Prev: Way off topic: oil and politics (was: Hexagonal grid and itsthree directions)
Next: New Solutions Manuals, Test Banks, Instructor Manuals 2011
From: BURT on 2 Jun 2010 16:05
On Jun 2, 1:01 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 2, 3:52 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 2, 12:32 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 2, 3:01 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > No. EM waves can oscillate into electric matter particles.
> > > > Only the wave nature can be proven beyond a doubt. There is
> > > > no physics that requires light to be a particle at absorption.
> > > > It can go into electric energy anyway.
>
> > > > Mitch Raemsch
>
> > > I don't see how you do not realize you are contradicting yourself.
>
> > > The wave oscillation into the particle is the 'particle'.
>
> > > From another of your posts:
>
> > > "No. The screen is absorbing waves. A light wave oscillates into the
> > > point particle giving it its electric energy.
>
> > > A particle nature is not needed for the absorption of light."
>
> > > An ocean wave which washes ashore does not oscillate into a point
> > > particle because an ocean wave does not consist of a particle.
>
> > > A light wave oscillates into a point particle because a photon
> > > consists of a physical particle and a physical wave.
>
> > > Here is an image of the interference pattern being formed by photons
> > > being detected at the screen over time:http://www.cbu.edu/~jvarrian/252/photslit.gif
> > > Image (a) is of 1000 photons detected after 10 seconds. Image (b) is
> > > of 60000 photons detected after 10 minutes. Notice how the photon
> > > 'particles' create the interference pattern.
>
> > > The photon 'particle' enters and exits a single slit. The photon wave
> > > enters and exits both slits and alters the direction the photon
> > > 'particle' travels.
>
> > Please stop repeating your argument as if you have won.
> > It is clear that light only needs a wave and that light particles are
> > to be questioned and ruled out.
>
> > Einstein was right to question what he won the Nobel Prize for.
>
> > Mitch Raemsch
>
> It is not a matter of winning. It is a matter of explaining to you
> your repeated assertion the photon wave oscillates into a particle
> requires there to be a 'particle' associated with a photon.
>
> If an ocean wave arrived on shore and was always detected at a
> particular point on the shore then the ocean wave would have a
> particle associated with it. An ocean wave does not arrive at one
> particular point on the shore. An ocean wave arrives along a wide
> width of the shore. The ocean wave arrives along a wide width of the
> shore because the wave does not have an associated particle.
>
> A photon is always detected as a particle because a very small region
> of the photon wave is occupied by the photon particle. The photon
> particle may exist as a very small region of the wave itself.
>
> Without a 'particle' associated with a photon, the following statement
> of yours is physically impossible:
>
> "EM waves can oscillate into electric matter particles."
>
> Without a 'particle' associated with a photon, the following statement
> of yours is physically impossible:
>
> "A light wave oscillates into the point particle giving it its
> electric energy."
>
> What you are unable to understand is the 'particle' may exist as part
> of the wave itself. The 'particle' may exist as a very small region of
> the wave itself. The 'particle' does not have to be a self-contained
> entity. The 'particle' exists when detected. However, the ability of
> this very small region of the wave to be detected as a 'particle' must
> be considered a particle. It is the ability of a very small region of
> the photon wave to be detected as a particle which is the particle
> associated with the photon wave.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Einstein won. He questioned what he won the Nobel Prize for.

Mitch Raemsch
From: mpc755 on 2 Jun 2010 17:02
On Jun 2, 4:05 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Einstein won. He questioned what he won the Nobel Prize for.
>
> Mitch Raemsch

Not sure what you mean by that but I do not think it has anything to
do with wave-particle duality.

'Louis de Broglie'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_de_Broglie

"His 1924 doctoral thesis, Recherches sur la théorie des quanta
(Research on Quantum Theory), introduced his theory of electron waves.
This included the wave-particle duality theory of matter, based on
the work of Albert Einstein and Max Planck on light. The thesis
examiners, unsure of the material, passed his thesis to Einstein for
evaluation who endorsed his wave-particle duality proposal
wholeheartedly; de Broglie was awarded his doctorate. This research
culminated in the de Broglie hypothesis stating that any moving
particle or object had an associated wave."

The associated wave is an aether wave.

If an ocean wave arrived on shore and was always detected at a
particular point on the shore then the ocean wave would have a
particle associated with it. An ocean wave does not arrive at one
particular point on the shore. An ocean wave arrives along a wide
width of the shore. The ocean wave arrives along a wide width of the
shore because the wave does not have an associated particle.

A photon is always detected as a particle because a very small region
of the photon wave is occupied by the photon particle. The photon
particle may exist as a very small region of the wave itself.

