Will Porat answer?
in [Relativity]
|
From: Inertial on 28 Mar 2010 23:00 "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:f24aeed9-55f1-4d32-8724-b4ae2bb0a931(a)35g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... > On Mar 28, 10:11 am, >> it is in the thread that was** initiated and leaded** by me y.p >> that is called >> A COPYRIGHT QUESTION' >> from 20 Feb 2010 >> but actually it was me that leaded it to look for the smallest photon >> energy >> here is the quote >> it was first said by Ben 699 >> not by Inertial : >> >> quote >> I think that you are just trying to smooth the creation instant and >> change it from a discontinuous event into a continuous one. If you >> imagine that smoothing taking place within that first quantum of time >> in our framework. Ie its transition from creation to moving at speed >> c, then I can't really argue against that (physicists might?) as no >> one really knows what happens within one quantum of time or space. But >> after creation when Maxwell's equation apply, it must be moving at >> speed c for the whole time we know it is travelling in our framework. >> Which is why it is said to be an instantaneous creation. >> >> > 2 >> > we know that E=hf is describing well the amount of energy in big >> > (actually huge number of real units ) quantities >> > many many photons carry >> > yet a gain we dont know what is that >> > 'many many' quantitatively >> >> E=hf applies to a single photon. >> end of quote >> he BEN said it before the monkey thief Inertial >> he said it **just one post before Artful ** !! >> >> anyone can see it in MY thread >> 'A copyright question '' >> from 20 Feb!! >> ------------- >> >> yet still all of the insisted alllalong the many >> threads >> (THAT I Y P INITIATED ) --- >> (and even this very moment >> >> that the definition for the single photon is >> >> hf !!! >> so if Ben is as well Artful !! >> then it was Artful that said it first >> if no >> it is Ben >> and Artful is a Nazi Goebbels lier >> btw >> ( i will keep looking in those thread if it was me that said it i >> some wayeven before Ben >> i ddint invest too much to find it out >> anyway >> it was me who first time defined the single smallest >> photon ENERGY!! >> as >> E =hf n >> WHILE >> 0 > n ,,,,,,1.00000 >> (Plank time is included in that defintion >> in any case it is obvious that it was me >> who leaded the whole development !! >> and at he bottom lne i did it right >> while the monkyInjertial >> just jumped as a monkey >> and did it wrong !!without understanding what he tried to >> steal !! >> until this moment he does not understand >> and it is documented >> ------------------ >> >> 2 >> Mr Inertial >> i am still waiting to your formula >> of smallest photon **energy** >> using ''''you'' Plank time !!! >> ps >> please answer my questions >> 1 >> and 2 >> dont try to evade any of them >> because it will be too obvious >> that you are running away >> >> TIA >> Y.Porat >> -------------------- > now what happened to you Inertial?? > > in past you was very quick to answer!! > > or may be you and your gangster team > are working how > on another forgery project !!!??? > > 2000 readers are waiting to see > how do you use your Plank time > in order > to get the smallest photon energy !!! > > TIA > Y.Porat > ------------------------- What happened to Porat .. Asked questions and refused to answer. I always answer his questions. I'll repost my questions here (minor typos corrected) === Porat, Can you answer these questions honestly and without resorting to unwarranted and unprovoked personal attacks? You claim individual single photon energy is time dependent. What IS the dependency you claim between individual single photon energy and time duration .. is the energy: a) linearly proportional to the time (ie E = kt, for some constant k) ? b) proportional to the square of the time (ie E = kt^2, for some constant k) ? c) inversely proportional (ie E = k/t, for some constant k) ? d) none of the above (please provide the relationship in formula form) Next .. consider three scenarios: A) monochromatic light shining on a detector for 0.1 seconds B) monochromatic light shining on the same size detector for 0.2 seconds C) monochromatic light shining on a detector of twice the area of that in scenario A, but also for 0.1 seconds Questions: How does the total energy received by the detector in case A compare to that in case B a) A has HALF the energy of case B b) A has THE SAME the energy of case B c) A has DOUBLE the energy of case B Your answer: How does the total number of photons received by the detector in case A compare to that in case B a) A has HALF the number of photons as case B b) A has THE SAME number of photons as case B c) A has DOUBLE number of photons as case B Your answer: How does the total energy received by the detector in case A compare to that in case C a) A has HALF the energy of case C b) A has THE SAME the energy of case C c) A has DOUBLE the energy of case C Your answer: How does the total number of photons received by the detector in case A compare to that in case C a) A has HALF the number of photons as case C b) A has THE SAME number of photons as case C c) A has DOUBLE number of photons as case C Your answer: And the last question (for now): What is your formula relating individual photon energy (for monochromatic light of frequency f) to planck time (tP)? Please use the symbol E for the single photon energy, h for Planck's constant, f for the light frequency, and tP for Planck time, and t for time ===
