Radio Waves, Photons, and Wave Speed.
in [Relativity]
|
From: Sam Wormley on 23 Dec 2009 14:03 On 12/23/09 10:59 AM, Ralph Garbage wrote: > On Dec 23, 8:44 am, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> On 12/23/09 10:32 AM, Ralph Garbage wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Dec 23, 7:28 am, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On 12/23/09 9:15 AM, Ralph Garbage wrote: >> >>>>> NO! >>>>> I'M rubber and YOU'RE glue... (i.e. I bounce and YOU stick) >> >>>> True! You can't stay grounded Ralph--You bounce from >>>> misunderstanding to misunderstanding and unable to use >>>> mathematics correctly... no wonder you identify with >>>> rubber. >> >>>> I stick to principles of physics and you bounce about >>>> like an untutored fool! >> >>> Hitting the 'nog a bit early, are we? >>> You want to try again? >> >>> In the mean time: >>> Henry Wilson DSc is a GOD! >>> A GOD I say! >> >> Gods only exist in some people's minds.... get over it. > > Your unsupported declarations are meaningless. > The only things of true significance is what goes on in Henry Wilson > DSc's mind! Avail yourself of his great wisdom and let it sink in. > All Hail Henry Wilson DSc!! I'll bet before you morphed in to henri/henry, you got down on your knees to worship A. Einstein!
From: dlzc on 23 Dec 2009 14:12 Dear jmfbahciv: On Dec 22, 7:32 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv(a)aol> wrote: > dlzc wrote: > > On Dec 21, 5:57 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv(a)aol> wrote: > > ... > >> As somebody who is "geometry- > >> challenged", it is difficult to > >> think about light. I keep looking > >> at a crystal ball I have which > >> makes things appear upsidedown. > >> Even though I see the effect of > >> light going through the crystal, > >> I can't seem to get my brain to > >> "see" the geometry in my head > >> without paper and pencil. Trying > >> to "see" something that appears > >> as a particle and a wave at the > >> same time is very difficult. I > >> have similar problems with > >> fields in 3D. > > > That is the problem with our > > brains. We have to define the > > present in terms of the past, > > rather than realizing the brain > > of a child apperceives reality > > without having to carry that > > baggage around. Look to a new > > experience. No quantum object is > > either localized and brittle as a > > billiard ball, nor is it part of > > some infinitely divisible whole. > > The conundrum and quandry is based > > on our macroscopic prejudice. > > Sure. I also think the geometry > problems I have are hardware > problems. ;-) > > > You have seen the large "funnels" > > that you can place coins in that > > will spin around and around, to > > ultimately end up as a donation > > in a cup in its "black hole"? > > No, I don't think I've seen those. They were used as donation collectors in grocery stores for about 15 years, but I have not seen many on a few years. Here is one: http://www.spiralwishingwells.com/guide/physics.html > Are you talking about something > like an exhibit I saw at Chicago's > Museum of Science and Industry in > its math section? it had a huge > inverted cone-shaped platform (it > wasn't a cone but I can't think of > the correct term). Every 5 maybe > 10 minutes a steel ball would drop > and the ball would travel through > arcs on this platform. Eventually > the arcs would be shorter and > shorter and the ball would drop > through the narrow cone piece. > > > You can form a "wavefront" of > > coins and achieve all sorts > > "optical" phenomenon. > > > Wave models allow us to model > > really huge numbers of photons, > > and achieve a desired result. > > They are handy approximations. > > They are tools. Put down the > > hammer, and stop seeing the world > > around you as comprised of nails... > > ;>) > > Or screws :-). > > My mother just gave me one of the > two gyroscopes that Dad bought > when we were kids. I was going to > use it to play physics. She gave > me the busted one :-(. Seems like all the good toy stores are gone (FAO Schwartz and Sharper Image) near me, so that leaves on-line... > those things are another example > of puzzlement :-). I just want to know how waterfalls make ozone... David A. Smith
From: eric gisse on 23 Dec 2009 15:11 Benj wrote: [...] Such confidence for knowing so little.
