Why against Stern-Gerlach experiment photons are said to be spin 1?
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Recent exchanges Sam Wormly, Uncle Al and johnreed
Next: STOP LHC. A call to reasonable people all over the world.
From: Darwin123 on 24 Nov 2009 00:41 On Nov 23, 10:16 am, Jarek Duda <duda...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > According to the Standard Model, the neutrino is a fundamental > > chargeless particle, so it should not have a magnetic dipole moment. > > If it ever was discovered that the neutrino has a finite magnetic > > dipole moment, it would be back to the drawing board. > > I've looked at a few papers and they were rather saying something > different...http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0601113 Do they say the photon is amde of particles with a nonzero electric charge? If they don't say that, then they won't support your conclusion. The reason a photon doesn't have a magnetic dipole is simply that it is not made of electric charges. I think I have more objections to the people who don't give you the simple answer you seek. Answer: No electric charges, no magnetic dipole. It is that simple. The standard model, relativity, etc. etc. have nothing to do with it. Stern and Gerlach never even asked about light since they knew light doesn't carry an electric charge. That is the answer. Please say you are happy to receive it |:-)
From: Jarek Duda on 24 Nov 2009 02:27 Darwin, thanks You for the answers, but still ... Magnetic field can be created by 'going around' or 'spinning' charges but neutrino is believed to have magnetic moment, but it clearly doesn't apply to these categories. http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0601113 The simplest/lightest fermion - neutrino is kind of 'pure spin', but we have no such 'pure charge' particle - electron is much heavier and requires also spin. That suggest that maybe it's not charge what is fundamental, but rather spin ... and neutrino suggest that this spin goes with (extremely weak) magnetic field - it's third, separate way. What is spin? I see there is large confusion of it with angular momentum. Quantum rotation operator says that spin means that quantum phase makes topological singularity of 'spin' degree around spin axis, like in this demonstration http://demonstrations.wolfram.com/SeparationOfTopologicalSingularities/ Property of waves to carry angular momentum is something different - it makes it twist-like traveling wave. For example tornado/swirl carries angular momentum, but doesn't need topological singularity - it's just rotation around the center.
From: Y.Porat on 24 Nov 2009 03:43 On Nov 23, 5:03 pm, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > On Nov 19, 4:30 pm, Jarek Duda <duda...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I never said it was. I said you needed both in order to have a > > > magnetic dipole moment. > > > So what about neutrino? > > According to the Standard Model, the neutrino is a fundamental > chargeless particle, so it should not have a magnetic dipole moment. > If it ever was discovered that the neutrino has a finite magnetic > dipole moment, it would be back to the drawing board. ------------- and you Igor forgot to tell us that a very long time the neutrino was considered massless (as your brain) but only much later the glassless -- became massive!! the fact that some mass is hard to detect doe snot mean it doe snot exist it is just out fault not to be able to find it but there is a new golden rule in physics that should be a light tower: NO MASS - NO REAL PHYSICS !! one day even a block head like you will get it (or may be even discover it himself ?? (:-) and only while it wil be discovered by a dumb mathematician like you (only you !!).. only then you will come out trumpeting it out (:-) Y.Porat -------------------------------------------
From: Igor on 24 Nov 2009 16:09 On Nov 23, 10:16 am, Jarek Duda <duda...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > According to the Standard Model, the neutrino is a fundamental > > chargeless particle, so it should not have a magnetic dipole moment. > > If it ever was discovered that the neutrino has a finite magnetic > > dipole moment, it would be back to the drawing board. > > I've looked at a few papers and they were rather saying something > different...http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0601113 If you notice, that paper doesn't actually say that the neutrino has a magnetic moment. It only provides a theoretical upper bound based on the most current observations. It's a lot like similar papers on the upper limit on photon mass.
From: Igor on 24 Nov 2009 16:11
On Nov 23, 12:26 pm, cjcountess <cjcount...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Electrons ARE "accelerated photons". They are the high end of the EM > spectrum, which is not only the electromagnetic, but the energy/matter > spectrum, where (E=hf/c^2) = (E=mc^2), or as deBroglie stated, > (E=hf=mc^2). > > See:http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dsn5q6f_101hgtjv9fb&hl=en > > Conrad J Countess Wow! That's pretty amazing! Merely by accelerating a massless particle, we're able to provide it with both mass and charge. Your post is just plain ridiculous. |