Light speed is constan "c". I am puzzled
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: is light/radiative energy potential or kinetic or both?
Next: Timerate is a Slow C in gravity by Gamma mathematics
From: Brad Guth on 18 Feb 2010 14:05 On Feb 18, 10:40 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Feb 18, 1:08 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 17, 5:16 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Feb 17, 5:09 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 17, 7:38 am, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Feb 15, 10:46 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Feb 15, 4:34 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Feb 15, 12:03 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > The aether does have mass. Matter and aether are different states of > > > > > > > > the same material. > > > > > > > > > The mass associated with the photons have replaced the electrons. > > > > > > > > That's exactly what I'm thinking has to be taking place, and therefore > > > > > > > the mass of those photons can be directly accounted for by simply > > > > > > > counting each and every electron produced by a given PV panel.. > > > > > > > > If a PV panel were 20% efficient and had an average of 340 watts/m2 > > > > > > > coming into its band-gap cells = 68 watts or watt hour of electrons/ > > > > > > > m2, times 24 = 1.632 kw.h/day, times 365 = 595.68 kw.h/year. > > > > > > > > 1 watt second or Joule = 6.24151e18 electrons per second > > > > > > > > 68 w.h = 2.448e5 w.s or Joules > > > > > > > > Of course photons offer all different kinds of energy from near zero > > > > > > > at the near zero frequency of gravity, <6.626e34 J.s or 4.135667e-15 > > > > > > > eV or 6.626e-27 erg.s at the Planck frequency or its wavelength, and > > > > > > > somehow every m3 of this universe safely contains it all at the same > > > > > > > time. If all photons were the exact same monochromatic wavelength, as > > > > > > > such it would make for calculating the average photon mass a whole lot > > > > > > > easier. > > > > > > > > ~ BG > > > > > > > We are agreeing on something fundamentally new. We are both saying the > > > > > > quantum of aether associated with the photon is physically being added > > > > > > to and physically occupy three dimensional space within the metal and > > > > > > it is this physical addition of aether by the photons to the metal > > > > > > that is causing the electrons to be emitted. We are both also saying > > > > > > whether a photon exists as a self-contained entity or not, the mass > > > > > > associated with this quantum of aether now exists within the metal. > > > > > > > Correct? > > > > > > I believe so. > > > > > Cool. > > > > > > Where's our Nobel? > > > > > > ~ BG- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > Where is the photon in light's waves? > > > > Is the photon in the electric or magnetic field? > > > > Einstein questioned what he won the Nobel Prize for. > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > Photons from zero Hz to Planck Hz exist, perhaps <1e100 of such > > photons/atom. > > > Perhaps the 98% missing mass of the LHC smashed proton is simply > > Planck photons. > > > What's your best swag? > > > ~ BG > > Aether and matter are different states of the same material. > > 'DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT? By A. > EINSTEIN'http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf > > "If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass > diminishes by L/c2." > > The mass of the body does diminish, but the matter which no longer > exists as part of the body has not vanished. It still exists, as > aether. As the matter transitions to aether it expands in three > dimensions. The effect this transition has on the surrounding aether > and matter is energy. > > Even though there is nothing fundamentally incorrect about thinking of > the missing mass as photons we can't know if photons exist as > individual particles when at rest with respect to the aether. > > I think it is more conceptually correct to simply refer to the missing > mass as aether. OK by me, but I still prefer to give photons their fair share of mass, especially when considering how many exist and are otherwise being continually created on the fly, so to speak, as whatever mass gets converted back and forth creates those trillions upon trillions upon trillions of photons/picosec, and those go on to create recoil/ secondary photons by the cubic if not greater, whereas whatever atomic or molecular mass remains the same. ~ BG