Without a 'particle' associated with a photon, the following statement
of yours is physically impossible:

"EM waves can oscillate into electric matter particles."

Without a 'particle' associated with a photon, the following statement
of yours is physically impossible:

"A light wave oscillates into the point particle giving it its
electric energy."

What you are unable to understand is the 'particle' may exist as part
of the wave itself. The 'particle' may exist as a very small region of
the wave itself. The 'particle' does not have to be a self-contained
entity. The 'particle' exists when detected. However, the ability of
this very small region of the wave to be detected as a 'particle' must
be considered a particle. It is the ability of a very small region of
the photon wave to be detected as a particle which is the particle
associated with the photon wave.

From: BURT on 2 Jun 2010 18:27
On Jun 2, 2:02 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 2, 4:05 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Einstein won. He questioned what he won the Nobel Prize for.
>
> > Mitch Raemsch
>
> Not sure what you mean by that but I do not think it has anything to
> do with wave-particle duality.
>
> 'Louis de Broglie'http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_de_Broglie
>
> "His 1924 doctoral thesis, Recherches sur la théorie des quanta
> (Research on Quantum Theory), introduced his theory of electron waves.
> This included the wave-particle duality  theory of matter, based on
> the work of Albert Einstein and Max Planck on light. The thesis
> examiners, unsure of the material, passed his thesis to Einstein for
> evaluation who endorsed his wave-particle duality proposal
> wholeheartedly; de Broglie was awarded his doctorate. This research
> culminated in the de Broglie hypothesis stating that any moving
> particle or object had an associated wave."
>
> The associated wave is an aether wave.
>
> If an ocean wave arrived on shore and was always detected at a
> particular point on the shore then the ocean wave would have a
> particle associated with it. An ocean wave does not arrive at one
> particular point on the shore. An ocean wave arrives along a wide
> width of the shore. The ocean wave arrives along a wide width of the
> shore because the wave does not have an associated particle.
>
> A photon is always detected as a particle because a very small region
> of the photon wave is occupied by the photon particle. The photon
> particle may exist as a very small region of the wave itself.
>
> Without a 'particle' associated with a photon, the following statement
> of yours is physically impossible:
>
> "EM waves can oscillate into electric matter particles."
>
> Without a 'particle' associated with a photon, the following statement
> of yours is physically impossible:
>
> "A light wave oscillates into the point particle giving it its
> electric energy."
>
> What you are unable to understand is the 'particle' may exist as part
> of the wave itself. The 'particle' may exist as a very small region of
> the wave itself. The 'particle' does not have to be a self-contained
> entity. The 'particle' exists when detected. However, the ability of
> this very small region of the wave to be detected as a 'particle' must
> be considered a particle. It is the ability of a very small region of
> the photon wave to be detected as a particle which is the particle
> associated with the photon wave.

Matter is wave particle except for the neutrino. And light is just
wave.

Mitch Raemsch
From: mpc755 on 2 Jun 2010 18:43
On Jun 2, 6:27 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jun 2, 2:02 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 2, 4:05 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > Einstein won. He questioned what he won the Nobel Prize for.
>
> > > Mitch Raemsch
>
> > Not sure what you mean by that but I do not think it has anything to
> > do with wave-particle duality.
>
> > 'Louis de Broglie'http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_de_Broglie
>
> > "His 1924 doctoral thesis, Recherches sur la théorie des quanta
> > (Research on Quantum Theory), introduced his theory of electron waves.
> > This included the wave-particle duality  theory of matter, based on
> > the work of Albert Einstein and Max Planck on light. The thesis
> > examiners, unsure of the material, passed his thesis to Einstein for
> > evaluation who endorsed his wave-particle duality proposal
> > wholeheartedly; de Broglie was awarded his doctorate. This research
> > culminated in the de Broglie hypothesis stating that any moving
> > particle or object had an associated wave."
>
> > The associated wave is an aether wave.
>
> > If an ocean wave arrived on shore and was always detected at a
> > particular point on the shore then the ocean wave would have a
> > particle associated with it. An ocean wave does not arrive at one
> > particular point on the shore. An ocean wave arrives along a wide
> > width of the shore. The ocean wave arrives along a wide width of the
> > shore because the wave does not have an associated particle.
>
> > A photon is always detected as a particle because a very small region
> > of the photon wave is occupied by the photon particle. The photon
> > particle may exist as a very small region of the wave itself.
>
> > Without a 'particle' associated with a photon, the following statement
> > of yours is physically impossible:
>
> > "EM waves can oscillate into electric matter particles."
>
> > Without a 'particle' associated with a photon, the following statement
> > of yours is physically impossible:
>
> > "A light wave oscillates into the point particle giving it its
> > electric energy."
>
> > What you are unable to understand is the 'particle' may exist as part
> > of the wave itself. The 'particle' may exist as a very small region of
> > the wave itself. The 'particle' does not have to be a self-contained
> > entity. The 'particle' exists when detected. However, the ability of
> > this very small region of the wave to be detected as a 'particle' must
> > be considered a particle. It is the ability of a very small region of
> > the photon wave to be detected as a particle which is the particle
> > associated with the photon wave.
>
> Matter is wave particle except for the neutrino. And light is just
> wave.
>
> Mitch Raemsch

If light were just wave then the following statement of yours if
physically impossible:

"EM waves can oscillate into electric matter particles."

