[jccc (OP)]

thank you Pete! I read those wiki pages.

after i understood light is gravitational wave produced by exited atoms, i am sure there is no photon. how do you think i think about those articles talking about photon? i don't believe them anymore.

100 laser balloon popping

if laser beam is particle beam, the energy of the beam should be the same at different distance.

if laser beam is gravitational wave between the source atoms and the target atoms, the energy of the beam should decay by distance.

look how fast the 1st balloon pops and how slow the last 1 is?

Now are you convinced?

[~CB]

after i understood light is gravitational wave produced by exited atoms, i am sure there is no photon.

...Sounds interesting. I want to know more about it, please!

[jccc (OP)]

after i understood light is gravitational wave produced by exited atoms, i am sure there is no photon.

...Sounds interesting. I want to know more about it, please!

click my name and read my posts. correct me....thank you.

[~CB]

Oooooo... Interesting theory! To me it sounds more feasible than photons.

[jccc (OP)]

Oooooo... Interesting theory! To me it sounds more feasible than photons.

awesome!!!  thank you very very much. you are the most open mind honest guy i ever met.

[PmbPhy]

after i understood light is gravitational wave produced by exited atoms, i am sure there is no photon.

...Sounds interesting. I want to know more about it, please!

Please take note of the fact that you're asking a known crackpot to explain his nonsense with you.

[jccc (OP)]

Oooooo... Interesting theory! To me it sounds more feasible than photons.

please tell Pete why you think my theory of light sounds more feasible to you, appreciate.

[guest39538]

after i understood light is gravitational wave produced by exited atoms, i am sure there is no photon.

...Sounds interesting. I want to know more about it, please!

Please take note of the fact that you're asking a known crackpot to explain his nonsense with you.

Charming, im ok with being called a crackpot, I know you refer to me.   

I know I have been sent to Coventry in a hope I  will leave science alone. 

I get everything, science is well easy to think about.

[jeffreyH]

Well turn off all the lights and you will simply float away. What a load of old rubbish. I think you need a fantasy fiction forum. It is so easy to sit in a comfy chair and let your imagination wander. That way you don't need to expend any of that tiresome effort learning anything. You might actually surprise yourself by what you would learn by actually taking criticism as positive. It is a sign of good character.

[jccc (OP)]

Well turn off all the lights and you will simply float away. What a load of old rubbish. I think you need a fantasy fiction forum. It is so easy to sit in a comfy chair and let your imagination wander. That way you don't need to expend any of that tiresome effort learning anything. You might actually surprise yourself by what you would learn by actually taking criticism as positive. It is a sign of good character.

what are you talking about?

the light in your room is produced by electricity, turn off the light has nothing to do with gravity between you and earth.

if the sun stops to shine, its gravity still holding us. the sunlight is from the hot atoms on suns surface vibrate at high frenquency, each atom produces its own gravitational wave that outward propagate at c speed.

you didn't read my posts or you have bad memory?

[chiralSPO]

Light and all other forms of electromagnetic radiation from gamma rays to radio waves are definitely *electromagnetic*

We know this because we can generate radio waves and microwaves with devices that drive oscillating electric or magnetic fields and we can generate oscillating electric/magnetic fields by capturing those waves with devices.

We know this because of how microwaves, infrared, visible and ultraviolet radiation interact with atoms and molecules. It is the electronic properties of molecules and atoms that determines which frequencies of light can be absorbed or emitted--mass has nothing to do with it (other than slight perturbations that the mass induces in the electronic structure). Molecules that have electrostatic dipole or quadrupole moments interact much more strongly with electromagnetic radiation that molecules that are completely (electrostatically) non-polar; but water and heavy water behave exactly the same--if light were gravity waves, wouldn't it have different effects on molecules that have different masses?

We know this because of how UV rays, x-rays and gamma rays interact with electrons.

We know this because we can rotate light with magnetic fields.

We know this because Maxwell's equations work.


light is electromagnetic

[jccc (OP)]

how about gravity? does a vibrating mass produce gravitational wave?

isn't gravity electromagnetic?

[alancalverd]

No

[~CB]

Oooooo... Interesting theory! To me it sounds more feasible than photons.

please tell Pete why you think my theory of light sounds more feasible to you, appreciate.

I need to confirm this one thing before I declare who's side I'm on and defend my previous statement.

So basically, to confirm my knowledge on photons I searched around different physics forums and the only answer they had was... That the photon is energy (Source: 'https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/do-atoms-create-photons.283784/'). I just need a confirmation from you guys that, that is the case and yet we do not have a proper explanation. Although if that's not the case, I would appreciate a descriptive 'why and how'.

[Colin2B]

I know I have been sent to Coventry in a hope I  will leave science alone. 

