0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I was making the point that maths problems don't have to obey the laws of physics.
It implies that the mirror has infinite mass
That's a logical fallacy called appeal to authority.
The force which the photons exert does not necessarily mean there is transfer of energy. Energy is transferred when the force moves through a distanceIn order to be perfectly reflective the walls have to be infinitely massive (this causes other problems).However, there's another way to do it.You can imagine a nearly massless mirror.When a photon hits it, it will move and take some energy from the photon. But that means that, when another photon hits it on the other side, it will add energy to that photon.Overall, the sum of the energies will be conserved The wavelengths of the photons will be "scrambled" and will settle down to a black-body distribution.The energy (on average) imparted to the light, rigid mirror will be Boltzmann's constant times 3 times the temperature. (That's the same energy as would be carried by an electron or proton at that temperature.)
It's not a fallacy if they are an authority.
Quote from: Bored chemist on 28/05/2022 12:06:16It's not a fallacy if they are an authority.It seems like you haven't learned about Galileo.
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 28/05/2022 17:05:53Quote from: Bored chemist on 28/05/2022 12:06:16It's not a fallacy if they are an authority.It seems like you haven't learned about Galileo. Galileo did a thought experiment and overturned the views of Aristotle.And then, because he was trying to explain it to people who were unaccustomed to actually thinking, he did the practical experiment.So what?
Quote from: Bored chemist on 28/05/2022 17:09:54Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 28/05/2022 17:05:53Quote from: Bored chemist on 28/05/2022 12:06:16It's not a fallacy if they are an authority.It seems like you haven't learned about Galileo. Galileo did a thought experiment and overturned the views of Aristotle.And then, because he was trying to explain it to people who were unaccustomed to actually thinking, he did the practical experiment.So what?Authorities can still make mistakes. Blindly following them is a logical fallacy.
Authorities can still make mistakes. Blindly following them is a logical fallacy.
It is not a logical fallacy to cite an expert.
More over, they often disagree and contradict one another. At least one of them must be false. Selecting which one to accept should be based on their supporting evidence.
However, if you bounce photons round inside a circular mirror, you end up scrambling their energies.
, they often disagree and contradict one another.
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 30/05/2022 21:50:51, they often disagree and contradict one another. Where did you see that ?In order for your point to be valid, you have to show that it happened "often".
Quote from: Bored chemist on 30/05/2022 17:35:09However, if you bounce photons round inside a circular mirror, you end up scrambling their energies.In my example with 10° incoming angle, the light will only be reflected 8 times before coming out of the circle through the opening. The energy loss as heat can be minimized. It's not a good reason to dismiss the problem altogether.
Your last sentence above is especially suspicious.