GETTING RID OF EINSTEIN RELATIVITY
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: What is the Aether?
Next: Debunking Nimtz
From: Henri Wilson on 24 Aug 2007 18:11 On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 08:55:38 +0000 (UTC), bz <bz+spr(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote: >HW@....(Henri Wilson) wrote in >news:4u7sc3hvse14n4tvil7nh1kvb3chcandeq(a)4ax.com: > >> On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 22:55:25 +0000 (UTC), bz >> <bz+spr(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote: >> >>>HW@....(Henri Wilson) wrote in >>>news:j1apc3lg5apq7korvk22n38lme7u12pvuc(a)4ax.com: >.... >> >>>The electrons transfer energy into the cavities, like air blowing over >>>the hole in a flute. Those cavities 'ring' at 1000 MHz. >>>One of the cavities has a probe that couples energy into the wave guide. >>>The 1000 MHz photons don't really exist until they are launched from the >>>'transmitting antenna' end of the wave guide. Before that, you just have >>>electric and magnetic fields traveling along together. >> >> So what is a 'field' made of bob? > >Energy. What is energy made of Bob?......and please don't say, "fields". >>>Each photons carries 6.625e-25 Joules of energy so you create 1.5E25 >>>photons per second when you are nuking your hardboiled eggs. Each photon >>>has a wavelength of 11.8 inches. >> >> That still doesn't really tell us much about how the photons actually >> originate or what they are doing whilst still inside the cavity. >> What makes a 1GHz photon different from a gamma particle? > >Wavelength. Energy. Frequency. > >Generating processes. > >Or relative velocity of the source; >a 1 GHz Microwave source moving toward us at a sufficient velocity would be >Doppler shifted so as to appear to be a gamma source. So far, you have only associated 'frequency' with the electric field driving the electrons at 1GHz. There is no connection between that frequency and the shower of photon PARTICLES that is produced. www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm The difference between a preacher and a used car salesman is that the latter at least has a product to sell.
From: Henri Wilson on 24 Aug 2007 18:20 On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 10:19:04 +0100, "George Dishman" <george(a)briar.demon.co.uk> wrote: > >"Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message >news:7e8sc353mr8ebrv6bfoarfi9k3b9mh51fg(a)4ax.com... >> On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 09:44:42 +0100, "George Dishman" >>>If you meant 1000 MHz, that is right order >>>of magnitude for a microwave oven, they are >>>around 2 GHz. If you meant 1000 mHz, that >>>is only 1Hz. A difference of 10^9 is hardly >>>a quibble, and if you knew any physics you >>>would have understood the importance and >>>been careful to write either 1Hz or 1GHz. >> >> You know what I meant. Even eric geese wouldn't be stupid enough to write >> '1000 >> millihertz'.....on second thoughts he would be..... > >He wouldn't be stupid enough to write 1000 MHz >if he meant 1 GHz either and if he mad a typo >and wrote "hz" instead of "Hz" making the case >of the "m" ambiguous, I am sure he would >clarify it when asked and definitely wouldn't >say "I meant what I said. ...a 1000 mhz AC ..". George, to be honest, I initially wrote 800 mhz then changed it to 1000 I assumed you would have known that microwaves don't operate in the millihertz region. > >>>However, whether you meant 1Hz or 1GHz, the >>>energy is in packets of E = h.nu, you just >>>get 10^9 more packets for your joule at 1Hz. >> >> George, we have electric fields in the GHz range. Photons are emitted. > >Photons constitute those fields, yes. No, read Bob's message. The photon 'shower' is emitted as a result of the electron excitation. There is no indication of any 'frequency' directly associated with the individual photons. >> Where is the connection between the field 'frequency' and the photon >> 'wavelength'? > >wavelength = speed / frequency 'frequency' is the 'rate of occurrence (or arrival)' of a repetitive event. In the case of a photon PARTICLE, what might that imply? > >> You dont even have a model that can define 'frequency of a photon'. > >Q.E.D. > >Q.E.D. Q.E is not 'D', at all. >> See neother you nor anyone else really knows anything about the >> relationship >> between photons and generated electric 'waves'.. > >The electric field is defined by the force on a >particle compared to its charge. Force is rate >of change of momentum so the field strength is >a measure of the rate at which momentum is >transferred to a particle by the photons. What photons? You said 'field'... >> At leat I have a model that seems to work. > >Not really, it fails all the experimental tests. hahahhohohoh! >>>A difference >>>given by c+v in the third frame from which you >>>describe the two stars is consistent with SR, it >>>is nothing more than simple algebra. >> >> ....and the same algebra used by BaTh to simulate brightness curves. > >No ballistic theory says the difference between >the source speed and that of the light emitted >from the source is "c in the third frame". > >> Now do you see why I'm right George? > >Yes, you imagine "c+v in the third frame" is the >same as "c in the third frame". In your fantasy >world I guess anything is possible. Does the outside of a star heat up or cool as it expands, George? >George > www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm The difference between a preacher and a used car salesman is that the latter at least has a product to sell.
