[Bored chemist]

I say, that the system will reach an energetic equilibrium at a specific frequency of resonance and from that moment energy level in the system will remain constant -

That makes no sense.
The proposed system has energy fed into it, there's no way for the energy to get out and you say that the energy stops getting bigger.
How?
Magic?

Where does the energy go?

However, there are other ways to trap EM radiation at a specific frequency within the cavity - e.g. microwaves inside the owen. For practical reasons, this mechanism can be used, to test my claims experimentally.

Do you not understand that a microwave oven has the same problem?
The impact of the microwaves on the shell of the oven will impart momentum to it.

Even the best of them only bounce the microwaves back and to a few million times.
https://aip.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1063/1.3693409

[CrazyScientist (OP)]

Photons are made of Riemann-half-sphere-half-antispheres, with momentum encoded into it by added points of space. An antisphere is a sphere made of left out points of space.

Actually the "shape" and geometry of a photon is not the issue here. The general idea is, if we should treat photons as time-finite packets of energy with a variable density (number) in a volume of space, or if we should treat them, as time-infinite quanta of the photon field with a constant number (density) in a volume of space...

According to mainstream science photons are created during emission and propagate in "empty vacuum" as EM waves, only to be annihilated during absorbtion. According to me, photons ARE the medium in which EM waves propagate - just like water molecules create the medium for different kind of waves and currents...

[puppypower]

No it is not.
And this is not evidence for it.

Actually analogy between sound and EM waves is quite commonly used by physicists throughout the history of physics...

https://www.alamy.com/the-analogy-of-sound-and-light-was-lately-given-by-professor-barrett-of-the-royal-college-of-science-dublin-on-some-experiments-illustrating-the-analogy-of-light-and-sound-the-professor-commenced-by-referring-to-some-of-the-well-about-eight-minutes-to-travel-to-birmingham-a-little-over-one-hundred-miles-while-in-the-same-time-the-light-from-the-flash-would-have-traveled-to-the-sun-a-distance-of-over-ninety-millions-of-miles-but-though-they-so-differ-in-the-rate-of-progress-both-light-and-sound-show-many-phenomena-in-common-flame-was-used-as-a-detector-of-sound-this-delicate-acoustic-image334319414.html

I know about EM radiation and sound in cavities.
It has nothing to do with your claim, has it?

Well I would say, that my scenario is a perfect example of photons trapped in a spherical cavity

How about lining your spherical cavity with phosphoresent mirror material? You charge up the light absorbing  inner surface with a tuned LED, and then pull the light source. The inner surface will emit photons, which are then absorbed, then reemitted, etc.

[CrazyScientist (OP)]

I say, that the system will reach an energetic equilibrium at a specific frequency of resonance and from that moment energy level in the system will remain constant -

That makes no sense.
The proposed system has energy fed into it, there's no way for the energy to get out and you say that the energy stops getting bigger.
How?
Magic?

Where does the energy go?

When EM field inside the cavity is resonating in an unison frequency, those vibrations are transferred to the whole system, so, we'll end up with vibrations of the entire sphere - energy of EM radiation will then turn into kinetic energy of the whole system...

However, there are other ways to trap EM radiation at a specific frequency within the cavity - e.g. microwaves inside the owen. For practical reasons, this mechanism can be used, to test my claims experimentally.

Do you not understand that a microwave oven has the same problem?
The impact of the microwaves on the shell of the oven will impart momentum to it.

Even the best of them only bounce the microwaves back and to a few million times.
https://aip.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1063/1.3693409

Sure, but then you can always compensate the loss of energy, by increasing the rate of emission or the magnitude of microwaves. Point is, to create more EM waves, than we loose in time - and it should be possible with our current technology...

Besides microwave owen cavity uses electric field, to trap the photons and I'm not 100% sure, if momentum transfer works here in the same way, as in the case of a mirror - I'd have to look for some info regarding this subject...

[CrazyScientist (OP)]

No it is not.
And this is not evidence for it.

Actually analogy between sound and EM waves is quite commonly used by physicists throughout the history of physics...

https://www.alamy.com/the-analogy-of-sound-and-light-was-lately-given-by-professor-barrett-of-the-royal-college-of-science-dublin-on-some-experiments-illustrating-the-analogy-of-light-and-sound-the-professor-commenced-by-referring-to-some-of-the-well-about-eight-minutes-to-travel-to-birmingham-a-little-over-one-hundred-miles-while-in-the-same-time-the-light-from-the-flash-would-have-traveled-to-the-sun-a-distance-of-over-ninety-millions-of-miles-but-though-they-so-differ-in-the-rate-of-progress-both-light-and-sound-show-many-phenomena-in-common-flame-was-used-as-a-detector-of-sound-this-delicate-acoustic-image334319414.html

I know about EM radiation and sound in cavities.
It has nothing to do with your claim, has it?

Well I would say, that my scenario is a perfect example of photons trapped in a spherical cavity

How about lining your spherical cavity with phosphoresent mirror material? You charge up the light absorbing  inner surface with a tuned LED, and then pull the light source. The inner surface will emit photons, which are then absorbed, then reemitted, etc.

