Just a dimension analysis of photon momentum!!
in [Physics]
|
Prev: 9-11 Truth makes HUGE showing at Los Angeles Peace March as bushkultie Iarndud Crackwhore Kook for War screeches in helpless rage
Next: FLUSHING THE TOILET
From: Y.Porat on 25 Jun 2010 00:25 On Jun 25, 5:50 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 24, 11:17 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jun 23, 3:59 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > the photon momentum can be presented as > > > > P = hf/c > > > right > > > it is the full comprehensive presentation > > > of the photon momentum > > > nothing missing - nothing excessive right ?? !! > > > > now lets take it as is > > > (without changing anything in it as the formula > > > presenting the **photon momentum * > > > momentum ie not energy .....!! ) > > > > and present it by its dimensions and > > > dimensionless figures > > > > h is > > > 6.6 exp -34 > > > > f is > > > fs/second > > > > while fs is*** the dimensionless > > > figure that is attached to the 1/second **** > > > > c is say (aprox ) > > > 3 exp10 meter/second > > > now if we combine all of it > > > we get > > > > P 6.6 exp -Kg meter ^2 /second times fs/Sec > > > divided by meter/Second times 3 exp10 > > > > ie if we present it without the > > > dimensions that are canceling themselves > > > in nominator and denominator > > > > we get > > > ==================================== > > > 6.6exp-34 Kg MET /SEC times fs/3 exp10 > > > ==================================== > > > now my question is > > > where do you see anything relativistic in it ??!! > > > > TIA > > > Y.Porat > > > ---------------------- > > > Just a suggestion, Porat. > > > Don't title a post that implies that you're going to do dimensional > > analysis, if you don't know how to do dimensional analysis, if you > > don't know the dimensions or the units of the quantities you're going > > to look at, if you think that relativistic quantities have different > > dimensions than nonrelativistic quantities, or if you think you can > > learn something about the fundamental nature of a thing by looking at > > the dimensions of one of its properties. > > > This would be like someone proposing to do the plumbing for a kitchen > > sink while not knowing what a pipe wrench is, what the hole in the > > bottom of the sink is for, how to tell which spigot is hot and which > > one is cold, or why a sink should not be made out of rye bread. > > > PD > > -------------------- > and Mr PD > i have a suggestion for you: !!! > instead of being a CHEAP demagogue !!! > > just tell us what is ***YOUR** > AGAIN ***YOUR*** > DIMENSION ANALYSIS** OF THE PHOTON MOMENTUM > (momentum not energy > again momentum and not energy !!!) > > P = hf/Lambda > AND TEL US WHAT IS RELATIVISTIC THERE !!! > > 2 > as far as i know you > a crook like you -- will not do it !!! > for your 'tactical ' cheating reasons !!! > because you know i am right !!! > > if you want to prove that i am wrong with with my analysis --- > > JUST BRING YOUR ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS!. > THAT IS WHAT AN HONEST PERSON > AND AN HONEST SCIENTIST -- WOULD DO !!! > and btw > do it by the MKS system unless you claim that > the MKS is '''not good enough or not legitimate for it ''' !!! > and dont just hand wave demagogically > adding relevant obfuscating philosophy stories !!! > > JUST A SIMPLE DIMENSION ANALYSIS > INCLUDING THE DIMENSION LESS FIGURES !!! > OF YOURS !!! > > DON T FORGET OR IGNORE THE DIMENSIONLESS FIGURES !!! > > TIA > Y.Porat > --------------------------------- sorry Typo he formula of photon momentum is h/Lambda !!! or hf/c!! yet please note hf /c IS A MOMENTUM FORMULA SOPLEASE DONT BOGGLE OUR MIDS PRESENTING IT AS AN SORT OF ENERGY FORMULA!! TH EMOMENT IT IS DIVIDED BY c it isnot anymore an energy formula but MOMENTUM FORMULA and it makes a principaldifference as you will see later because momentum is not energy !!) so sorry my typo mistake it is not not hf/Lambda but h/lambda or hf/lambda (momentum !!!) (i respond quickly and have in my mind just the main arguments so such mistakes can occure in my **quick responds ** ***unlike** my main analysts in which i spend more time checking it !! and i noticed it before anyone to correct me (:-)) so please MR PD ---as above just give us *your analysis **of it TIA Y.Porat --------------------
