy) conservation laws. It's only you who is seeking to say otherwise.
Saying that momentum and mass/ energy are conserved is neither inconsistent with what I have said before, nor with mainstream science.