[Starlight (OP)]

The constancy of light is a postulate and has no derivation.

Drawing.png (15.66 kB . 468x229 - viewed 4038 times)

p is momentum , hf is light and f(X) is function X


f(X)=F where F is force .

[Starlight (OP)]

My equation specifically ''asks'' about the linear momentum of light and the physical reasoning behind lights speed .
I appreciate your considerate reply but it doesn't directly answer my question in regards to the mechanism behind lights speed .
My logical formula specifically states the physical process and energy divided by a vector space .



I believe that is quite applicable in explaining the question .

In a 4 dimensional format :

E / =f(x)?

These are nonsensical equations.

They are explanations of causality and the physical process ,  they are not meant to have specific units or values . They explain the process .

They are not nonsense  and specifically demonstrate that lights speed is a product of a linear force . Light not having its own mechanism of propulsion .

[evan_au]

Light not having its own mechanism of propulsion .

A wave on the ocean, once started, continues onwards:
- It continues to have a speed
- Despite having no method of propulsion of its own
- And despite having no linear force applied to it.

Maxwell's equations produce a wave motion, which, once started, needs no linear force to propel it.

[alancalverd]

The physical meaning of the speed of light comes from Maxwell's equations. and shown to be a function of u_o and e_0, the permeability and permativity of free space. The constancy of light is a postulate and has no derivation.

Always a pleasure to cross swords in friendly combat with an expert, Pete! I think you underestimate your perceptiveness here.

As you say, Maxwell showed (from classical experiments in electromagnetic induction) that c is a function of μ₀ and ε₀ only. Now as these are both properties of a vacuum, they cannot change: there is nothing in a vacuum, so none of its properties can evolve or be distorted. Thus c is necessarily a constant.

[Starlight (OP)]

Light not having its own mechanism of propulsion .

A wave on the ocean, once started, continues onwards:
- It continues to have a speed
- Despite having no method of propulsion of its own

The wind is the propulsion of ocean waves and an ocean wave ends its onwards journey  when it crashes against a shoreline !

A photon has no method of propulsion ,  emitting is a word without physical explanation .

=f(x)

What is function x if not an attractive linear force that is constant in nature?

[alancalverd]

emitting is a word without physical explanation .

The physical explanation is given by the derivation of Maxwell's equations. Any undergraduate textbook or Wikipedia will lead you gently through the maths.

[Kryptid]

What is function x if not an attractive linear force that is constant in nature?

Forces cause acceleration. Photons travel at a constant speed. So there is no acceleration, and therefore no force, involved.

This user's posting habits look very familiar. Thebox, is that you?

[Starlight (OP)]

What is function x if not an attractive linear force that is constant in nature?

Forces cause acceleration. Photons travel at a constant speed. So there is no acceleration, and therefore no force, involved.

Forces can also cause a constant speed ! 

Additionally a photon accelerates when exiting glass !

Box?

[Kryptid]

Forces can also cause a constant speed !

Not in terms of net forces. An airplane traveling at constant speed may have the force of its engines pushing it, but it is receiving an equal force in the form of drag acting in the opposite direction. So the net force is zero. The same thing applies to an object falling at terminal velocity.

Additionally a photon accelerates when exiting glass !

I'm not certain that's true. I think the change in velocity is actually that of the phase velocity and not that of the individual photons that make up the light beam. Someone more knowledgeable about that might help clarify the matter.

[Hayseed]

I would suspect a spin.  The radial V takes from the axial V while moving thru the media.  When exiting the media, the radial V goes back with the axial V.

Like spinning current causing a phase delay.

[pzkpfw]

... This user's posting habits look very familiar. Thebox, is that you?

I don't think he's Thebox (who thought light speed was _infinite_), but for amusing cross reference, I believe Starlight posts as Complexity at scienceforums.net [ https://www.scienceforums.net/profile/141169-complexity/ ] Some history there to check.

Nice to see he's learned to trim screen shots.

[Starlight (OP)]

I'm not certain that's true. I think the change in velocity

Regardless of reasoning , a change in velocity represents some sort of force that allows the change in velocity . Applying Newtons laws of motion , when light slows down passing through glass or a medium  , there is an external force acting on the lights velocity to slow it down.  When the light exits glass or a  medium it speeds up again ,  a force must make it speed up again or it would retain the speed light had whilst passing through the medium .

←f(x)

f(x) being a functioning force F  !

[syhprum]

Let us think of light as an electromagnetic wave not as a particle its velocity depends on permeability and permittivity of the medium in which it travels when it leaves the glass it adapts to the new medium in which it is travelling.

[Starlight (OP)]

Let us think of light as an electromagnetic wave not as a particle its velocity depends on permeability and permittivity of the medium in which it travels when it leaves the glass it adapts to the new medium in which it is travelling.

Permeability of a medium is effectively the force of resistance and causes a ''gravitational'' drag on the EMR that is passing through the medium .  The  attractive linear force of function (x) allows the EMR to increase in speed once the EMR has left the medium and ''gravitational'' drag . Clouds are a perfect example !

[Bored chemist]

  attractive linear force of function (x)

All forces are linear.
What do you think you are  talking about?

[Starlight (OP)]

  attractive linear force of function (x)

All forces are linear.
What do you think you are  talking about?

I am talking about the linear momentum  of  EMR and the quantum mechanics of lights constant speed . Explaining function (x) as being an attractive force that is the cause of lights momentum .

Light having no unique propulsion system but instead being influenced by the f(x) !

Momentum = f(x)



f(x)=F?

Where F is an attractive force !

[Origin]

Light having no unique propulsion system but instead being influenced by the f(x) !

Light does not need a 'propulsion' system so your f(x) is meaningless!
 

Where F is an attractive force !

There is no attractive force involving light! 

[The Spoon]

I think Kryptid could be right about the OP being the box. The use of meaningless made up equations is a bit of a giveaway...

[Starlight (OP)]

Light does not need a 'propulsion' system so your f(x) is meaningless!
 

Where F is an attractive force !

There is no attractive force involving light!

Really ?   Then you can explain clearly to the readers how light manages to leave a flashlights bulb !


I think this must be rather embarrassing for science as the denial is so obviously avoiding truths .

[Starlight (OP)]

I think Kryptid could be right about the OP being the box. The use of meaningless made up equations is a bit of a giveaway...

I do not know this Box you keep mentioning , could this person you mention discuss special relativity ?