From: artful on 25 Jun 2010 01:02 On Jun 25, 2:25 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: [snip] > sorry Typo > he formula of photon momentum is > > h/Lambda !!! or hf/c!! Yes .. we know > yet please note > hf /c > IS A MOMENTUM FORMULA Yes .. we know. You just said that > SOPLEASE DONT BOGGLE OUR MIDS PRESENTING IT AS AN SORT OF ENERGY > FORMULA!! I didn't. I gave a number of different equations for photon momentum, all equally valid P = Mc = E/c = hf/c = h/lambda > TH EMOMENT IT IS DIVIDED BY c Yes .. we know .. you divide the energy of the photon by c. E = hf, so E/c = hf/c = momentum of the photon > it isnot anymore an energy formula > but MOMENTUM FORMULA Yes .. we know > and it makes a principaldifference as you will see later because > momentum is not energy !!) Yes .. we know > so sorry my typo mistake > it is not > not > hf/Lambda > but > h/lambda or hf/lambda (momentum !!!) I think you mean "h/lamda or hf/c" > (i respond quickly and have in my mind just the main arguments > so such mistakes can occure > in my **quick responds ** > ***unlike** my main analysts in which i spend more time checking > it !! > and i noticed it before anyone to correct me (:-)) > > so please MR PD ---as above > just give us *your analysis **of it I've done this before for you .. its trivial Dimensions of momentum are [Mass] x [Length] x [Time]^-1 Dimensions of h are [Mass] x [Length]^2 x [Time]^-1 Dimensions of lambda are [Length] Dimensions of f are [Time]^-1 Dimensions of c are [Length] x [time]^-1 So h/lambda has dimensions [Mass] x [Length]^2 x [Time]^-1 / [Length] = [Mass] x [Length] x [Time]^-1 So it is a valid momentum formula Similarly hf/c has dimensions ( [Mass] x [Length]^2 x [Time]^-1 ) x ( [Time]^-1 ) / ( [Length] x [Time]-1 ) = [Mass] x [Length] x [Time]^-1 So it is a valid momentum formula (hopefully no typos there) That is a complete dimensional analysis. Do you understand it?
From: Y.Porat on 25 Jun 2010 01:51 On Jun 25, 7:02 am, artful <artful...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 25, 2:25 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > [snip] > > > sorry Typo > > he formula of photon momentum is > > > h/Lambda !!! or hf/c!! > > Yes .. we know > > > yet please note > > hf /c > > IS A MOMENTUM FORMULA > > Yes .. we know. You just said that > > > SOPLEASE DONT BOGGLE OUR MIDS PRESENTING IT AS AN SORT OF ENERGY > > FORMULA!! > > I didn't. I gave a number of different equations for photon momentum, > all equally valid > > P = Mc = E/c = hf/c = h/lambda > > > TH EMOMENT IT IS DIVIDED BY c > > Yes .. we know .. you divide the energy of the photon by c. E = hf, > so E/c = hf/c = momentum of the photon > > > it isnot anymore an energy formula > > but MOMENTUM FORMULA > > Yes .. we know > > > and it makes a principaldifference as you will see later because > > momentum is not energy !!) > > Yes .. we know > > > so sorry my typo mistake > > it is not > > not > > hf/Lambda > > but > > h/lambda or hf/lambda (momentum !!!) > > I think you mean "h/lamda or hf/c" > > > (i respond quickly and have in my mind just the main arguments > > so such mistakes can occure > > in my **quick responds ** > > ***unlike** my main analysts in which i spend more time checking > > it !! > > and i noticed it before anyone to correct me (:-)) > > > so please MR PD ---as above > > just give us *your analysis **of it > > I've done this before for you .. its trivial > > Dimensions of momentum are > > [Mass] x [Length] x [Time]^-1 > > Dimensions of h are > > [Mass] x [Length]^2 x [Time]^-1 > > Dimensions of lambda are > > [Length] > > Dimensions of f are > > [Time]^-1 > > Dimensions of c are > > [Length] x [time]^-1 > > So h/lambda has dimensions > > [Mass] x [Length]^2 x [Time]^-1 / [Length] = [Mass] x [Length] x > [Time]^-1 > > So it is a valid momentum formula > > Similarly hf/c has dimensions > > ( [Mass] x [Length]^2 x [Time]^-1 ) x ( [Time]^-1 ) / ( [Length] x > [Time]-1 ) = [Mass] x [Length] x [Time]^-1 > > So it is a valid momentum formula > > (hopefully no typos there) > > That is a complete dimensional analysis. Do you understand it? ------------ psychopath crook with 3 different anonymous names DO YOU THINK THAT PD NEEDS YOUR FUCKEN crooked HELP?!! 2 NASTY PIGGY YOU 'FORGOT'' THE DIMENSION LESS FIGURES !!! (not accidentally (:-) so little Josef Goebbels jut let PD do it ** properly and honestly ** and completely to the last detail !! !! 'THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS' !!!) TIA to PD Y.Porat -------------------------------