No one is sending you to Coventry, it's just that folks have learnt that answering a question from you results in the following:
- An accusation that we just quote book learning
- A statement that you are fully capable of thinking it out yourself
- A nonsensical statement of misused words and phrases.

Eventually people get tired of trying

[~CB]

after i understood light is gravitational wave produced by exited atoms, i am sure there is no photon.

...Sounds interesting. I want to know more about it, please!

Please take note of the fact that you're asking a known crackpot to explain his nonsense with you.

Look... Mr. Peter (I'm younger than you and less knowledgeable. Hence, 'Mr.'. I hope it didn't offend you in any way), he hasn't yet been disrespectful to me in any way and neither has he shown any other signs of being a crackpot... Atleast not to me. I'm the kind of person who likes to learn from my own mistakes. Maybe he is a crackpot in your opinion, but in my world he is still a polite person who just wants to discuss his theories with us. I might change this opinion later if he evolves to be the kind of person who just claims 'He knows it all' and 'You are all wrong'. But, right now, to me, he is just like any of you. 
By the way, I like to be explicit... So I wanted to tell you this one other thing.
I mean you know it already, but yeah I'm going to restate it for the sake of other members. I'm still learning quantum mechanics and surely am less knowledgeable than any of you as of this moment. So Jccc shouldn't be very happy to have me on his side, believing in his theory since, like I just said 'I'm learning quantum mechanics'. Maybe I might disagree with Jccc later (After being completely aware of every aspect of quantum mechanics) but right now I find his theory more feasible than atoms emitting photons.
 As soon as you confirm my knowledge on photons be answering my previous post... I will declare with full confidence if I still believe in Jccc's theories or Am on the side of the members who disagrees with him.
That's all I had to say and I hope you try to understand my true intention and do not, in any way find this post offensive. I respect all of you on here and am honoured to be a part of this forum, I truly Am!

[Colin2B]

I need to confirm this one thing before I declare who's side I'm on and defend my previous statement.

..to confirm my knowledge on photons I searched around different physics forums and the only answer they had was... That the photon is energy .....

Welcome Jasper

My understanding is that the photon is a particle, it carries/transfers energy but it not energy per se. It's energy depends on it's frequency.

You might like to read http://home.comcast.net/~peter.m.brown/mech/what_is_energy.htm as a starter and perhaps the author will give you a detailed response on the photon. He's well into QM and is worth listening to.

Jccc has some creative ideas (and some naughty ones), but I tend to find EM waves and photons useful concepts that offer enough consistency and predictability for my needs.

[jccc (OP)]

my ideas are simple.

1. there are 3 building blocks in nature, proton carries 900 + charges, electron carries -1 charge, enertron carries -10^-16 charge.

proton attracts all negative charged stuff, therefore a ball of electron and enertron will form around proton. because enertron is denser than electron ( charge to volume ratio), it condensed around proton by electromagnetic force, density from the proton outward decay at 1/r^3. electron also attracted by proton and stable at atom radius where the proton electron attraction force is equal to the electron enertron repelling force. 

proton is like core of earth, enertron is the land and atmosphere, electron is like giant beach ball. atom's force field is far beyond radius, earth's gravitational field is also far beyond atmosphere.

atom in fact is so dense build, that's why atoms are not compressible, that's why electron cannot discharge into proton.

2. a charge's force field extend to infinite distance, it decays at 1/r^2 but never become 0. an atom, even it is electrically neutral, charges within atom still carry same force fields. therefore matter and chemical bounding able to form.

gravity is nothing but net em forces of all charges within or between matters/stars. gravity is a force, all masses attract each other because charges within have boundless force fields. gravity is not wave or particle. when a mass is vibrating, it produces gravitational wave which is a force pause able to act on other masses.

3. energy is force. forces are within charges. forces can only act on charges.

what's all. correct or not? opinion various. time will tell, i might refine my thoughts later. but so far, seems all sounding enough for myself.

we are seekers, without truth, we won't stop. don't let anything stop us. truth will set us free. soon!

Enjoy life, try to love all things, Dear friends!

 

[guest39538]

I know I have been sent to Coventry in a hope I  will leave science alone. 

No one is sending you to Coventry, it's just that folks have learnt that answering a question from you results in the following:
- An accusation that we just quote book learning
- A statement that you are fully capable of thinking it out yourself
- A nonsensical statement of misused words and phrases.

Eventually people get tired of trying

So because I will not accept all science beliefs, you will not discuss science with me, how strange.

[chiralSPO]

So because I will not accept all science beliefs, you will not discuss science with me, how strange.

no, we get tired trying to discuss science with you because you think you know many things that you do not. We can't even start talking about anything remotely interesting before you understand elementary mathematics (like units, ratios and arithmetic) and elementary physics (charge, for instance).