From: Ralph Garbage on 23 Dec 2009 15:37 On Dec 23, 6:20 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > "Ralph Garbage" <ralph.rabbi...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:e3ecd4b3-4258-415d-b38a-37e6824966c8(a)u18g2000pro.googlegroups.com... > > > > > On Dec 23, 5:23 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > >> "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > >>news:25bb5813-c866-4c89-b7ce-f8f7f96e64cb(a)m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com.... > > >> > On Dec 23, 1:59 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > >> >> "Ralph Garbage" <ralph.rabbi...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > >> >>news:a6f48879-e9b4-496f-8384-91a9adc2a959(a)w19g2000pre.googlegroups.com... > > >> >> > On Dec 22, 3:36 am, "Paul B. Andersen" > >> >> > <paul.b.ander...(a)somewhere.no> > >> >> > wrote: > >> >> >> On 22.12.2009 11:49, Henry Wilson DSc wrote: > > >> >> >> > On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:03:59 +0100, "Paul B. Andersen" > >> >> >> > <paul.b.ander...(a)somewhere.no> wrote: > > >> >> >> >> On 21.12.2009 01:38, Henry Wilson DSc wrote: > >> >> >> >>> There are still some people here who believe that a radio wave > >> >> >> >>> is > >> >> >> >>> of > >> >> >> >>> similar > >> >> >> >>> nature to a gamma particle and consists of a single photon. > >> >> >> >>> Others > >> >> >> >>> think it is > >> >> >> >>> a Maxwellian type wave in an aether. How naive. > > >> >> >> >>> I suggest that a radio wave is made by modulating the emission > >> >> >> >>> rate > >> >> >> >>> of a great > >> >> >> >>> many 'white' photons. The 'wave' is determined by varying the > >> >> >> >>> photon > >> >> >> >>> energy > >> >> >> >>> density and is projected over a wide angle at c wrt the > >> >> >> >>> broadcasting > >> >> >> >>> antenna. > > >> >> >> >> This is WILSON'S RADIATION LAW again, isn't it? > >> >> >> >> Or has the law changed? > >> >> >> >> Is RABBIDGE'S RADIATION LAW different? > > >> >> >> >> |Dr. Henri Wilson wrote March 26, 2009: > >> >> >> >> || On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 22:38:59 +0100, "Paul B. Andersen" > >> >> >> >> ||<paul.b.ander...(a)somewhere.no> wrote: > >> >> >> >> || > >> >> >> >> ||| Dr. Henri Wilson wrote: > >> >> >> >> |||| Radio signals use photon density variations for waveform > >> >> >> >> definition....... > >> >> >> >> |||| WILSON'S RADIATION LAW. > >> >> >> >> ||| > >> >> >> >> ||| OK, Henri. > >> >> >> >> ||| Apply 'WILSON'S RADIATION LAW' on this real world example: > >> >> >> >> ||| > >> >> >> >> ||| In the interstellar medium there are regions of cold > >> >> >> >> hydrogen. > >> >> >> >> ||| (Just about all the atoms are in ground state.) > >> >> >> >> ||| From this hydrogen, we receive a 21 cm EM radiation. > >> >> >> >> ||| We know that this radiation comes from the superfine > >> >> >> >> transition > >> >> >> >> ||| associated with spin reversal of the electron in ground > >> >> >> >> state. > >> >> >> >> ||| (The same as is used in hydrogen atomic clocks.) > >> >> >> >> ||| When the spin reverses, a single photon is emitted/absorbed. > >> >> >> >> ||| This process is stochastic, and on average each atom > >> >> >> >> experiences > >> >> >> >> ||| a transition once per ~10 million years. Since the density > >> >> >> >> is > >> >> >> >> ||| in the order of 30 atoms per cm^3, and one period of the > >> >> >> >> radiation > >> >> >> >> ||| is 0.7 ns, a bit calculation will show that you must have a > >> >> >> >> volume > >> >> >> >> ||| of 10^7 km^3 (a cube with 215 km sides) to have a 50% > >> >> >> >> probability > >> >> >> >> ||| for a transitions to take place within a specific period. > >> >> >> >> ||| This means that there are hundreds of km between two atoms > >> >> >> >> emitting > >> >> >> >> ||| a photon within the same period. > >> >> >> >> ||| > >> >> >> >> ||| How come these randomly emitted photons from far apart