From: artful on 25 Jun 2010 02:04 On Jun 25, 3:51 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 25, 7:02 am, artful <artful...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 25, 2:25 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > [snip] > > > > sorry Typo > > > he formula of photon momentum is > > > > h/Lambda !!! or hf/c!! > > > Yes .. we know > > > > yet please note > > > hf /c > > > IS A MOMENTUM FORMULA > > > Yes .. we know. You just said that > > > > SOPLEASE DONT BOGGLE OUR MIDS PRESENTING IT AS AN SORT OF ENERGY > > > FORMULA!! > > > I didn't. I gave a number of different equations for photon momentum, > > all equally valid > > > P = Mc = E/c = hf/c = h/lambda > > > > TH EMOMENT IT IS DIVIDED BY c > > > Yes .. we know .. you divide the energy of the photon by c. E = hf, > > so E/c = hf/c = momentum of the photon > > > > it isnot anymore an energy formula > > > but MOMENTUM FORMULA > > > Yes .. we know > > > > and it makes a principaldifference as you will see later because > > > momentum is not energy !!) > > > Yes .. we know > > > > so sorry my typo mistake > > > it is not > > > not > > > hf/Lambda > > > but > > > h/lambda or hf/lambda (momentum !!!) > > > I think you mean "h/lamda or hf/c" > > > > (i respond quickly and have in my mind just the main arguments > > > so such mistakes can occure > > > in my **quick responds ** > > > ***unlike** my main analysts in which i spend more time checking > > > it !! > > > and i noticed it before anyone to correct me (:-)) > > > > so please MR PD ---as above > > > just give us *your analysis **of it > > > I've done this before for you .. its trivial > > > Dimensions of momentum are > > > [Mass] x [Length] x [Time]^-1 > > > Dimensions of h are > > > [Mass] x [Length]^2 x [Time]^-1 > > > Dimensions of lambda are > > > [Length] > > > Dimensions of f are > > > [Time]^-1 > > > Dimensions of c are > > > [Length] x [time]^-1 > > > So h/lambda has dimensions > > > [Mass] x [Length]^2 x [Time]^-1 / [Length] = [Mass] x [Length] x > > [Time]^-1 > > > So it is a valid momentum formula > > > Similarly hf/c has dimensions > > > ( [Mass] x [Length]^2 x [Time]^-1 ) x ( [Time]^-1 ) / ( [Length] x > > [Time]-1 ) = [Mass] x [Length] x [Time]^-1 > > > So it is a valid momentum formula > > > (hopefully no typos there) > > > That is a complete dimensional analysis. Do you understand it? > > ------------ > psychopath crook Nope > with 3 different anonymous names As I've explained the reason for many time .. get over it. > DO YOU THINK THAT PD NEEDS YOUR FUCKEN crooked HELP?!! Yes .. you most certainly do > 2 > NASTY PIGGY > YOU 'FORGOT'' THE DIMENSION LESS > FIGURES !!! (not accidentally (:-) No .. I didn't FORGET them .. and it wasn't accidentally .. you asked for a DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS which does NOT include the dimensioless values .. only the dimensions. THAT is why it is called DIMENSIONAL analysis. Get it? Probably not. > so little Josef Goebbels Not me > jut let PD do it ** properly and honestly ** No need .. I already have done it properly and honestly .. But if he wants to do it again, he can. > and completely to the last detail !! !! Like I did. Complete and detailed. > 'THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS' !!!) Yes it is .. you seem to ignore details like: what is a dimensional analysis. > TIA to PD Note that even including a dimensionless number (so its no longer dimensional anlysis) does not change anything .. the value is arbitrary (depending on the units you use and the values of the variables involved). All you'll end up showing is what we already know .. photon momentum is proportional to frequency and inversely proportional to wavelength (with some unit-dependent ratio).