From: Y.Porat on 29 Mar 2010 01:03 On Mar 29, 5:00 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:f24aeed9-55f1-4d32-8724-b4ae2bb0a931(a)35g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... > > > > > On Mar 28, 10:11 am, > >> it is in the thread that was** initiated and leaded** by me y.p > >> that is called > >> A COPYRIGHT QUESTION' > >> from 20 Feb 2010 > >> but actually it was me that leaded it to look for the smallest photon > >> energy > >> here is the quote > >> it was first said by Ben 699 > >> not by Inertial : > > >> quote > >> I think that you are just trying to smooth the creation instant and > >> change it from a discontinuous event into a continuous one. If you > >> imagine that smoothing taking place within that first quantum of time > >> in our framework. Ie its transition from creation to moving at speed > >> c, then I can't really argue against that (physicists might?) as no > >> one really knows what happens within one quantum of time or space. But > >> after creation when Maxwell's equation apply, it must be moving at > >> speed c for the whole time we know it is travelling in our framework. > >> Which is why it is said to be an instantaneous creation. > > >> > 2 > >> > we know that E=hf is describing well the amount of energy in big > >> > (actually huge number of real units ) quantities > >> > many many photons carry > >> > yet a gain we dont know what is that > >> > 'many many' quantitatively > > >> E=hf applies to a single photon. > >> end of quote > >> he BEN said it before the monkey thief Inertial > >> he said it **just one post before Artful ** !! > > >> anyone can see it in MY thread > >> 'A copyright question '' > >> from 20 Feb!! > >> ------------- > > >> yet still all of the insisted alllalong the many > >> threads > >> (THAT I Y P INITIATED ) --- > >> (and even this very moment > > >> that the definition for the single photon is > > >> hf !!! > >> so if Ben is as well Artful !! > >> then it was Artful that said it first > >> if no > >> it is Ben > >> and Artful is a Nazi Goebbels lier > >> btw > >> ( i will keep looking in those thread if it was me that said it i > >> some wayeven before Ben > >> i ddint invest too much to find it out > >> anyway > >> it was me who first time defined the single smallest > >> photon ENERGY!! > >> as > >> E =hf n > >> WHILE > >> 0 > n ,,,,,,1.00000 > >> (Plank time is included in that defintion > >> in any case it is obvious that it was me > >> who leaded the whole development !! > >> and at he bottom lne i did it right > >> while the monkyInjertial > >> just jumped as a monkey > >> and did it wrong !!without understanding what he tried to > >> steal !! > >> until this moment he does not understand > >> and it is documented > >> ------------------ > > >> 2 > >> Mr Inertial > >> i am still waiting to your formula > >> of smallest photon **energy** > >> using ''''you'' Plank time !!! > >> ps > >> please answer my questions > >> 1 > >> and 2 > >> dont try to evade any of them > >> because it will be too obvious > >> that you are running away > > >> TIA > >> Y.Porat > >> -------------------- > > now what happened to you Inertial?? > > > in past you was very quick to answer!! > > > or may be you and your gangster team > > are working how > > on another forgery project !!!??? > > > 2000 readers are waiting to see > > how do you use your Plank time > > in order > > to get the smallest photon energy !!! > > > TIA > > Y.Porat > > ------------------------- > > What happened to Porat .. Asked questions and refused to answer. I always > answer his questions. > ---------------------- so let us see if you answer my question as a normal human being I ASKED YOU FIRST AND YOU HAVE TO ANSWER FIRST: OR ELSE IT I S OBFUSCATIONS OF LITTL E JOSEF GOEBBELS : just show us how do you present your formula for the smallest photon energy (as i did !! but not you !!) ----- ***while all of the readers keep in mind your DOCUMENTED FACT THAT YOU CLAIMED AGAIN AND AGAIN THAT hf IS NOT TIME DEPENDENT !! AGAIN ACCORDING TO YOU **hf is NOT TIME DEPENDENT** AGAIN ACCORDING TO YOU hf IS NOT TIME DEPENDENT*** if so just we would like to see your formula for the smallest photon energy using 1 (***your**** hf 2 *** the Plank time** IT IS VERY VERY SIMPLE NO NEED FOR JOSEF GOEBBELS TRICKS not all the 2000 readers are idiots !! and you cant cheat every body for ever TIA Y.Porat ------------------------
