0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Can you confirm c is the same for everyone under GR and SR relatively speaking. I am not aware of any experiments indicating c is variable in a gravitational field.
Quote from: flummoxed on 10/04/2019 10:04:19Can you confirm c is the same for everyone under GR and SR relatively speaking. I am not aware of any experiments indicating c is variable in a gravitational field.Experiments in the 1960's by Irwin Shapiro confirmed what Einstein predicted, i.e. that c is variable in a non-inertial frame, i.e. a gravitational field.
Thanks I never thought of it this way.
Because , according to the general theory, the speed of a light wave depends on the strength of the gravitational along its path, ...
Would I be correct in thinking c is still measured as constant, wherever it is measured, because the ruler has shrunk and time as slowed?
Does this also mean light is faster than c as it moves towards a gravitational source, ..
if this is so what happens at event horizons of BH's, do things suddenly disapear as they enter a BH or does time slow, and rulers shrink meaning they are stuck in the horizon??
I understand bosons have spin 0,1,2 whilst fermions have spin 1/2,3/2 etc Numerous models of photons exist, are there any preferred models? Photons have spin 1, am I correct in thinking the spin of a photon is related to its angular momentum, and wave shape? ie polarization. Can the photon be modelled as a flat disc, if not why not ?When a photon is generated by an atom changing energy levels an electron moves to a different energy level, by either absorbing or emitting energy in the form of a photon. Is it possible a photon consists of 2 virtual particles with opposite charges, spinning around each other?
No. You have said that virtual particles are massless, but the e-p pair derived from a photon has mass of 2me., so all you have done is make your model more complicated than reality. That is the job of religion and philosophy, not science!
I would be amused to know how you think religion is involved in the very basic question what is a photon.
Quote from: flummoxed on 14/04/2019 19:26:15 I would be amused to know how you think religion is involved in the very basic question what is a photon. It isn't. Religion is the business of making the obvious obscure and the simple, complicated. Usually by introducing binary or triune mysteries.
https://www.livescience.com/19268-quantum-double-slit-experiment-largest-molecules.html" Researchers have sent molecules containing either 58 or 114 atoms through the so-called "double-slit experiment," showing that they cause an interference pattern that can only be explained if the particles act like waves of water, rather than tiny marbles."
There is no discontinuity in the self-interference of electromagnetic radiation. x-rays diffract in exactly the same way as radio waves and visible light. There is no inherent difference between x- and γ-radiation apart from their source but at very short wavelengths it's difficult (nay impossible) to find a diffraction grating of commensurate dimensions, so the self-interference phenomenon is not practically demonstrable and we only use the particle model. Pilot waves do not predict the photoelectric effect or the black body spectrum, and are not consistent with the fact that "old" photons (from distant stars) behave in exactly the same way as "new" ones from a local source.
Can a photon bre representged as two vitrual particles and a pilot wave? Not usefully. Just to go back to the buckyball. It has two layers of structure: the atoms themselves and the spatial relationship between the atoms, so there must be at least two distinct pilot waves that determine the position of any one atom in space. As you say, you can get quite large molecules to self-interfere, but if their trajectory is defined by two pilot waves, you would expect the output to be all sorts of subspecies and isomers of the original molecule depending on the interference between the two pilot waves.
Radio waves are generated via electric currents moving along radio masts, and creating a distortion in the electric field around around the mast which radiates away at c, dispersing as it moves.
Quote from: flummoxed on 15/04/2019 11:05:44Radio waves are generated via electric currents moving along radio masts, and creating a distortion in the electric field around around the mast which radiates away at c, dispersing as it moves.No, not an electric field, but a selfpropagating electromagnetic wave as described by Maxwell.
You need to decide what you mean by "strength". The intensity of a light field decreases with 1/r2 at distance r from a point source, as does the intensity of a radio signal. It just happens that for very weak signals we can detect individual light or x-ray photons, but the individual photon energy of radio signals is too low to be detected.
No, not an electric field, but a selfpropagating electromagnetic wave as described by Maxwell.