| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Cimus26" |
| Date: |
26 Oct 2003 09:43:30 AM |
| Object: |
A Snapshot of a Photon |
A Snapshot of a Photon
The photon has been viewed as a somewhat mysterious entity which sometimes
has the properties of a particle and sometimes has the properties oaf a wave.
It would seem interesting to see, therefore, whether we can determine what a
photon would look like if we had a "godlike" ability to "see" it without the
restrictions imposed by our limits of observation.
Since the photon is electromagnetic in nature, perhaps the best place to
start is by examining the nature of an electromagnetic wave emitted by a
dipole, such as the antenna of a radio transmitter. There is no question that
this radiation consists of crossed electric and magnetic fields having a 90
degree phase relationship to each other. These fields are readily observed and
allow us to use them for communication over distance. (See
http://www.members.aol.com/einsteinhoax/cf131.gif ). We also know by
observation that this wave is actually composed of discrete "lumps" of energy
called photons because it is noisy. The noise energy of the wave varies in
proportion to the square root of its total energy. As a result, the signal
(energy in the wave) to noise (energy in the wave components) ratio of the wave
itself varies inversely with the square root of the waves strength. The effect
is well described in handbooks on electromagnetic communication and seems
beyond challenge.
If we attenuate the wave sufficiently, it becomes a parade of the
individual particles (photons) appearing as separate entities which may be
detected separately.
The question to be answered is what the nature of these particles must be so
that in the aggregate they can form a smooth continuous wave. To meet this
requirement, the photons in the wave must be coherent. This means that they
must have the same polarization and be appropriately phased so that they can
add properly. (In lasers this coherency is defined as the distance of millions
of cycles over which the phase and polarization match is maintained.)
The question to be answered is what form does the photon have to be in
order to be capable of combining with other wavelets to form the coherent wave.
The answer is probably provided by the "Impulse Function", 1/(e*x^2).
Multiplying the continuous wave by this function provides, for the photons
which compose the wave. a shape shown by
http://www.members.aol.com/einsteinhoax/cf133.gif. One only need to imagine the
electric and magnetic components of this construction propagating along its
axis at the velocity of light to envision what a photon "looks like".
When one combines this shape with the quantum coupling between photons
which has been demonstrated by the work of Quantum Physicists, one finds that
he describes the kind of entity that has the dual wave an particle properties
we associate with a photon. The only question left is why the nature of the
photon is considered to be mysterious.
The source material for this posting may be found in "Gravity" (1987),
"The Einstein Hoax" (1997), and "Corrections to Residual Errors in Special
Relativity (1999) located at http://www.members.aol.com/einsteinhoax/site.htm .
EVERYTHING WHICH WE ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING ELSE WE
HAVE ACCEPTED AS TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OBSERVATIONS, AND IT MUST
BE MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT ALWAYS MEET THIS
REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF WORKMANSHIP FROM
THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.
Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not monitored on a
regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same courtesy as
they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our parts, please
do not raise objections that are not related to material that you have read at
the Website. This posting is merely a summary.
For a response send E-Mail to
The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 5 years.
In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF THE MATERIAL
PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by individuals who have
mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without questioning it. If anyone
provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be objectively answered, the
material at the Website will be withdrawn.
..
.
|
|
| User: "Jim Hunter" |
|
| Title: Re: A Snapshot of a Photon |
26 Oct 2003 01:22:44 PM |
|
|
"Cimus26" <cimus26@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031026104330.22575.00000117@mb-m18.aol.com...
A Snapshot of a Photon
The photon has been viewed as a somewhat mysterious entity which
sometimes
has the properties of a particle and sometimes has the properties oaf a
wave.
It would seem interesting to see, therefore, whether we can determine what
a
photon would look like if we had a "godlike" ability to "see" it without
the
restrictions imposed by our limits of observation.
Since photons have nothing mysterious to do with seeing, there's no reason
to quote "see".
Given that they aren't even atomic in nature, which is what imposes
the limits of observation, rather than physics journals.
Since the photon is electromagnetic in nature, perhaps the best place
to
start is by examining the nature of an electromagnetic wave emitted by a
dipole, such as the antenna of a radio transmitter. There is no question
that
this radiation consists of crossed electric and magnetic fields having a
90
degree phase relationship to each other. These fields are readily observed
and
allow us to use them for communication over distance. (See
http://www.members.aol.com/einsteinhoax/cf131.gif ). We also know by
observation that this wave is actually composed of discrete "lumps" of
energy
called photons because it is noisy.
But the since "noise" can be removed *completely* at
the temperatures of liquid helium, it is obviously not noise.
The noise energy of the wave varies in
proportion to the square root of its total energy. As a result, the signal
(energy in the wave) to noise (energy in the wave components) ratio of the
wave
itself varies inversely with the square root of the waves strength. The
effect
is well described in handbooks on electromagnetic communication and seems
beyond challenge.
No it's not. Since E-M theory is based on *classical* wave theory,
just like *all* handbooks are.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Moroney" |
|
| Title: Re: A Snapshot of a Photon |
26 Oct 2003 11:17:47 PM |
|
|
(Cimus26) writes:
A Snapshot of a Photon
There is no question that
this radiation consists of crossed electric and magnetic fields having a 90
degree phase relationship to each other.