From: George Dishman on 25 Aug 2007 06:37 "Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message news:ttluc31rf6kk2ns4j0u9243tafsdlterrs(a)4ax.com... > On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 10:19:04 +0100, "George Dishman" > <george(a)briar.demon.co.uk> wrote: >>"Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message >>news:7e8sc353mr8ebrv6bfoarfi9k3b9mh51fg(a)4ax.com... >>> On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 09:44:42 +0100, "George Dishman" > >>>>If you meant 1000 MHz, that is right order >>>>of magnitude for a microwave oven, they are >>>>around 2 GHz. If you meant 1000 mHz, that >>>>is only 1Hz. A difference of 10^9 is hardly >>>>a quibble, and if you knew any physics you >>>>would have understood the importance and >>>>been careful to write either 1Hz or 1GHz. >>> >>> You know what I meant. Even eric geese wouldn't be stupid enough to >>> write >>> '1000 >>> millihertz'.....on second thoughts he would be..... >> >>He wouldn't be stupid enough to write 1000 MHz >>if he meant 1 GHz either and if he mad a typo >>and wrote "hz" instead of "Hz" making the case >>of the "m" ambiguous, I am sure he would >>clarify it when asked and definitely wouldn't >>say "I meant what I said. ...a 1000 mhz AC ..". > > George, to be honest, I initially wrote 800 mhz then changed it to 1000 OK. > I assumed you would have known that microwaves don't operate in the > millihertz > region. Of course, but you have previously said that low frequency signals had to be different to high frequencies like light and microwaves. Since you posted, there has been an article relating to detecting the influence of Solar g-modes in the Earth where frequncies are in the micro-hertz range. That radiation is still quantised. >>>>However, whether you meant 1Hz or 1GHz, the >>>>energy is in packets of E = h.nu, you just >>>>get 10^9 more packets for your joule at 1Hz. >>> >>> George, we have electric fields in the GHz range. Photons are emitted. >> >>Photons constitute those fields, yes. > > No, read Bob's message. I think Bob needs to think again about how he replied. > The photon 'shower' is emitted as a result of the electron excitation. > There is > no indication of any 'frequency' directly associated with the individual > photons. Sorry Henry, again a low level light source shone onto a grating and then detected with a photo-multiplier shows maxima and minima in the distribution pattern of photon detection events. An individual photon obeys exactly the same rule for a grating as you showed in your grating diagram except that the parameter affected ids the probability of its landing at a given location. It is having a mathematical model for that probability for a _single_ particle that defines a particle-based theory. >>> Where is the connection between the field 'frequency' and the photon >>> 'wavelength'? >> >>wavelength = speed / frequency > > 'frequency' is the 'rate of occurrence (or arrival)' of a repetitive > event. In > the case of a photon PARTICLE, what might that imply? It implies a cyclical nature to the probabilistic calculation for the particle, what is know as the wavefunction in QM. >>> You dont even have a model that can define 'frequency of a photon'. >> >>Q.E.D. >> >>Q.E.D. > > Q.E is not 'D', at all. You said I "dont even have a model that can define 'frequency of a photon'." but Q.E.D. is such a model so I do have one, hence the Q. is definitively D.. >>> See neother you nor anyone else really knows anything about the >>> relationship >>> between photons and generated electric 'waves'.. >> >>The electric field is defined by the force on a >>particle compared to its charge. Force is rate >>of change of momentum so the field strength is >>a measure of the rate at which momentum is >>transferred to a particle by the photons. > > What photons? You said 'field'... Yes, I told you what the word "field" means in this context (not something containing sheep), it is a word describing the statistical mean effect of a flux of photons. >>Yes, you imagine "c+v in the third frame" is the >>same as "c in the third frame". In your fantasy >>world I guess anything is possible. > > Does the outside of a star heat up or cool as it expands, George? Good question, you have expansion which causes cooling and you also have the force causing that expansion which is the radiation pressure of the light rising from the He++ layer which increases the temperature so the combination will vary through the cycle. When fully modelled, the total of the various effects matches the observations. George
From: bz on 25 Aug 2007 07:36 HW@....(Henri Wilson) wrote in news:9nluc3lg12i91ffql385pvkdc70papdm69(a)4ax.com: > On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 08:55:38 +0000 (UTC), bz > <bz+spr(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote: > >>HW@....(Henri Wilson) wrote in >>news:4u7sc3hvse14n4tvil7nh1kvb3chcandeq(a)4ax.com: >> >>> On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 22:55:25 +0000 (UTC), bz >>> <bz+spr(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote: >>> >>>>HW@....