From: Y.Porat on 25 Jun 2010 03:47
On Jun 25, 8:04 am, artful <artful...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 25, 3:51 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jun 25, 7:02 am, artful <artful...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jun 25, 2:25 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > [snip] > > > > > sorry Typo > > > > he formula of photon momentum is > > > > > h/Lambda !!! or hf/c!! > > > > Yes .. we know > > > > > yet please note > > > > hf /c > > > > IS A MOMENTUM FORMULA > > > > Yes .. we know. You just said that > > > > > SOPLEASE DONT BOGGLE OUR MIDS PRESENTING IT AS AN SORT OF ENERGY > > > > FORMULA!! > > > > I didn't. I gave a number of different equations for photon momentum, > > > all equally valid > > > > P = Mc = E/c = hf/c = h/lambda > > > > > TH EMOMENT IT IS DIVIDED BY c > > > > Yes .. we know .. you divide the energy of the photon by c. E = hf, > > > so E/c = hf/c = momentum of the photon > > > > > it isnot anymore an energy formula > > > > but MOMENTUM FORMULA > > > > Yes .. we know > > > > > and it makes a principaldifference as you will see later because > > > > momentum is not energy !!) > > > > Yes .. we know > > > > > so sorry my typo mistake > > > > it is not > > > > not > > > > hf/Lambda > > > > but > > > > h/lambda or hf/lambda (momentum !!!) > > > > I think you mean "h/lamda or hf/c" > > > > > (i respond quickly and have in my mind just the main arguments > > > > so such mistakes can occure > > > > in my **quick responds ** > > > > ***unlike** my main analysts in which i spend more time checking > > > > it !! > > > > and i noticed it before anyone to correct me (:-)) > > > > > so please MR PD ---as above > > > > just give us *your analysis **of it > > > > I've done this before for you .. its trivial > > > > Dimensions of momentum are > > > > [Mass] x [Length] x [Time]^-1 > > > > Dimensions of h are > > > > [Mass] x [Length]^2 x [Time]^-1 > > > > Dimensions of lambda are > > > > [Length] > > > > Dimensions of f are > > > > [Time]^-1 > > > > Dimensions of c are > > > > [Length] x [time]^-1 > > > > So h/lambda has dimensions > > > > [Mass] x [Length]^2 x [Time]^-1 / [Length] = [Mass] x [Length] x > > > [Time]^-1 > > > > So it is a valid momentum formula > > > > Similarly hf/c has dimensions > > > > ( [Mass] x [Length]^2 x [Time]^-1 ) x ( [Time]^-1 ) / ( [Length] x > > > [Time]-1 ) = [Mass] x [Length] x [Time]^-1 > > > > So it is a valid momentum formula > > > > (hopefully no typos there) > > > > That is a complete dimensional analysis. Do you understand it? > > > ------------ > > psychopath crook > > Nope > > > with 3 different anonymous names > > As I've explained the reason for many time .. get over it. > > > DO YOU THINK THAT PD NEEDS YOUR FUCKEN crooked HELP?!! > > Yes .. you most certainly do > > > 2 > > NASTY PIGGY > > YOU 'FORGOT'' THE DIMENSION LESS > > FIGURES !!! (not accidentally (:-) > > No .. I didn't FORGET them .. and it wasn't accidentally .. you asked > for a DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS which does NOT include the dimensioless > values .. only the dimensions. THAT is why it is called DIMENSIONAL > analysis. Get it? Probably not. > > > so little Josef Goebbels > > Not me > > > jut let PD do it ** properly and honestly ** > > No need .. I already have done it properly and honestly .. But if he > wants to do it again, he can. > > > and completely to the last detail !! !! > > Like I did. Complete and detailed. > > > 'THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS' !!!) > > Yes it is .. you seem to ignore details like: what is a dimensional > analysis. > > > TIA to PD > > Note that even including a dimensionless number (so its no longer > dimensional anlysis) does not change anything .. the value is > arbitrary (depending on the units you use and the values of the > variables involved). All you'll end up showing is what we already > know .. photon momentum is proportional to frequency and inversely > proportional to wavelength (with some unit-dependent ratio). ------------------- i said that i have no intention todsicuss with little Josef Goebbels neat please not for the psycho pigshit anonymous and please include the dimension less figures that are indispensable for that analysis iow without them the --formula ***means nothing !! as a real physicist should know ! ****as its time for psycho pigshit (that wants to teach me physics and to obfuscate and to wast time ) ----to know it as well!!!**** as i said THE DEVIL IS IN THE DE TALES!! not for little pigshits !!! so next please to PD TIA Y.Porat -------------------------------------- |