There is plenty of question about that. Maxwell's Equations very clearly
state the electric and magnetic fields from EM radiation are _in phase_.
The 90 degree phase separation pops up when you look at the (separate)
electric and magnetic fields in the elements of a tuned circuit.
--
-Mike
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom Potter" |
|
| Title: Re: A Snapshot of a Photon |
27 Oct 2003 07:12:59 AM |
|
|
"Michael Moroney" <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> wrote in message
news:bni9pr$llg$1@pcls4.std.com...
cimus26@aol.com (Cimus26) writes:
A Snapshot of a Photon
There is no question that
this radiation consists of crossed electric and magnetic fields having a
90
degree phase relationship to each other.
There is plenty of question about that. Maxwell's Equations very clearly
state the electric and magnetic fields from EM radiation are _in phase_.
The 90 degree phase separation pops up when you look at the (separate)
electric and magnetic fields in the elements of a tuned circuit.
At resonance, the capacitive (Electric) and inductive (Magnetic) fields
in a tuned circuit differ by 180 degrees from each other,
and are orthogonal to a line defined
by the source (Power input) and sink (Power output)
of the circuit.
The electric and magnetic fields are
offset in frequencies outside of resonance.
It is interesting to see that the "complex conjugation"
used to orient non-resonant conditions to the source/sink reference
is basically an effort to define the direction of time.
Power flows downhill (From source to sink.),
and "complex conjugation" differentiates
between directions in time, and a static condition.
A system is static if the complex conjugate is 180 degrees.
--
Tom Potter http://tompotter.us
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Paul M. Koloc" |
|
| Title: Re: A Snapshot of a Photon |
28 Oct 2003 08:50:34 PM |
|
|
Michael Moroney wrote:
cimus26@aol.com (Cimus26) writes:
A Snapshot of a Photon
There is no question that
this radiation consists of crossed electric and magnetic fields having a 90
degree phase relationship to each other.
There is plenty of question about that. Maxwell's Equations very clearly
state the electric and magnetic fields from EM radiation are _in phase_.
The 90 degree phase separation pops up when you look at the (separate)
electric and magnetic fields in the elements of a tuned circuit.
My vision of a photon is different, perchance because there is too much
mythology involved with what is the electric field, magnetic field, and
charge. In my mythology, the Key is defining reality as operators and
arrays of information. So, for example, an electric or magnetic field is
just the streaming of information through space. The streaming is the
vector _A_, and if it flows from creation to annihilation (positive to
negative charge), the flow is across an element of time, so it is the
partial of _A_ with respect to time. Likewise the B field is just the
vortex flow of information in space or the curl of A.
That means the information pattern that constitutes a photon is like the
_A_ flowing along as if it were tracing out the wire in single string of
connected bedsprings with the "winding" of each connected spring formed
with opposite "spin" to the adjacent spring. If I could draw the flight
with ascii, I would. I assume that only narcoleptics like me can
visualize this model as it actually happens in reality.
Koloc stuff; Copyright 2003 Paul M. Koloc
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------
| Paul M. Koloc; Prometheus II, Ltd.; 9903 Cottrell Terrace,
| Silver Spring, MD 20903-1927; FAX (301) 434-6737: Tel (301) 445-1075
| Grid Power -Raising $$Support$$ <http://www.neoteric-research.org/>
| <http://www.prometheus2.net/> mailto:<pmk@plasmak.com>
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "Richard Clark" |
|
| Title: Re: A Snapshot of a Photon |
31 Oct 2003 02:16:37 AM |
|
|
My vision of a photon is different, perchance because there is too much
mythology involved with what is the electric field, magnetic field, and
charge. In my mythology, the Key is defining reality as operators and
arrays of information. So, for example, an electric or magnetic field is
just the streaming of information through space. The streaming is the
vector _A_, and if it flows from creation to annihilation (positive to
negative charge), the flow is across an element of time, so it is the
partial of _A_ with respect to time. Likewise the B field is just the
vortex flow of information in space or the curl of A.
That means the information pattern that constitutes a photon is like the
_A_ flowing along as if it were tracing out the wire in single string of
connected bedsprings with the "winding" of each connected spring formed
with opposite "spin" to the adjacent spring. If I could draw the flight
with ascii, I would. I assume that only narcoleptics like me can
visualize this model as it actually happens in reality.
