0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Principle of relativity and Lorentz transformationsHe discussed the "principle of relative motion" in two papers in 1900 and named it the principle of relativity in 1904, according to which no mechanical or electromagnetic experiment can discriminate between a state of uniform motion and a state of rest. In 1905 Poincaré wrote to Lorentz about Lorentz's paper of 1904, which Poincaré described as a "paper of supreme importance." In this letter he pointed out an error Lorentz had made when he had applied his transformation to one of Maxwell's equations, that for charge-occupied space, and also questioned the time dilation factor given by Lorentz. In a second letter to Lorentz, Poincaré gave his own reason why Lorentz's time dilation factor was indeed correct after all: it was necessary to make the Lorentz transformation form a group and gave what is now known as the relativistic velocity-addition law. Poincaré later delivered a paper at the meeting of the Academy of Sciences in Paris on 5 June 1905 in which these issues were addressed.
Vern,As an outsider what would your immediate contentions be on timeless as posed by the two possible erreneous examples given in the OP?
MSHow do photons decay? Do you mean at somepoint they will simply dissapear, or do they decay through gradually reduced frequency and lose energy until the frequency goes flatline?
Quote from: Mr. Scientist on 04/11/2009 15:22:54Vern,As an outsider what would your immediate contentions be on timeless as posed by the two possible erreneous examples given in the OP?I guess I don't get the concept of a timeless photon. The real stuff that is the photon is electric and magnetic change in local space. The little pieces of space (or whatever space is) need not move laterally. It is the effect that is moving, like a water wave. So the way I see a photon, there is no timelessness involved.It is only a problem when you try and consider a photon as its own particle (or wave function) that is intact as it moves through space. It is as someone here likes to say; you get in trouble when you consider photons to be like little bullets. It don't work. 
MSI asked how photons decay to something else or nothing, not how something else decays to be photon. Anti-matter matter interactions completely annihialted each other into energy. A presume that energy is electromagnetic in form (Photon). So how does the photon decay? Which brings up another question, as I understand it matter-antimatter annhialation does not result result in entrophy. Do you think that is the case?