(Henri Wilson) wrote in >>>>news:j1apc3lg5apq7korvk22n38lme7u12pvuc(a)4ax.com: >>.... >>> >>>>The electrons transfer energy into the cavities, like air blowing over >>>>the hole in a flute. Those cavities 'ring' at 1000 MHz. >>>>One of the cavities has a probe that couples energy into the wave >>>>guide. The 1000 MHz photons don't really exist until they are launched >>>>from the 'transmitting antenna' end of the wave guide. Before that, >>>>you just have electric and magnetic fields traveling along together. >>> >>> So what is a 'field' made of bob? >> >>Energy. > > What is energy made of Bob?......and please don't say, "fields". Fields. What are fields made of? Depends on what you plant in them. :) Then there was the farmer that was outstanding in his field. Not really. :) E fields are made of 'lines of electrical force'. B fields are made of 'lines of magnetic force'. Don't ask me what lines of force are made of, I don't know. All I know is that they exert force on (depending on the kind of line) either a test charge or a magnet. let me try again. > What is energy made of Bob?......and please don't say, "fields". I don't know what it is made of [I never claimed to know everything, in fact I admit that what I don't know is an infinite set], only what energy can do. It can do work. >>>>Each photons carries 6.625e-25 Joules of energy so you create 1.5E25 >>>>photons per second when you are nuking your hardboiled eggs. Each >>>>photon has a wavelength of 11.8 inches. >>> >>> That still doesn't really tell us much about how the photons actually >>> originate or what they are doing whilst still inside the cavity. >>> What makes a 1GHz photon different from a gamma particle? >> >>Wavelength. Energy. Frequency. >> >>Generating processes. >> >>Or relative velocity of the source; >>a 1 GHz Microwave source moving toward us at a sufficient velocity would >>be Doppler shifted so as to appear to be a gamma source. > > So far, you have only associated 'frequency' with the electric field > driving the electrons at 1GHz. The electric field driving the electrons is not really associated with any frequency. It just supplies the energy to drive 'the electron wind' that 'blows' the 'flute'. > There is no connection between that > frequency and the shower of photon PARTICLES that is produced. Correct. The magnetron's operation doesn't depend on quantum phenomena any more than playing a flute depends on the fact that the air consists of molecules. <aside> there ARE probably photons produced inside the magnetron in the form of synchrotron radiation but those photons are probably in the uv or soft xray region and just serve to heat up the anode. <end aside> The faster the electrons move, the 'stronger the wind' that 'blows the flute'. The magnetic fields from the moving electrons induce currents in the anode walls. Those currents oscillate at the resonant frequency of the cavity. The oscillating current causes the electrons to 'bunch up' as they spiral outward from the cathode. There are no 'photons particles' inside the magnetron at the microwave frequencies. There is not enough room for them. -- bz please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an infinite set. bz+spr(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap
From: Henri Wilson on 25 Aug 2007 18:15
On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 11:36:25 +0000 (UTC), bz <bz+spr(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote: >HW@....(Henri Wilson) wrote in >news:9nluc3lg12i91ffql385pvkdc70papdm69(a)4ax.com: > >> On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 08:55:38 +0000 (UTC), bz >> <bz+spr(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote: >>>> So what is a 'field' made of bob? >>> >>>Energy. >> >> What is energy made of Bob?......and please don't say, "fields". > >Fields. What are fields made of? > >Depends on what you plant in them. :) >Then there was the farmer that was outstanding in his field. Not really. >:) > >E fields are made of 'lines of electrical force'. >B fields are made of 'lines of magnetic force'. > >Don't ask me what lines of force are made of, I don't know. All I know is >that they exert force on (depending on the kind of line) either a test >charge or a magnet. > >let me try again. >> What is energy made of Bob?......and please don't say, "fields". > >I don't know what it is made of [I never claimed to know everything, in >fact I admit that what I don't know is an infinite set], only what energy >can do. > >It can do work. The fact is Bob, this highlights how primative physics really is at the present time. It has many equations that explain 'HOW' but no physical models to explain most fundamental phenomena. I think it's quite disgusting that nobody has made any progress in linking 'fields' to other physical entities. >>>Or relative velocity of the source; >>>a 1 GHz Microwave source moving toward us at a sufficient velocity would >>>be Doppler shifted so as to appear to be a gamma source. >> >> So far, you have only associated 'frequency' with the electric field >> driving the electrons at 1GHz. > >The electric field driving the electrons is not really associated with any >frequency. >It just supplies the energy to drive 'the electron wind' that 'blows' the >'flute'. It is. The field is 1GHz AC. >> There is no connection between that >> frequency and the shower of photon PARTICLES that is produced. > >Correct. The magnetron's operation doesn't depend on quantum phenomena any >more than playing a flute depends on the fact that the air consists of >molecules. <aside> there ARE probably photons produced inside the magnetron >in the form of synchrotron radiation but those photons are probably in the >uv or soft xray region and just serve to heat up the anode. <end aside> > >The faster the electrons move, the 'stronger the wind' that 'blows the >flute'. >The magnetic fields from the moving electrons induce currents in the anode >walls. Those currents oscillate at the resonant frequency of the cavity. >The oscillating current causes the electrons to 'bunch up' as they spiral >outward from the cathode. There are no 'photons particles' inside the >magnetron at the microwave frequencies. There is not enough room for them. What happened to all those 'photons' emitted from the wave guide. I say their 'density' varies at 1 gig but they don't possess that kind of 'intrinsic frequency'. www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm The difference between a preacher and a used car salesman is that the latter at least has a product to sell. |