Your "vision of a photon is different" for sure. My vision of the particle and
wave nature of light can be reduced to 5 easy to understand words:
(PHOTONS surfing on light WAVES! :)
Halloween Survey
http://members.aol.com/RichClark7/rev/hallowen.htm
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "S. Enterprize Company" |
|
| Title: Re: A Snapshot of a Photon - Smart1234 Replies... |
26 Oct 2003 07:25:49 PM |
|
|
A Snapshot of a Photon
http://smart1234.s-enterprize.com/PhotonWithMath2.htm
http://smart1234.s-enterprize.com/SpiralPhoton.htm
http://members.aol.com/SEntrprize/photon1.htm
http://members.aol.com/smart314159/HSFPhotoEffect.gif
http://smart1234.s-enterprize.com/Electron3a.gif
http://smart1234.s-enterprize.com/Hydrogen1q.gif
This shows how and why a photon takes the shape it does. The particles and
atoms spin in a Smart Model Helix Spiral Spinning Field. Energy is emitted and
absorbed by photons. Photons don't have mass, but momentum. High energy photons
can transfer it's helix spiral spinning field energy to electrons and protons
which cause the creation of new particles during there collision. The photon
collisions are inelastic and when the new Helix Spiral Spinning Field
sub-particles are created, they are the basic same shape and form, except the
core of the neutral particles become highly pressurized into a constant
resonance frequency, which maintains the constant mass of particles like
electrons etc... .
In NMR the same resonance frequency is found for atoms and causes them to
absorb the EM energy which causes the proton to line up a certain way showing
the spectra for identification of the certain compounds. So the molecular
formulas can be determined for organic materials using NMR.
The Smart Model is the only correct atomic model on earth today. It
explains basically everything logically for the basic structure of this
universe.
Smart's Alt. Physics News Group
http://pub39.bravenet.com/forum/show.php?usernum=3320272813&cpv=1
S. Enterprize (Science Journal)
http://smart1234.s-enterprize.com/
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: A Snapshot of a Photon |
26 Oct 2003 02:39:47 PM |
|
|
Cimus26 wrote:
A Snapshot of a Photon
Did you ever wonder "What the heck is a photon, anyway?"
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/photon/schmoton.htm
Special Relativity
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/SpecialRelativity.html
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html
General Relativity
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/GeneralRelativity.html
http://rattler.cameron.edu/EMIS/journals/LRG/Articles/Volume6/2003-1ashby/index.html
http://www.eftaylor.com/pub/projecta.pdf
A Field Guide to Critical Thinking
http://www.csicop.org/si/9012/critical-thinking.html
Tuning Up Your Crank Filters
http://spot.colorado.edu/~vstenger/Briefs/Cranks.html
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: A Snapshot of a Photon |
26 Oct 2003 02:18:17 PM |
|
|
Cimus26 wrote:
A Snapshot of a Photon
[snip]
Hey stooopid Ernest Wittke, light travels a foot/nanosecond. How fast
is your shutter?
Psychotic ineducable boring retic (Ernest Wittke),
http://w0rli.home.att.net/youare.swf
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/sunshine.jpg
http://www.you-moron.com/
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=group%3Asci.physics+author%3Awittke
http://www.apa.org/journals/psp/psp7761121.html
http://insti.physics.sunysb.edu/~siegel/quack.html
<http://www.firehead.org/~jessh/film/kubrick/Kubrick-Psycho.html>
<http://www.naturalchild.com/elliott_barker/prisons.html>
The source material for this posting may be found in "Gravity" (1987),
"The Einstein Hoax" (1997), and "Corrections to Residual Errors in Special
Relativity (1999)
[snip]
Hey, stooopid Ernest Wittke - Do you want EVIDENCE? Each of the 24
GPS satellites carries either four cesium atomic clocks or three
rubidum atomic clocks in orbit, with full relativistic corrections
being applied.
http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-th/0307140
GR structure, especially Part 4/p. 7
<http://rattler.cameron.edu/EMIS/journals/LRG/Articles/Volume4/2001-4will/index.html>
Experimental constraints on General Relativity.
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0308010
Nature 425 374 (2003)
<http://rattler.cameron.edu/EMIS/journals/LRG/Articles/Volume6/2003-1ashby/index.html>
http://www.eftaylor.com/pub/projecta.pdf
Relativity in the GPS system
NIM A 355 537 (1995)
Physics Letters B 328 103 (1994)
Physical Review Letters 64 1697 (1990)
Physical Review Letters 39 1051 (1977)
Physical Review 135 B1071 (1964)
Physics Letters 12 260 (1964)
Europhysics Letters 56(2) 170-174 (2001)
General Relativity and Gravitation 34(9) 1371 (2002)
http://fourmilab.to/etexts/einstein/specrel/specrel.pdf
<http://www.geocities.com/physics_world/sr/ae_1905_error.htm>
<http://www.physics.gatech.edu/people/faculty/finkelstein/relativity.pdf>
http://users.powernet.co.uk/bearsoft/Paper6.pdf
http://users.powernet.co.uk/bearsoft/LPHrel.html
Longitudinal and transverse mass
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/gpsuser/gpsuser.pdf
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/icd200/default.htm
http://www.trimble.com/gps/index.html
http://sirius.chinalake.navy.mil/satpred/
http://www.phys.lsu.edu/mog/mog9/node9.html
http://egtphysics.net/GPS/RelGPS.htm
http://www.schriever.af.mil/gps/Current/current.oa1
http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html
<http://www-astronomy.mps.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html>
If anyone
provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be objectively answered, the
material at the Website will be withdrawn.
Right, like your head has ever been withdrawn from your ***** - even
when you *****.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" The Net!
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