But the point is to emit more EM radiation, than is being lost due to imperfection of the system. I doubt, that phosphoresent surface will emit radiation at the same energy level, as the one, which was originally produced by the light source...

[Zer0]

SideNote -

Sorry We had that Irreligious scuffle in that Other OP, Unfortunate!
✌️

I Apologize for suggesting You to modify/change your NickName.
🙏

I Do Not Appreciate Unsolicited suggestions, advice or Information.
👍
Science, Religion or Otherwise.



P.S. - Please do Not let this little sidenote distract You, & Please do carry on with the illuminating discussions.
🙂
& Yaa, i Really like Images that you post.
👍
Visualization makes it Alot more easier for Me to understand & absorb concepts.
👌
Nice Work!

[CrazyScientist (OP)]

SideNote -

Sorry We had that Irreligious scuffle in that Other OP, Unfortunate!
✌️

I Apologize for suggesting You to modify/change your NickName.
🙏

I Do Not Appreciate Unsolicited suggestions, advice or Information.
👍
Science, Religion or Otherwise.



P.S. - Please do Not let this little sidenote distract You, & Please do carry on with the illuminating discussions.
🙂
& Yaa, i Really like Images that you post.
👍
Visualization makes it Alot more easier for Me to understand & absorb concepts.
👌
Nice Work!

Thanks and no problem I rarely take things personally. But honestly, after witnessing the general response, I'm thinking about making a thread: "what if God can be proven by science?". I can bet, that it will be the most active thread for a looooong time...

I know the difference between my private beliefs and science, but it could be interesting, to have a place, where we could speak about the meta- side
of physics...What do you think?

[CrazyScientist (OP)]

Ok, but let's go back to science. I did same research and found couple interesting sources. First of all, let's Look at the image below, which shows the resonance cavity of a laser:

Although there are no perfect mirrors and a portion of radiation is being released from the cavity, energy loss is compensated with the gain medium, to which EM can transfer their energy, what greatly increases efficiency of the light source. As the result, density of EM radiation inside the cavity is growing faster, than it is being released from it.

I propose a simple experiment - let's take some powerful laser and close the exit hole in the cavity with a mirror. If this, what Bored Chemist claims is true, then we should expect, that the cavity will explode due to the internal pressure of emitted energy. If what I claim is true, then we should expect that the energy level of equilibrium will increase by the level equal to the laser output energy - and that's it...

[Bored chemist]

When EM field inside the cavity is resonating in an unison frequency, those vibrations are transferred to the whole system, so, we'll end up with vibrations of the entire sphere - energy of EM radiation will then turn into kinetic energy of the whole system...

So... exactly the same as with light and a mirrored ball.

Why do you think there is a difference between EM radiation and EM radiation?

- I'd have to look for some info regarding this subject...

Here is some info on this subject.

Do you not understand that a microwave oven has the same problem?
The impact of the microwaves on the shell of the oven will impart momentum to it.

[Bored chemist]

If this, what Bored Chemist claims is true, then we should expect, that the cavity will explode due to the internal pressure of emitted energy

No.
I don't believe that,.
It is bollocks.

Just because you get things wrong, that's no reason to assume that I don't know what would happen.

[CrazyScientist (OP)]

When EM field inside the cavity is resonating in an unison frequency, those vibrations are transferred to the whole system, so, we'll end up with vibrations of the entire sphere - energy of EM radiation will then turn into kinetic energy of the whole system...

So... exactly the same as with light and a mirrored ball.p

Well, yeah...

Why do you think there is a difference between EM radiation and EM radiation?

It's because the difference of the wavelenght/frequency of EM radiation.

Now my question: what do you think will cause the increase of energy level in the whole system in my scenario: is it increasing intensity or is it growing frequency of emitted EM waves?

What defines the energy of EM radiation?

- I'd have to look for some info regarding this subject...

Here is some info on this subject.

Do you not understand that a microwave oven has the same problem?
The impact of the microwaves on the shell of the oven will impart momentum to it.

Only in your model of radiation, this pressure should grow together with the increasing number of photons inside the cavity, until it won't blow up (because the material of cavity is too weak, to allow a black hole formation inside it)...

Constant emission of EM radiation in cavities causes the increase of intensity, but you keep treating it, like increasing frequency. If you completely isolate a source of heat with the temperature of 1000°C, temperature of a medium won't grow beyond 1000°C despite the constant radiation of heat.

[Bored chemist]

Only in your model of radiation, this pressure should grow together with the increasing number of photons inside the cavity, until it won't blow up (because the material of cavity is too weak, to allow a black hole formation inside it)...

That work of fiction is still yours, rather than mine. Don't insult me by linking my name to it.

You see, I'm quite clever, so I can tell the difference between a cylinder and a sphere.
I can see that the light will spill out of the sides of the laser if it can't get out of the ends.

But you seem not to be well enough versed in science to realise that.