If light were just wave then the following statement of yours if
physically impossible:

"A light wave oscillates into the point particle giving it its
electric energy."

What you are unable to understand is the 'particle' may exist as part
of the wave itself. The 'particle' may exist as a very small region of
the wave itself. The 'particle' does not have to be a self-contained
entity. The 'particle' exists when detected. However, the ability of
this very small region of the wave to be detected as a 'particle' must
be considered a particle. It is the ability of a very small region of
the photon wave to be detected as a particle which is the particle
associated with the photon wave.
From: BURT on 2 Jun 2010 19:26
On Jun 2, 3:43 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 2, 6:27 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 2, 2:02 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 2, 4:05 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Einstein won. He questioned what he won the Nobel Prize for.
>
> > > > Mitch Raemsch
>
> > > Not sure what you mean by that but I do not think it has anything to
> > > do with wave-particle duality.
>
> > > 'Louis de Broglie'http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_de_Broglie
>
> > > "His 1924 doctoral thesis, Recherches sur la théorie des quanta
> > > (Research on Quantum Theory), introduced his theory of electron waves..
> > > This included the wave-particle duality  theory of matter, based on
> > > the work of Albert Einstein and Max Planck on light. The thesis
> > > examiners, unsure of the material, passed his thesis to Einstein for
> > > evaluation who endorsed his wave-particle duality proposal
> > > wholeheartedly; de Broglie was awarded his doctorate. This research
> > > culminated in the de Broglie hypothesis stating that any moving
> > > particle or object had an associated wave."
>
> > > The associated wave is an aether wave.
>
> > > If an ocean wave arrived on shore and was always detected at a
> > > particular point on the shore then the ocean wave would have a
> > > particle associated with it. An ocean wave does not arrive at one
> > > particular point on the shore. An ocean wave arrives along a wide
> > > width of the shore. The ocean wave arrives along a wide width of the
> > > shore because the wave does not have an associated particle.
>
> > > A photon is always detected as a particle because a very small region
> > > of the photon wave is occupied by the photon particle. The photon
> > > particle may exist as a very small region of the wave itself.
>
> > > Without a 'particle' associated with a photon, the following statement
> > > of yours is physically impossible:
>
> > > "EM waves can oscillate into electric matter particles."
>
> > > Without a 'particle' associated with a photon, the following statement
> > > of yours is physically impossible:
>
> > > "A light wave oscillates into the point particle giving it its
> > > electric energy."
>
> > > What you are unable to understand is the 'particle' may exist as part
> > > of the wave itself. The 'particle' may exist as a very small region of
> > > the wave itself. The 'particle' does not have to be a self-contained
> > > entity. The 'particle' exists when detected. However, the ability of
> > > this very small region of the wave to be detected as a 'particle' must
> > > be considered a particle. It is the ability of a very small region of
> > > the photon wave to be detected as a particle which is the particle
> > > associated with the photon wave.
>
> > Matter is wave particle except for the neutrino. And light is just
> > wave.
>
> > Mitch Raemsch
>
> If light were just wave then the following statement of yours if
> physically impossible:
>
> "EM waves can oscillate into electric matter particles."
>
> If light were just wave then the following statement of yours if
> physically impossible:
>
> "A light wave oscillates into the point particle giving it its
> electric energy."
>
> What you are unable to understand is the 'particle' may exist as part
> of the wave itself. The 'particle' may exist as a very small region of
> the wave itself. The 'particle' does not have to be a self-contained
> entity. The 'particle' exists when detected. However, the ability of
> this very small region of the wave to be detected as a 'particle' must
> be considered a particle. It is the ability of a very small region of
> the photon wave to be detected as a particle which is the particle
> associated with the photon wave.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Stop arguing with me. Light is a wave alone and you can not prove it
otherwise. Particles are not needed for wave absorption. If you insist
then show why an EM wave cannot enter energy by collapsing?

Mitch Raemsch
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Prev: Way off topic: oil and politics (was: Hexagonal grid and itsthree directions)
Next: New Solutions Manuals, Test Banks, Instructor Manuals 2011