Prev: Notion of Absolute Clock Synchronization in SR
Next: What the hell, Jerome Drexler?
From: I. F. on 11 Mar 2010 19:23
hello,

are you really sure that the mass of the photon is zero and that its
speed is c, since photons have a variable energy and frequency, and
that the frequency of the electron depends on its speed?

its mass might be extremely low and its speed extremely close to c
From: Inertial on 11 Mar 2010 19:28

"I. F." <exformatist(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:23bf9f3c-f09d-4277-927b-456e07e1180a(a)t20g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
> hello,
>
> are you really sure that the mass of the photon is zero and that its
> speed is c,

As sure as we can be .. from the experiments that measure them

> since photons have a variable energy and frequency,

Yes they do. That doesn't mean they have mass, nor that their speed is
anything other than c

> and
> that the frequency of the electron depends on its speed?

What has that to do with photons?

> its mass might be extremely low and its speed extremely close to c

Extremely. Do you know how accurately these have been measured?

And, of course, there is no a valid theory (AFAIK) about photons that
supports it being otherwise.


From: Tom Roberts on 11 Mar 2010 20:09
I. F. wrote:
> are you really sure that the mass of the photon is zero and that its
> speed is c, since photons have a variable energy and frequency, and
> that the frequency of the electron depends on its speed?
>
> its mass might be extremely low and its speed extremely close to c

Certain? no. But the difference is only of academic interest; in practice, any
computation of experimental results can assume the photon has zero mass, and the
error introduced by that assumption is ENORMOUSLY smaller than the relevant
resolutions. Even in QED where some quantities agree with experiment to 12
significant digits.

The PDG gives the upper bound on the photon's mass as 6E-17 eV. That is so
incredibly small there is nothing to compare it to.


Tom Roberts
From: BURT on 11 Mar 2010 21:07
On Mar 11, 5:09 pm, Tom Roberts <tjroberts...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> I. F. wrote:
> > are you really sure that the mass of the photon is zero and that its
> > speed is c, since photons have a variable energy and frequency, and
> > that the frequency of the electron depends on its speed?
>
> > its mass might be extremely low and its speed extremely close to c
>
> Certain? no. But the difference is only of academic interest; in practice, any
> computation of experimental results can assume the photon has zero mass, and the
> error introduced by that assumption is ENORMOUSLY smaller than the relevant
> resolutions. Even in QED where some quantities agree with experiment to 12
> significant digits.
>
> The PDG gives the upper bound on the photon's mass as 6E-17 eV. That is so
> incredibly small there is nothing to compare it to.
>
> Tom Roberts

If light has kinetic energy then it is quantified by the constant C.
Every light wave would have the same energy.

Mitch Raemsch
From: Tom Roberts on 12 Mar 2010 11:06
BURT wrote:
> If light has kinetic energy then it is quantified by the constant C.
> Every light wave would have the same energy.

Why do you repeatedly make such idiotic statements, that are in wild
disagreement with simple and basic observations? All they do is illustrate your
complete and utter lack of understanding of even very basic physics.

Why bother? What's the point?


Tom Roberts
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Notion of Absolute Clock Synchronization in SR
Next: What the hell, Jerome Drexler?