Which is why you should stop posting tosh and go and learn some science.

but you keep treating it, like increasing frequency.

No
That's bollocks and everyone reading this knows it.
I am treating it as an increasing number of photons (and, accordingly, and increasing mass of photons).

Since you plainly do not understand what I (and mainstream science) say, you are not in a position to criticise it, are you?

[Bored chemist]

If you completely isolate a source of heat with the temperature of 1000°C, temperature of a medium won't grow beyond 1000°C despite the constant radiation of heat.

Only you hallucinated that it might.
But, in the scenario you described, there is a constant addition of energy via a (hypothetical) one way valve.

[Bored chemist]

What defines the energy of EM radiation?

The product of the number of photons and the energy which each photon has.
And, in your opening gambit, you kept increasing the number of photons.
Once you have added C^2 worth of energy you will have increased the mass by 1Kg.
It doesn't matter if that's microwave photons or visible photons which is why this

It's because the difference of the wavelenght/frequency of EM radiation.

is nonsense.


Go away and don't come back until either you have learned some science, or until you are prepared to learn some.

[CrazyScientist (OP)]

Only in your model of radiation, this pressure should grow together with the increasing number of photons inside the cavity, until it won't blow up (because the material of cavity is too weak, to allow a black hole formation inside it)...

That work of fiction is still yours, rather than mine. Don't insult me by linking my name to it.

You see, I'm quite clever, so I can tell the difference between a cylinder and a sphere.
I can see that the light will spill out of the sides of the laser if it can't get out of the ends.

But you seem not to be well enough versed in science to realise that.

Which is why you should stop posting tosh and go and learn some science.

So, according to you what makes the most important difference here, is the geometry of cavity?

quote author=CrazyScientist link=topic=82373.msg642865#msg642865 date=1623437553]but you keep treating it, like increasing frequency.

No
That's bollocks and everyone reading this knows it.
I am treating it as an increasing number of photons (and, accordingly, and increasing mass of photons).

Since you plainly do not understand what I (and mainstream science) say, you are not in a position to criticise it, are you?
[/quote][/quote]

Then tell me please, how according to you, growing number of photons is expressed in the properties of EM wave?

Let me help you - it's the growing magnitude/intensity of waves...

Only you hallucinated that it might.
But, in the scenario you described, there is a constant addition of energy via a (hypothetical) one way valve.

And what is the only difference between light and heat?

[Bored chemist]

So, according to you what makes the most important difference here, is the geometry of cavity?

For a start you need to stop saying that things are "according to" me when they are not.
You keep making up dross and putting it forward as if it's my idea.
That is dishonest.
No
What makes the difference is the big holes in the side of the cavity.

[Bored chemist]

And what is the only difference between light and heat?

The difference is that heat is the microscopic mechanical energy of a substance- the movement of the atoms etc and can be transferred by conduction, radiation, convection or advection, but light is EM radiation within a range of wavelengths - about 400 to 700 nm.

Again; from the fact that you had to ask that,  it's clear that you don't know the basic science.

[Bored chemist]

Let me help you - it's the growing magnitude/intensity of waves...

So why did you try to pretend that it was

like increasing frequency.

and then pretend that it was me who had said that?

[CrazyScientist (OP)]

Quote from: CrazyScientist on Today at 19:52:33
It's because the difference of the wavelenght/frequency of EM radiation.

is nonsense.


Go away and don't come back until either you have learned some science, or until you are prepared to learn some.

So this is what I learned:
https://www.e-education.psu.edu/meteo300/node/682

"We can think of radiation either as waves or as individual particles called photons. The energy associated with a single photon is given by  E = hν , where E is the energy (SI units of J), h is Planck's constant (h = 6.626 x 10–34 J s), and ν is the frequency of the radiation (SI units of s–1 or Hertz, Hz) (see figure below). Frequency is related to wavelength by λ=c/ν , where c, the speed of light, is 2.998 x 108 m s–1. Another quantity that you will often see is wavenumber, σ=1/λ, which is commonly reported in units of cm–1."

[CrazyScientist (OP)]

So, according to you what makes the most important difference here, is the geometry of cavity?

For a start you need to stop saying that things are "according to" me when they are not.
You keep making up dross and putting it forward as if it's my idea.
That is dishonest.

So, if it's not you, who states all those  things, then who is it? Should I understand, that you don't associate with your own claims?

No
What makes the difference is the big holes in the side of the cavity.

Holes covered by mirrors... So spherical mirror is one hole, which surrounds the inner space?

Sure, there are imperfection in the cavity of laser, but still energy level is growing inside the cavity - more energy is being "trapped", than it is being released.

The difference is that heat is the microscopic mechanical energy of a substance- the movement of the atoms etc and can be transferred by conduction, radiation, convection or advection, but light is EM radiation within a range of wavelengths - about 400 to 700 nm.

Again; from the fact that you had to ask that,  it's clear that you don't know the basic science.

Ok, I should be more specific:
What is the difference between emission of light and emission of thermal radiation? Are there any substantial differences between both mechanics?