From: Brad Guth on 18 Feb 2010 14:09 On Feb 18, 10:25 am, Double-A <double...(a)hush.com> wrote: > On Feb 18, 10:08 am, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 17, 5:16 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Feb 17, 5:09 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 17, 7:38 am, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Feb 15, 10:46 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Feb 15, 4:34 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Feb 15, 12:03 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > The aether does have mass. Matter and aether are different states of > > > > > > > > the same material. > > > > > > > > > The mass associated with the photons have replaced the electrons. > > > > > > > > That's exactly what I'm thinking has to be taking place, and therefore > > > > > > > the mass of those photons can be directly accounted for by simply > > > > > > > counting each and every electron produced by a given PV panel.. > > > > > > > > If a PV panel were 20% efficient and had an average of 340 watts/m2 > > > > > > > coming into its band-gap cells = 68 watts or watt hour of electrons/ > > > > > > > m2, times 24 = 1.632 kw.h/day, times 365 = 595.68 kw.h/year. > > > > > > > > 1 watt second or Joule = 6.24151e18 electrons per second > > > > > > > > 68 w.h = 2.448e5 w.s or Joules > > > > > > > > Of course photons offer all different kinds of energy from near zero > > > > > > > at the near zero frequency of gravity, <6.626e34 J.s or 4.135667e-15 > > > > > > > eV or 6.626e-27 erg.s at the Planck frequency or its wavelength, and > > > > > > > somehow every m3 of this universe safely contains it all at the same > > > > > > > time. If all photons were the exact same monochromatic wavelength, as > > > > > > > such it would make for calculating the average photon mass a whole lot > > > > > > > easier. > > > > > > > > ~ BG > > > > > > > We are agreeing on something fundamentally new. We are both saying the > > > > > > quantum of aether associated with the photon is physically being added > > > > > > to and physically occupy three dimensional space within the metal and > > > > > > it is this physical addition of aether by the photons to the metal > > > > > > that is causing the electrons to be emitted. We are both also saying > > > > > > whether a photon exists as a self-contained entity or not, the mass > > > > > > associated with this quantum of aether now exists within the metal. > > > > > > > Correct? > > > > > > I believe so. > > > > > Cool. > > > > > > Where's our Nobel? > > > > > > ~ BG- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > Where is the photon in light's waves? > > > > Is the photon in the electric or magnetic field? > > > > Einstein questioned what he won the Nobel Prize for. > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > Photons from zero Hz to Planck Hz exist, perhaps <1e100 of such > > photons/atom. > > > Perhaps the 98% missing mass of the LHC smashed proton is simply > > Planck photons. > > > What's your best swag? > > > ~ BG > > Sub-Planck photons are black holes. > > Double-A That makes perfect sense, just like electrons and positrons are the next best things to their being black holes. Perhaps this is why LHC doesn't dare circulate and smash electrons into one another, out of a justified fear of creating larger black holes. ~ BG