From: Inertial on 29 Mar 2010 01:15 "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:47e73ce6-894a-46fa-b63b-9e201e68ecab(a)r27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com... > On Mar 29, 5:00 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: >> "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >> >> news:f24aeed9-55f1-4d32-8724-b4ae2bb0a931(a)35g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> >> > On Mar 28, 10:11 am, >> >> it is in the thread that was** initiated and leaded** by me y.p >> >> that is called >> >> A COPYRIGHT QUESTION' >> >> from 20 Feb 2010 >> >> but actually it was me that leaded it to look for the smallest photon >> >> energy >> >> here is the quote >> >> it was first said by Ben 699 >> >> not by Inertial : >> >> >> quote >> >> I think that you are just trying to smooth the creation instant and >> >> change it from a discontinuous event into a continuous one. If you >> >> imagine that smoothing taking place within that first quantum of time >> >> in our framework. Ie its transition from creation to moving at speed >> >> c, then I can't really argue against that (physicists might?) as no >> >> one really knows what happens within one quantum of time or space. But >> >> after creation when Maxwell's equation apply, it must be moving at >> >> speed c for the whole time we know it is travelling in our framework. >> >> Which is why it is said to be an instantaneous creation. >> >> >> > 2 >> >> > we know that E=hf is describing well the amount of energy in big >> >> > (actually huge number of real units ) quantities >> >> > many many photons carry >> >> > yet a gain we dont know what is that >> >> > 'many many' quantitatively >> >> >> E=hf applies to a single photon. >> >> end of quote >> >> he BEN said it before the monkey thief Inertial >> >> he said it **just one post before Artful ** !! >> >> >> anyone can see it in MY thread >> >> 'A copyright question '' >> >> from 20 Feb!! >> >> ------------- >> >> >> yet still all of the insisted alllalong the many >> >> threads >> >> (THAT I Y P INITIATED ) --- >> >> (and even this very moment >> >> >> that the definition for the single photon is >> >> >> hf !!! >> >> so if Ben is as well Artful !! >> >> then it was Artful that said it first >> >> if no >> >> it is Ben >> >> and Artful is a Nazi Goebbels lier >> >> btw >> >> ( i will keep looking in those thread if it was me that said it i >> >> some wayeven before Ben >> >> i ddint invest too much to find it out >> >> anyway >> >> it was me who first time defined the single smallest >> >> photon ENERGY!! >> >> as >> >> E =hf n >> >> WHILE >> >> 0 > n ,,,,,,1.00000 >> >> (Plank time is included in that defintion >> >> in any case it is obvious that it was me >> >> who leaded the whole development !! >> >> and at he bottom lne i did it right >> >> while the monkyInjertial >> >> just jumped as a monkey >> >> and did it wrong !!without understanding what he tried to >> >> steal !! >> >> until this moment he does not understand >> >> and it is documented >> >> ------------------ >> >> >> 2 >> >> Mr Inertial >> >> i am still waiting to your formula >> >> of smallest photon **energy** >> >> using ''''you'' Plank time !!! >> >> ps >> >> please answer my questions >> >> 1 >> >> and 2 >> >> dont try to evade any of them >> >> because it will be too obvious >> >> that you are running away >> >> >> TIA >> >> Y.Porat >> >> -------------------- >> > now what happened to you Inertial?? >> >> > in past you was very quick to answer!! >> >> > or may be you and your gangster team >> > are working how >> > on another forgery project !!!??? >> >> > 2000 readers are waiting to see >> > how do you use your Plank time >> > in order >> > to get the smallest photon energy !!! >> >> > TIA >> > Y.Porat >> > ------------------------- >> >> What happened to Porat .. Asked questions and refused to answer. I >> always >> answer his questions. >> ---------------------- > so let us see if you answer my question > as a normal human being I already have > I ASKED YOU FIRST No .. I asked YOU first, a few days ago .. and you refuse to answer > AND YOU HAVE TO ANSWER FIRST: I already have answered > OR ELSE IT I S OBFUSCATIONS OF LITTL E > JOSEF GOEBBELS : > > > just show us how do you > present your formula for the smallest photon energy > (as i did !! but not you !!) ----- E = hf > ***while all of the readers keep in mind your > DOCUMENTED FACT THAT YOU CLAIMED AGAIN AND AGAIN THAT > > hf IS NOT TIME DEPENDENT !! It isn't > AGAIN > ACCORDING TO YOU > **hf is NOT TIME DEPENDENT** It isn't > AGAIN > ACCORDING TO YOU > hf IS NOT TIME DEPENDENT*** It isn't > if so > just we would like to see your formula for > the smallest photon energy E = hf > using > 1 > > (***your**** hf E = hf > 2 > *** the Plank time** It is not time dependent, so there is no need for planck time to be present in the formula. > IT IS VERY VERY SIMPLE I know. And I've told you the answer time and again for weeks. > NO NEED FOR JOSEF GOEBBELS TRICKS You mean tricks like answering your questions? > not all the 2000 readers are idiots !! No .. just you > and you cant cheat every body for ever So .. answer my questions that I ASKED YOU FIRST !!! Or are you as big a coward as you are a liar and cheat?
|
Pages: 1 Prev: LUMINIFEROUS ETHER WIND RAW DATA Next: An Alternate Theory of Gravity (proposed by mpc755) |