Infinite vs. instant
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Simple and direct proof that the theoretical science of AGW is fraud and the product of the host of charlatans led by J Hansen includingno discusion Wormley
Next: COSMIC BULLET FIRED BY EXPLODING STAR
From: GogoJF on 25 May 2010 23:19 On May 25, 10:12 pm, GogoJF <jfgog...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On May 25, 8:32 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On 5/25/10 12:53 PM, GogoJF wrote: > > > > On May 25, 12:45 pm, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com>  wrote: > > >> On 5/25/10 12:38 PM, GogoJF wrote: > > > >>> On May 25, 12:32 pm, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com>   wrote: > > >>>> On 5/25/10 11:48 AM, GogoJF wrote: > > > >>>>> Seeing light is instantaneous; seeing > > >>>>> light is not a transmission like a radar wave. > > > >>>>    Other than its wavelength ,momentum and energy, > > >>>>    radar (microwave) is identical to visible light. > > >>>>    Whatever gave you reason to believe otherwise? > > > >>> Radar is two-way transmission for another. > > > >>   Shine a flash light into a mirror. > > > > Don't paint yourself into a corner.  You might not be able to get out. > > >   Shall we try again Gogo? The electromagnetic force (one of four), > >   is carried by the photon. Some examples from the electromagnetic' > >   spectrum, include x-rays, UV, visible light, microwave. Radar > >   frequencies are typically in longer wavelengths, say cm to meter > >   range. > > >   From the quantum mechanical perspective, > > >    1. photons are emitted (by charged particles) > >    2. photons propagate at c > >    3. photons are absorbed (by charged particles) > > >   Photon momentum > >    p = hν/c = h/λ > > >   Photon Energy > >    E = hν > > Why do you waste your time with me? I do not have the operational definitions you are looking for.
From: Sam Wormley on 26 May 2010 00:45 On 5/25/10 10:12 PM, Gogol wrote: > On May 25, 8:32 pm, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> On 5/25/10 12:53 PM, GogoJF wrote: >> >> >> >>> On May 25, 12:45 pm, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On 5/25/10 12:38 PM, GogoJF wrote: >> >>>>> On May 25, 12:32 pm, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> On 5/25/10 11:48 AM, GogoJF wrote: >> >>>>>>> Seeing light is instantaneous; seeing >>>>>>> light is not a transmission like a radar wave. >> >>>>>> Other than its wavelength ,momentum and energy, >>>>>> radar (microwave) is identical to visible light. >>>>>> Whatever gave you reason to believe otherwise? >> >>>>> Radar is two-way transmission for another. >> >>>> Shine a flash light into a mirror. >> >>> Don't paint yourself into a corner. You might not be able to get out. >> >> Shall we try again Gogo? The electromagnetic force (one of four), >> is carried by the photon. Some examples from the electromagnetic' >> spectrum, include x-rays, UV, visible light, microwave. Radar >> frequencies are typically in longer wavelengths, say cm to meter >> range. >> >> From the quantum mechanical perspective, >> >> 1. photons are emitted (by charged particles) >> 2. photons propagate at c >> 3. photons are absorbed (by charged particles) >> >> Photon momentum >> p = hν/c = h/λ >> >> Photon Energy >> E = hν > > Why do you waste your time with me? Because you're the dad of a nice kid.
From: Peter Webb on 26 May 2010 05:22 "PD" <thedraperfamily(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:261f4366-0ee9-4da7-b45a-22d0d4b3ae5b(a)o15g2000vbb.googlegroups.com... On May 25, 11:48 am, GogoJF <jfgog...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On May 25, 11:41 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 25, 9:45 am, GogoJF <jfgog...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On May 25, 9:42 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On 5/25/10 9:19 AM, GogoJF wrote: > > > > > > When it comes to light, what is the difference? Isn't it two > > > > > different buzz words to describe a single phenomenon? > > > > > When you look at the moon you see it as it was about 1.3 second > > > > ago. Sun - About 8 minutes. Vega, when you look at Vega, you are > > > > seeing it as it was more than 25 years ago. > > > > Aw man, your living in the past. This question restated: what is the > > > difference between instant and infinite when it comes to light, when > > > dealing with physics? > > > Light has infinite range, which means that there is not a range from > > the source that the light will never cross. > > > However, the time it takes to get to any given range is nonzero. > > Therefore it is not instantaneous transmission. > > I believe in the opposite. Light has a finite range to the observer > called maximum visual acuity. Seeing light is instantaneous; seeing > light is not a transmission like a radar wave. First of all, seeing light in a biological eye is not instantaneous either. It takes a measurable time for rods and cones to respond to the light, generate the action potential in the nerves, and for that nerve signal to transmit to the brain. Secondly, the time spent for processing AT the receiver doesn't have anything to do with the time it takes for the light to get from the source to the receiver. What you see this very instant when you look up at the Sun is not the Sun as it is now, but as it was a little over 8 minutes ago. __________________________________ Well, that is of course in our inertial frame. In the frame of reference of the photon, the photon is received on earth at the same instant it is emitted from the Sun, which given the title of the thread would appear relevant.
