It is currently Thu Oct 17, 2019 6:36 pm


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 120 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 11:24 am
Posts: 266
Location: The White Rose County
Ruud has a basic principle of light, matter, time and the Universe. I happen to agree that he may indeed have hit upon something. If the other members of the forum don't agree with his basic principle then they can comment and disprove it through the use of their knowledge. Like Joe says - if no one was allowed to put forward a theory then where does that leave us as a human race?
I have discussed applications in which Ruud's basic principled may work, it is up to forum members to disprove those applications and all I've heard so far is insult from certain members.
Therefore, using scientific evidence prove to me that this whole thing is wrong - cause I'm interested to hear this.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 3:32 pm
Posts: 41
Location: Amsterdam
Okay...

The basic idea I have is that the speed of light is not a velocity at all. I think that the lightspeed is the absolute minumum speed.

You can see that as the absolute point zero of space and time.

One argument for this is that the lightspeed does not have an acceleration.

If we measure the lightspeed, it has instantly the velocity of 300.000km/sec.

That's allready kind of weird, where does the light gets his speed from?

A second point I like to make is that there seem to be no time for a photon.

A photon leaves and arives at the same time.

How can something move without time?

In my opinion is light just a trail wich leaves his source in all directions of past time.

The source ( matter) is the thing what moves forward trough time.

When we measure the speed of light, we actuaaly measure the speed of mass trough time. It's like standing in a train and measure the speed of the tracks.

How you find out what is moving,

Is it the tracks our is it the train?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 11:24 am
Posts: 266
Location: The White Rose County
Right before we go any further you must excuse Ruud's English, he is Dutch and has trouble getting things over.
I think this is a good place to start a serious debate concerning Ruud's idea.
We all know that electrons release photons under certain conditions. The current theory is that light speed is a constant and has no acceleration curve at all. The implications of having such a constant in my opinion are astromical. For example if we are going to look at this in terms of time reference frames it becomes very interesting. That is so because there would have to be several frames missing either within the electron or just as the photon is leaving the electron. Something that has no acceleration curve and appears into a time reference frame cannot exist IMHO and I have always agreed with some physisists who have stated this.
Ruud's model takes away for the need for acceleration to happen at all by implying that the photon is simply left behind by mass at 300,000km\s and it is the mass that moves away from the photon.
OK thats a start, can anyone pick the bones out of it?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 8:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 10:17 am
Posts: 610
Location: Midlands UK
Quantum physics would suggest that the photon is not necessarily 'a thing' that leaves the electron. The photon is a wave function that exists through all space (and maybe time) and only collapses into an event (such as a flash of light on a distant screen) when someone observes the flash.
Now if that can happen, it is not necessary to thing of the photon as accelerating from rest up to light speed.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 8:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 11:24 am
Posts: 266
Location: The White Rose County
GeorgeC wrote:
Quantum physics would suggest that the photon is not necessarily 'a thing' that leaves the electron. The photon is a wave function that exists through all space (and maybe time) and only collapses into an event (such as a flash of light on a distant screen) when someone observes the flash.
Now if that can happen, it is not necessary to thing of the photon as accelerating from rest up to light speed.

But the photon has left the electron at C whether we the viewer observed it in another location or not. Surely you are not implying that a photon only exists if we see it? Light hits your eyes from distant stars millions of light years away. If you shut your eyes and your friend doesn't the light will still hit his eyes. This is not the argument, the argument concerns why light has no acceleration curve and the implications of time reference frames on that fact.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 9:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 10:17 am
Posts: 610
Location: Midlands UK
The wave function exists. The wackiness of quantum physics does indeed suggest that the photon only exists when it is observed. At this point the wave function 'collapses' and creates a real photon. This reasoning removes the need to consider how the photon can get instantaneously up to light speed.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 10:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 11:24 am
Posts: 266
Location: The White Rose County
GeorgeC wrote:
The wave function exists. The wackiness of quantum physics does indeed suggest that the photon only exists when it is observed. At this point the wave function 'collapses' and creates a real photon. This reasoning removes the need to consider how the photon can get instantaneously up to light speed.

Hi George,
Good food for thought and an interesting idea but doubtful IMHO. Even if that theory were proven correct the fact remains if a photon is observed then it had to have seperated from it's parent electron.
Modern excepted theory suggests that the speed of light is a constant with no acceleration curve.
If anyone can explain to me how this could be observed in time reference frames using Newtonion mechanics I would be happy, :wink:
For example; a train travels down a track accelerating to 100km\h. At reference frame one the train's velocity is 000000000.1km\h, reference frame two the train's velocoty is 000000000.2km\h and so forth.
When the train reaches 100km\h we can (using the length of the track and the time taken) work out it's everage velocity and it's acceleration curve.
Modern theory has a photon in frame one at a velocity of 300,000km\s frame two 300,000km\s and so forth. The problem with this is, using Newtonion mechanics the photon cannot possibly be in frame one, or frame two or any frame for that matter. The photon is never at rest so frame zero cannot be observed. The truth is - no one has a clue do they?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 11:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 10:17 am
Posts: 610
Location: Midlands UK
The 'Frame 1, 2' etc idea works for a train because a train has a mass and obeys Netwon's F=ma. A photon has no mass (although it manages to exert a push on things that it hits :? ) so can start off at full speed.
Quantum mechanics makes my head spin, but I am beginning to get an understanding of a 'wave function'. The instant the electron loses energy and the photon is 'created', the wave function comes into existence. This function describes the probability of the photon being observed at a given location. Some theories suggest that the photon could be seen just about anywhere in the universe, which implies that the photon exists everywhere. If that is true then it certainly removes the need to think in terms of 'Frame 1, 2'.
Only when an observer sees the photon does the probability at that point become 100% and everywhere else collapses to 0%. The hardest part of this to grasp is what happens if there are no 'observers'. What happened in the universe before any life evolved? :shock:


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 12:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 11:24 am
Posts: 266
Location: The White Rose County
Hi George,
OK, in Quantum theory, the electron emits the photon under a certain condition - agreed? Does Quantum theory except that every time such an event takes place it is unique to the two sub atomic particles taking part? If so, would you agree George that this creates a paradox in which it is impossible the determine which sub atomic particle is actually on the move?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 1:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:44 pm
Posts: 917
Location: Costa Blanca, Spain 37.963N 0.738W
GeorgeC wrote:
A photon has no mass (although it manages to exert a push on things that it hits :? ) so can start off at full speed.
Quantum mechanics makes my head spin, but I am beginning to get an understanding of a 'wave function'.


Nonsense. A photon has mass,

m = h / Lc where h = Planck´s constant, L = wavelength of the photon, c = velocity of light in free space.

This ridiculous thread is simply a continuation of one already closed down by the mods.
Quasar and rudolfhenriques are not astronomers, and have made no posts other than to their own pseudo-mystical threads, where they promulgate their claptrap ideas. They know no science (neither apparently does GeorgeC) - even their grasp of written English is poor - and have no place in a serious scientific forum.
I recommend that the mods close this stupid thread down as well (but they will certainly open another the same).

_________________
Coronado PST with SME-40 double stack H@ filter


Last edited by Eclipse on Sat Jun 21, 2008 1:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 1:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 10:17 am
Posts: 610
Location: Midlands UK
Eclipse - yes, in terms of mass-energy equivalence, a photon does have mass. I was trying to say that it does not have a rest mass so can't be considered to be accelerated from 0 to c.
Sorry if the chat has upset you. I will shut up.
PS I do know a little about physics... :(


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 1:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:44 pm
Posts: 917
Location: Costa Blanca, Spain 37.963N 0.738W
GeorgeC, I do not mean to be rude, but if you are truly a physicist why on Earth are you encouraging this garbage?? You MUST see it is total nonsense. Let us go back to supporting the aims of the SPA.

_________________
Coronado PST with SME-40 double stack H@ filter


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 1:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 11:24 am
Posts: 266
Location: The White Rose County
Eclipse wrote:
GeorgeC wrote:
A photon has no mass (although it manages to exert a push on things that it hits :? ) so can start off at full speed.
Quantum mechanics makes my head spin, but I am beginning to get an understanding of a 'wave function'.


Nonsense. A photon has mass,

m = h / Lc where h = Planck´s constant, L = wavelength of the photon, c = velocity of light in free space.

This ridiculous thread is simply a continuation of one already closed down by the mods.
Quasar and rudolfhenriques are not astronomers, and have made no posts other than to their own pseudo-mystical threads, where they promulgate their claptrap ideas. They know no science (neither apparently does GeorgeC) - even their grasp of written English is poor - and have no place in a serious scientific forum.
I recommend that the mods close this stupid thread down as well (but they will certainly open another the same).

Hi Eclipse,
What exactly are you afraid of here. Surely if you think these discussions are bordering on the ridiculous then you would ignore them and post in threads that are of interest to you. Again I invite you to become part of it using your sound scientific background and through the use of popular mechanics argue your case that they are indeed entirely wrong. You are very good at paraphrasing mathematical quotes you have read in books. Tell me are you any good at discussing subjects without the use of those quotes?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 1:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 10:17 am
Posts: 610
Location: Midlands UK
Eclipse wrote:
GeorgeC, I do not mean to be rude, but if you are truly a physicist why on Earth are you encouraging this garbage?? You MUST see it is total nonsense. Let us go back to supporting the aims of the SPA.

Because I thought I recognised someone trying to get a grip on a subject which even the best minds find taxing. Having scanned through some of the other posts (such as the one on gravity waves) I did not see any indication that the conversations were only open to Nobel prize winners.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 2:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 11:24 am
Posts: 266
Location: The White Rose County
Do you know something, I've been watching the stars with and without a telescope for 26 years like many of you have. During that time I've wondered about things that happen out there and tried to resolve things that weren't clear in my mind through the use of very intelligent people. A lot of those people have cleared things up for me very satisfactory over the years. However there are always gaps to be filled where one theory doesn't quite fit into another such as Quantum and Einstein. I always keep an open mind for something new to appear with a different prospective that could have a positive input. Problems have arisen where a member of this forum is suggesting that we must not have an open mind and take everything that has been suggested so far as 'set in stone'. If this attitude was taken by all members of the human race then can I remind him that we would all be still in caves clubbing each other over the head. :wink:
So my advice is to chill out and see where it leads us, not to be rude and try his best to ruin this thread. :wink:


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 120 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group