From: mpc755 on 18 Feb 2010 14:51 In article <e91929d1-b8b0-4f5f-81da- 7c289ad5b44c(a)v20g2000prb.googlegroups.com>, bradguth(a)gmail.com says... > > On Feb 18, 10:40 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On Feb 18, 1:08 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Feb 17, 5:16 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Feb 17, 5:09 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Feb 17, 7:38 am, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Feb 15, 10:46 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Feb 15, 4:34 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 15, 12:03 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > The aether does have mass. Matter and aether are different states of > > > > > > > > > the same material. > > > > > > > > > > > The mass associated with the photons have replaced the electrons. > > > > > > > > > > That's exactly what I'm thinking has to be taking place, and therefore > > > > > > > > the mass of those photons can be directly accounted for by simply > > > > > > > > counting each and every electron produced by a given PV panel. > > > > > > > > > > If a PV panel were 20% efficient and had an average of 340 watts/m2 > > > > > > > > coming into its band-gap cells = 68 watts or watt hour of electrons/ > > > > > > > > m2, times 24 = 1.632 kw.h/day, times 365 = 595.68 kw.h/year. > > > > > > > > > > 1 watt second or Joule = 6.24151e18 electrons per second > > > > > > > > > > 68 w.h = 2.448e5 w.s or Joules > > > > > > > > > > Of course photons offer all different kinds of energy from near zero > > > > > > > > at the near zero frequency of gravity, <6.626e34 J.s or 4.135667e-15 > > > > > > > > eV or 6.626e-27 erg.s at the Planck frequency or its wavelength, and > > > > > > > > somehow every m3 of this universe safely contains it all at the same > > > > > > > > time. If all photons were the exact same monochromatic wavelength, as > > > > > > > > such it would make for calculating the average photon mass a whole lot > > > > > > > > easier. > > > > > > > > > > ~ BG > > > > > > > > > We are agreeing on something fundamentally new. We are both saying the > > > > > > > quantum of aether associated with the photon is physically being added > > > > > > > to and physically occupy three dimensional space within the metal and > > > > > > > it is this physical addition of aether by the photons to the metal > > > > > > > that is causing the electrons to be emitted. We are both also saying > > > > > > > whether a photon exists as a self-contained entity or not, the mass > > > > > > > associated with this quantum of aether now exists within the metal. > > > > > > > > > Correct? > > > > > > > > I believe so. > > > > > > > Cool. > > > > > > > > Where's our Nobel? > > > > > > > > ~ BG- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > Where is the photon in light's waves? > > > > > > Is the photon in the electric or magnetic field? > > > > > > Einstein questioned what he won the Nobel Prize for. > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > Photons from zero Hz to Planck Hz exist, perhaps <1e100 of such > > > photons/atom. > > > > > Perhaps the 98% missing mass of the LHC smashed proton is simply > > > Planck photons. > > > > > What's your best swag? > > > > > ~ BG > > > > Aether and matter are different states of the same material. > > > > 'DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT? By A. > > EINSTEIN'http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf > > > > "If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass > > diminishes by L/c2." > > > > The mass of the body does diminish, but the matter which no longer > > exists as part of the body has not vanished. It still exists, as > > aether. As the matter transitions to aether it expands in three > > dimensions. The effect this transition has on the surrounding aether > > and matter is energy. > > > > Even though there is nothing fundamentally incorrect about thinking of > > the missing mass as photons we can't know if photons exist as > > individual particles when at rest with respect to the aether. > > > > I think it is more conceptually correct to simply refer to the missing > > mass as aether. > > OK by me, but I still prefer to give photons their fair share of mass, > especially when considering how many exist and are otherwise being > continually created on the fly, so to speak, as whatever mass gets > converted back and forth creates those trillions upon trillions upon > trillions of photons/picosec, and those go on to create recoil/ > secondary photons by the cubic if not greater, whereas whatever atomic > or molecular mass remains the same. > > ~ BG Photons get their fair share of mass when they are detected as a quantum of aether.
From: Brad Guth on 18 Feb 2010 15:19 On Feb 18, 11:51 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > In article <e91929d1-b8b0-4f5f-81da- > 7c289ad5b...(a)v20g2000prb.googlegroups.com>, bradg...(a)gmail.com says... > > > > > > > On Feb 18, 10:40 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Feb 18, 1:08 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 17, 5:16 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Feb 17, 5:09 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Feb 17, 7:38 am, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Feb 15, 10:46 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Feb 15, 4:34 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 15, 12:03 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The aether does have mass. Matter and aether are different states of > > > > > > > > > > the same material. > > > > > > > > > > > The mass associated with the photons have replaced the electrons. > > > > > > > > > > That's exactly what I'm thinking has to be taking place, and therefore > > > > > > > > > the mass of those photons can be directly accounted for by simply > > > > > > > > > counting each and every electron produced by a given PV panel. > > > > > > > > > > If a PV panel were 20% efficient and had an average of 340 watts/m2 > > > > > > > > > coming into its band-gap cells = 68 watts or watt hour of electrons/ > > > > > > > > > m2, times 24 = 1.632 kw.h/day, times 365 = 595.68 kw.h/year. > > > > > > > > > > 1 watt second or Joule = 6.24151e18 electrons per second > > > > > > > > > > 68 w.h = 2.448e5 w.s or Joules > > > > > > > > > > Of course photons offer all different kinds of energy from near zero > > > > > > > > > at the near zero frequency of gravity, <6.626e34 J.s or 4..135667e-15 > > > > > > > > > eV or 6.626e-27 erg.s at the Planck frequency or its wavelength, and > > > > > > > > > somehow every m3 of this universe safely contains it all at the same > > > > > > > > > time. If all photons were the exact same monochromatic wavelength, as > > > > > > > > > such it would make for calculating the average photon mass a whole lot > > > > > > > > > easier. > > > > > > > > > > ~ BG > > > > > > > > > We are agreeing on something fundamentally new. We are both saying the > > > > > > > > quantum of aether associated with the photon is physically being added > > > > > > > > to and physically occupy three dimensional space within the metal and > > > > > > > > it is this physical addition of aether by the photons to the metal > > > > > > > > that is causing the electrons to be emitted. We are both also saying > > > > > > > > whether a photon exists as a self-contained entity or not, the mass > > > > > > > > associated with this quantum of aether now exists within the metal. > > > > > > > > > Correct? > > > > > > > > I believe so. > > > > > > > Cool. > > > > > > > > Where's our Nobel? > > > > > > > > ~ BG- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > Where is the photon in light's waves? > > > > > > Is the photon in the electric or magnetic field? > > > > > > Einstein questioned what he won the Nobel Prize for. > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > Photons from zero Hz to Planck Hz exist, perhaps <1e100 of such > > > > photons/atom. > > > > > Perhaps the 98% missing mass of the LHC smashed proton is simply > > > > Planck photons. > > > > > What's your best swag? > > > > > ~ BG > > > > Aether and matter are different states of the same material. > > > > 'DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT? By A. > > > EINSTEIN'http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf > > > > "If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass > > > diminishes by L/c2." > > > > The mass of the body does diminish, but the matter which no longer > > > exists as part of the body has not vanished. It still exists, as > > > aether. As the matter transitions to aether it expands in three > > > dimensions. The effect this transition has on the surrounding aether > > > and matter is energy. > > > > Even though there is nothing fundamentally incorrect about thinking of > > > the missing mass as photons we can't know if photons exist as > > > individual particles when at rest with respect to the aether. > > > > I think it is more conceptually correct to simply refer to the missing > > > mass as aether. > > > OK by me, but I still prefer to give photons their fair share of mass, > > especially when considering how many exist and are otherwise being > > continually created on the fly, so to speak, as whatever mass gets > > converted back and forth creates those trillions upon trillions upon > > trillions of photons/picosec, and those go on to create recoil/ > > secondary photons by the cubic if not greater, whereas whatever > > atomic or molecular mass remains the same. > > > ~ BG > > Photons get their fair share of mass when they are detected as a quantum > of aether. Whatever make you a happy camper. How point-source worthy is this aether? because the volumetric point or tail end of a photon wave or the cross sectional area of a photon quantum string is really small. ~ BG
From: mpc755 on 18 Feb 2010 15:41
On Feb 18, 3:19 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Feb 18, 11:51 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > In article <e91929d1-b8b0-4f5f-81da- > > 7c289ad5b...(a)v20g2000prb.googlegroups.com>, bradg...(a)gmail.com says... > > > > On Feb 18, 10:40 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Feb 18, 1:08 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Feb 17, 5:16 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Feb 17, 5:09 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Feb 17, 7:38 am, Brad Guth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Feb 15, 10:46 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 15, 4:34 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 15, 12:03 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > The aether does have mass. Matter and aether are different states of > > > > > > > > > > > the same material. > > > > > > > > > > > > The mass associated with the photons have replaced the electrons. > > > > > > > > > > > That's exactly what I'm thinking has to be taking place, and therefore > > > > > > > > > > the mass of those photons can be directly accounted for by simply > > > > > > > > > > counting each and every electron produced by a given PV panel. > > > > > > > > > > > If a PV panel were 20% efficient and had an average of 340 watts/m2 > > > > > > > > > > coming into its band-gap cells = 68 watts or watt hour of electrons/ > > > > > > > > > > m2, times 24 = 1.632 kw.h/day, times 365 = 595.68 kw.h/year. > > > > > > > > > > > 1 watt second or Joule = 6.24151e18 electrons per second > > > > > > > > > > > 68 w.h = 2.448e5 w.s or Joules > > > > > > > > > > > Of course photons offer all different kinds of energy from near zero > > > > > > > > > > at the near zero frequency of gravity, <6.626e34 J.s or 4.135667e-15 > > > > > > > > > > eV or 6.626e-27 erg.s at the Planck frequency or its wavelength, and > > > > > > > > > > somehow every m3 of this universe safely contains it all at the same > > > > > > > > > > time. If all photons were the exact same monochromatic wavelength, as > > > > > > > > > > such it would make for calculating the average photon mass a whole lot > > > > > > > > > > easier. > > > > > > > > > > > ~ BG > > > > > > > > > > We are agreeing on something fundamentally new. We are both saying the > > > > > > > > > quantum of aether associated with the photon is physically being added > > > > > > > > > to and physically occupy three dimensional space within the metal and > > > > > > > > > it is this physical addition of aether by the photons to the metal > > > > > > > > > that is causing the electrons to be emitted. We are both also saying > > > > > > > > > whether a photon exists as a self-contained entity or not, the mass > > > > > > > > > associated with this quantum of aether now exists within the metal. > > > > > > > > > > Correct? > > > > > > > > > I believe so. > > > > > > > > Cool. > > > > > > > > > Where's our Nobel? > > > > > > > > > ~ BG- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > Where is the photon in light's waves? > > > > > > > Is the photon in the electric or magnetic field? > > > > > > > Einstein questioned what he won the Nobel Prize for. > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > Photons from zero Hz to Planck Hz exist, perhaps <1e100 of such > > > > > photons/atom. > > > > > > Perhaps the 98% missing mass of the LHC smashed proton is simply > > > > > Planck photons. > > > > > > What's your best swag? > > > > > > ~ BG > > > > > Aether and matter are different states of the same material. > > > > > 'DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT? By A. > > > > EINSTEIN'http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf > > > > > "If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass > > > > diminishes by L/c2." > > > > > The mass of the body does diminish, but the matter which no longer > > > > exists as part of the body has not vanished. It still exists, as > > > > aether. As the matter transitions to aether it expands in three > > > > dimensions. The effect this transition has on the surrounding aether > > > > and matter is energy. > > > > > Even though there is nothing fundamentally incorrect about thinking of > > > > the missing mass as photons we can't know if photons exist as > > > > individual particles when at rest with respect to the aether. > > > > > I think it is more conceptually correct to simply refer to the missing > > > > mass as aether. > > > > OK by me, but I still prefer to give photons their fair share of mass, > > > especially when considering how many exist and are otherwise being > > > continually created on the fly, so to speak, as whatever mass gets > > > converted back and forth creates those trillions upon trillions upon > > > trillions of photons/picosec, and those go on to create recoil/ > > > secondary photons by the cubic if not greater, whereas whatever > > > atomic or molecular mass remains the same. > > > > ~ BG > > > Photons get their fair share of mass when they are detected as a quantum > > of aether. > > Whatever make you a happy camper. > > How point-source worthy is this aether? because the volumetric point > or tail end of a photon wave or the cross sectional area of a photon > quantum string is really small. > > ~ BG No idea. |