atoms > >> >> >> >> ||| arrange themselves in a wavelike density distribution with > >> >> >> >> ||| exactly 21 cm wavelength? > >> >> >> >> || > >> >> >> >> || They don't, dopey. They don't have to. The individual photons > >> >> >> >> have > >> >> >> >> that > >> >> >> >> || intrinsic wavelength. > >> >> >> >> | > >> >> >> >> | We agree, then. > >> >> >> >> | What reaches the antenna is a flow of randomly spaced photons > >> >> >> >> | with no wavelike density distribution. The wavelength is an > >> >> >> >> | aspect of every photon. > >> >> >> >> | > >> >> >> >> | So why did you previously say: > >> >> >> >> | "Radio signals use photon density variations for waveform > >> >> >> >> definition" > >> >> >> >> | when you now say it is wrong? > >> >> >> >> || > >> >> >> >> ||| Is there a drill sergeant? > >> >> >> >> || > >> >> >> >> || This is not the same process as that which occurs when a high > >> >> >> >> frequency AC > >> >> >> >> || current moves around an antenna. Do you understand radiation > >> >> >> >> from > >> >> >> >> an > >> >> >> >> || accelerating charge? > >> >> >> >> | > >> >> >> >> | So if we receive 21 cm radiation emitted from an antenna, > >> >> >> >> | photon density variations is used for waveform definition, > >> >> >> >> | but if we receive 21 cm radiation from hydrogen, there > >> >> >> >> | is no photon density variation, but the waveform is an aspect > >> >> >> >> | of the photons. > > >> >> >> > correct... > > >> >> >> SIC!!!!! :-) > > >> >> >> >> Hilarious, no? > > >> >> >> > not really. No. > > >> >> >> So Ralph Rabbidge doesn't realize how hilarious his giant > >> >> >> self-contradistinctions are. > > >> >> >> This Rabbidge fellow isn't very bright, is he? :-) > > >> >> > Henry Wilson DSc is really really genius! > >> >> > You couldn't even come close to challenging his powerful mind. > > >> >> BAHAHAHAHA .. hysterical > > >> > ------------------ > >> > psychopath!! > > >> So .. you're going to stalk me posting insults now .. how childish of > >> you. > >> not really different to your usual behavior actually. > > > He obviously just took exception to your hysterical comment, and > > worships Henry Wilson DSc as soon EVERYONE will! > > Henry Wilson DSc rules! > > BAHAHAHAHHA. No .. he's just a senile old psycho stalker (Porat, that is, > not Henry .. but then, on second thoughts....) On second thought you recognize the brilliance, majesty and pageantry of Henry Wilson DSc!!
From: Ralph Garbage on 23 Dec 2009 14:56
On Dec 23, 11:03 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 12/23/09 10:59 AM, Ralph Garbage wrote: > > > > > On Dec 23, 8:44 am, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 12/23/09 10:32 AM, Ralph Garbage wrote: > > >>> On Dec 23, 7:28 am, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> On 12/23/09 9:15 AM, Ralph Garbage wrote: > > >>>>> NO! > >>>>> I'M rubber and YOU'RE glue... (i.e. I bounce and YOU stick) > > >>>> True! You can't stay grounded Ralph--You bounce from > >>>> misunderstanding to misunderstanding and unable to use > >>>> mathematics correctly... no wonder you identify with > >>>> rubber. > > >>>> I stick to principles of physics and you bounce about > >>>> like an untutored fool! > > >>> Hitting the 'nog a bit early, are we? > >>> You want to try again? > > >>> In the mean time: > >>> Henry Wilson DSc is a GOD! > >>> A GOD I say! > > >> Gods only exist in some people's minds.... get over it. > > > Your unsupported declarations are meaningless. > > The only things of true significance is what goes on in Henry Wilson > > DSc's mind! Avail yourself of his great wisdom and let it sink in. > > All Hail Henry Wilson DSc!! > > I'll bet before you morphed in to henri/henry, you got down > on your knees to worship A. Einstein! Morphed in to henri/henry? I dream of being worthy enough to carry the water of the Great Henry Wilson DSc! Worship Einstein? Hah! That SciFi writer? You've got to be kidding me!! |