From: jbriggs444 on 26 May 2010 07:58 On May 26, 5:22 am, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote: > "PD" <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:261f4366-0ee9-4da7-b45a-22d0d4b3ae5b(a)o15g2000vbb.googlegroups.com... > On May 25, 11:48 am, GogoJF <jfgog...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On May 25, 11:41 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On May 25, 9:45 am, GogoJF <jfgog...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 25, 9:42 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On 5/25/10 9:19 AM, GogoJF wrote: > > > > > > > When it comes to light, what is the difference? Isn't it two > > > > > > different buzz words to describe a single phenomenon? > > > > > > When you look at the moon you see it as it was about 1.3 second > > > > > ago. Sun - About 8 minutes. Vega, when you look at Vega, you are > > > > > seeing it as it was more than 25 years ago. > > > > > Aw man, your living in the past. This question restated: what is the > > > > difference between instant and infinite when it comes to light, when > > > > dealing with physics? > > > > Light has infinite range, which means that there is not a range from > > > the source that the light will never cross. > > > > However, the time it takes to get to any given range is nonzero. > > > Therefore it is not instantaneous transmission. > > > I believe in the opposite. Light has a finite range to the observer > > called maximum visual acuity. Seeing light is instantaneous; seeing > > light is not a transmission like a radar wave. > > First of all, seeing light in a biological eye is not instantaneous > either. It takes a measurable time for rods and cones to respond to > the light, generate the action potential in the nerves, and for that > nerve signal to transmit to the brain. > > Secondly, the time spent for processing AT the receiver doesn't have > anything to do with the time it takes for the light to get from the > source to the receiver. What you see this very instant when you look > up at the Sun is not the Sun as it is now, but as it was a little over > 8 minutes ago. > > __________________________________ > > Well, that is of course in our inertial frame. In the frame of reference of > the photon, the photon is received on earth at the same instant it is > emitted from the Sun, which given the title of the thread would appear > relevant.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: PD on 26 May 2010 09:21
On May 26, 4:22 am, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote: > "PD" <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:261f4366-0ee9-4da7-b45a-22d0d4b3ae5b(a)o15g2000vbb.googlegroups.com... > On May 25, 11:48 am, GogoJF <jfgog...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 25, 11:41 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On May 25, 9:45 am, GogoJF <jfgog...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 25, 9:42 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On 5/25/10 9:19 AM, GogoJF wrote: > > > > > > > When it comes to light, what is the difference? Isn't it two > > > > > > different buzz words to describe a single phenomenon? > > > > > > When you look at the moon you see it as it was about 1.3 second > > > > > ago. Sun - About 8 minutes. Vega, when you look at Vega, you are > > > > > seeing it as it was more than 25 years ago. > > > > > Aw man, your living in the past. This question restated: what is the > > > > difference between instant and infinite when it comes to light, when > > > > dealing with physics? > > > > Light has infinite range, which means that there is not a range from > > > the source that the light will never cross. > > > > However, the time it takes to get to any given range is nonzero. > > > Therefore it is not instantaneous transmission. > > > I believe in the opposite. Light has a finite range to the observer > > called maximum visual acuity. Seeing light is instantaneous; seeing > > light is not a transmission like a radar wave. > > First of all, seeing light in a biological eye is not instantaneous > either. It takes a measurable time for rods and cones to respond to > the light, generate the action potential in the nerves, and for that > nerve signal to transmit to the brain. > > Secondly, the time spent for processing AT the receiver doesn't have > anything to do with the time it takes for the light to get from the > source to the receiver. What you see this very instant when you look > up at the Sun is not the Sun as it is now, but as it was a little over > 8 minutes ago. > > __________________________________ > > Well, that is of course in our inertial frame. In the frame of reference of > the photon, the photon is received on earth at the same instant it is > emitted from the Sun, which given the title of the thread would appear > relevant. There is no inertial reference frame of the photon. Inertial reference frames are defined as those in which the laws of physics hold in the form we know them. |