Ballistic Theory, Progress report...Suitable for 5yo Kids
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: OWLS is not equal to c
Next: Mathematical Inconsistencies in Einstein's Derivation of the Lorentz Transformation
From: bz on 3 Aug 2005 09:07 "sue jahn" <susysewnshow(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote in news:42f0a8e9$0$18642$14726298(a)news.sunsite.dk: > > "bz" <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote in message > news:Xns96A72FEAEF37WQAHBGMXSZHVspammote(a)130.39.198.139... >> H@..(Henri Wilson) wrote in >> news:0920f1pfofa1omcth88bbp598mt4riv84a(a)4ax.com: >> >> >>>>That would indicate that it can NOT be millions of cycles 'long'. >> >>>> >> >>>>I see no reason for it to be more than 1 cycle 'long'. >> >>> >> >>> Ah! but what is a 'cycle'? >> >>> .....a cycle of what? >> >> >> >>A cycle of E <---> M energy transfer. Where the E and M fields >> >>exchange energy. >> >> >> >>A rotation of the energy magnitude vector in EM space. >> >> >> >>A cycle of the AC voltage in my transmitting antenna. >> >>A cycle of the AC voltage induced by the passing M field in my >> >>receiving antenna. >> > >> > No that's not the cycle of a single photon. That involves 'group >> > phasing'. >> >> Depends on the transmitter's power. >> >> >>A cycle of the current in my loop transmitting antenna [which >> >>produces an M field in space] >> >>A cycle of the current induced in my loop receiving antenna by the M >> >>field of the passing radio wave. >> > >> > No bob. Read the question. >> >> >>> Ah! but what is a 'cycle'? >> >>> .....a cycle of what? >> >> I answered the question with respect to the topic under discussion. >> >> I see no reason for a single photon to be longer than one cycle. > > Since the rules of Quantum Mechanics are already written, and you > AFAIK are not being consulted on a rewrite, the point is rather moot. Eh AFAIK, the rules of quantum mechanics are rather silent upon the 'length' of a photon. Last time I looked, the emission and absorbtion process was considered to be practically 'instantanious', with the half life of the excited state being the parameter under study. The paper http://jchemed.chem.wisc.edu/JCEWWW/Articles/DynaPub/DynaPub.html#ref16 seems to confuse the half life of the excited state with the time required to actually emit a photon and to equate that with the photon length. -- bz please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an infinite set. bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap
From: Sue... on 3 Aug 2005 09:45 Henri Wilson wrote: > On Wed, 3 Aug 2005 07:16:11 -0400, "sue jahn" <susysewnshow(a)yahoo.com.au> > wrote: > > > > >"bz" <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote in message news:Xns96A72FEAEF37WQAHBGMXSZHVspammote(a)130.39.198.139... > >> H@..(Henri Wilson) wrote in > >> news:0920f1pfofa1omcth88bbp598mt4riv84a(a)4ax.com: > >> > >> >>>>That would indicate that it can NOT be millions of cycles 'long'. > >> >>>> > >> >>>>I see no reason for it to be more than 1 cycle 'long'. > >> >>> > >> >>> Ah! but what is a 'cycle'? > >> >>> .....a cycle of what? > >> >> > >> >>A cycle of E <---> M energy transfer. Where the E and M fields exchange > >> >>energy. > >> >> > >> >>A rotation of the energy magnitude vector in EM space. > >> >> > >> >>A cycle of the AC voltage in my transmitting antenna. > >> >>A cycle of the AC voltage induced by the passing M field in my receiving > >> >>antenna. > >> > > >> > No that's not the cycle of a single photon. That involves 'group > >> > phasing'. > >> > >> Depends on the transmitter's power. > >> > >> >>A cycle of the current in my loop transmitting antenna [which produces > >> >>an M field in space] > >> >>A cycle of the current induced in my loop receiving antenna by the M > >> >>field of the passing radio wave. > >> > > >> > No bob. Read the question. > >> > >> >>> Ah! but what is a 'cycle'? > >> >>> .....a cycle of what? > >> > >> I answered the question with respect to the topic under discussion. > >> > >> I see no reason for a single photon to be longer than one cycle. > > > >Since the rules of Quantum Mechanics are already written, and you > >AFAIK are not being consulted on a rewrite, the point is rather moot. Eh ? > > QM is a statistical theory...and stats don't work too well with a sample size > of ONE. Did someone say the *sample* size was one ? Santa can deliver 2.3 toys to *ONE* house with a high degree of certainty that each child in the house will get a toy. Sue... > > > > >Sue... > > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> bz > >> > >> please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an > >> infinite set. > >> > >> bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap > > > > > HW. > www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm > > Sometimes I feel like a complete failure. > The most useful thing I have ever done is prove Einstein wrong.
From: bz on 3 Aug 2005 10:19 "Sue..." <suzysewnshow(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote in news:1123076729.211267.18360(a)o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com: >> QM is a statistical theory...and stats don't work too well with a >> sample size of ONE. > > Did someone say the *sample* size was one ? > > Santa can deliver 2.3 toys to *ONE* house > with a high degree of certainty that each > child in the house will get a toy. Only if Santa restricts his deliveries to a small portion of the globe. -- bz please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an infinite set. bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap
From: Sue... on 3 Aug 2005 14:02 bz wrote: > "Sue..." <suzysewnshow(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote in > news:1123076729.211267.18360(a)o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com: > > >> QM is a statistical theory...and stats don't work too well with a > >> sample size of ONE. > > > > Did someone say the *sample* size was one ? > > > > Santa can deliver 2.3 toys to *ONE* house > > with a high degree of certainty that each > > child in the house will get a toy. > BZ: Only if Santa restricts his deliveries to a small portion of the globe. << I see no reason for a single photon to be longer than one cycle.>> Sue: Well maybe it has to be at least four cycles in case some astromnomer wants to cut it into four pieces. http://www.eso.org/outreach/press-rel/pr-2000/phot-26-00.html GAWD! you don't suppose Santa elves cut up the toys do you? Sue... > > > > > -- > bz > > please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an > infinite set. > > bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap
From: bz on 3 Aug 2005 14:55
"Sue..." <suzysewnshow(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote in news:1123091999.580984.298710 @o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com: > > bz wrote: >> "Sue..." <suzysewnshow(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote in >> news:1123076729.211267.18360(a)o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com: >> >> >> QM is a statistical theory...and stats don't work too well with a >> >> sample size of ONE. >> > >> > Did someone say the *sample* size was one ? >> > >> > Santa can deliver 2.3 toys to *ONE* house >> > with a high degree of certainty that each >> > child in the house will get a toy. >> > BZ: Only if Santa restricts his deliveries to a small portion of the > globe. > << I see no reason for a single photon to be longer than one cycle.>> > > Sue: Well maybe it has to be at least four cycles in case > some astromnomer wants to cut it into four pieces. > http://www.eso.org/outreach/press-rel/pr-2000/phot-26-00.html Naw, they just need for 4 photons to arrive from the same source at the same time. > GAWD! you don't suppose Santa elves cut up the toys do you? Naw, they just stretch them out over millions of cycles. -- bz please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an infinite set. bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap |