| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Segrahcoy" |
| Date: |
27 Feb 2004 07:54:25 AM |
| Object: |
Do Virtual Photons Ecist? |
Do Virtual Photons Exist?
The Aether was original conceived as a means of explaining "forces acting
at a distance" (i.e.- electric, magnetic, gravitation, et al). When the idea of
the classical Aether was abandoned early in the century, there was a need to
find another means of explaining these forces because, if it were not possible
to explain them by some other means then it would be necessary to retain the
Aether and the absolute reference frame it represented. The elimination of that
reference frame was an absolute imperative of the political agenda of the
academic community. Fortunately, the advent of quantum theory allowed Dr.
Feynmann to generate the idea that these forces were produced by the exchange
of "virtual particles". These particles were so named because they popped into
and out of existence for periods of time that were so short that the rules of
quantum physics insured that their temporary existence did not violate the Law
of Conservation of Energy.
It is easy to understand how these particles could provide a force over a
distance. A "virtual particle" emitted from one point would absorb momentum and
travel ballistically to another where it would release that momentum. The net
result would be force acting between the points. The situation is analogous to
the effect observed when two athletes throw a medicine ball back and forth to
each other. Difficulty with the analogy is that the throwing of the medicine
ball can only produce a repulsive force; it cannot produce an attractive force!
The mathematics associated with the force production by "virtual particles"
particles, however, does allow for the production of attractive forces, but,
since no explanation as to how this is possible is provided, one is left with
the suspicion that this is another example of a solution where an effect that
is allowed by the mathematics involved is being used outside of the constraints
imposed by the physical realities of the problem. These realities require a
rather unusual exchange of momentum to be involved. In order to produce the
attractive force, the "virtual photon" would have to be launched with a
momentum represented by a propagation direction away from its target, reverse
its momentum (direction of travel), go past its target and repeat the process
so as to acquire a momentum in the required direction as it struck the target
from behind. (If anyone can provide a different explanation I would like to
hear it.) Of course, if the "virtual photon" were propagating through a medium,
such as the Aether, there would be no conceptual problem, the "virtual particle
could make the necessary exchange of momentum with the medium. (A boomerang
returns to the thrower because it exchanges momentum with a medium, air. But
then, if the Aether were present we would have no need to consider the
existence of "virtual photons".
There is no need to resort to theoretical arguments, however. If virtual
photons produce electric and magnetic forces, they should be observable.
Consider a large electromagnet, such as is used in an MIR machine. A recent
news report described an unfortunate incident where a steel oxygen bottle was
not properly mounted to its wall bracket. The magnetic field of the MIR pulled
the bottle to the machine and killed a boy who was being scanned. It is obvious
that the room was filled with a large and extremely powerful magnetic field. If
"virtual photons" were present in that room, they would have produced a level
of electromagnetic interference that would scream their presence. If electric
and magnetic forces were produced by "virtual photons", they would have to also
effect any electromagnetic detectors in their vicinity and one would expect
that both natural and man-made electric and magnetic fields would render
electromagnetic communication impossible.
An experiment is described in Chapter 4 of "The Einstein Hoax" in which a
strong electric field is produced inside of an evacuated chamber and an antenna
is located between the electrodes. Using a radiation detector that covers the
entire spectrum would allow the detection of any spurious photons that acted to
produce the attractive force. Its a simple experiment and is one which should
be performed it science is to accept "virtual photons" as meaningful.
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.
E-mail:-
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: "Franz Heymann" |
|
| Title: Re: Do Virtual Photons Ecist? |
27 Feb 2004 04:21:00 PM |
|
|
"Segrahcoy" <segrahcoy@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040227085425.12281.00000451@mb-m02.aol.com...
Bugger off, Retiche
Franz
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jeff Relf" |
|
| Title: Not a physical object. |
27 Feb 2004 09:16:48 AM |
|
|
Hi Mr. Nymshifting Spam-Bot, You asked
" Do Virtual Photons Exist ? " ,
Virtual photons are abstract properties of a field,
not physical objects.
You then continued with,
" The Aether was original conceived as
a means of explaining ' forces acting at a distance ' " .
Right,
so the aether was virtual too, not a physical object.
Are you saying that you prefer archaic abstractions ?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: Do Virtual Photons Ecist? |
27 Feb 2004 10:22:20 AM |
|
|
Segrahcoy wrote:
Do Virtual Photons Exist?
Some Frequently Asked Questions About Virtual Particles
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Quantum/virtual_particles.html
Virtual Particle
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/VirtualParticle.html
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/forces/qed.html
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/particles/expar.html#c5
Crank Information
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=group%3Asci.physics+author%3Areticher
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=group%3Asci.physics+author%3Areticher1
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: Do Virtual Photons Ecist? |
27 Feb 2004 10:26:22 AM |
|
|
Segrahcoy wrote:
Do Virtual Photons Exist?
[snip]
[snip ignorant crap]
Psychotic ineducable boring spammer retic (Ernest Wittke),
You see yourself this way,
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/effete6.jpg
The entire remainder of the planet sees you this way,
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/effete3.png
http://b5.sdvc.uwyo.edu/bab5/snds/argcstpd.wav
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.mazepath.com/uncleal/effete0.jpg
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/effete1.png
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/effete2.png
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/effete3.png
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/effete4.png
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/effete5.jpg
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 spammer 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://tycho.usno.navy.mil/ptti/ptti2002/paper20.pdf>
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
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9909014
falling light
http://www.hawaii.edu/suremath/SRtwinParadox.html
<http://physics.syr.edu/courses/modules/LIGHTCONE/twins.html>
Twin Paradox
Science 303(5661) 1143;1153 (2004)
http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0401086
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0312071
Deeply relativistic neutron star binaries
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0301024
Nordtvedt Effect
Special Relativity is physics on a topologically trivial Lorentzian
manifold with a metric whose curvature tensor is zero. This is a
perfectly diffeomorphism-invariant condition and does not require
any particular coordinate choice. It is invariant under
the full group of diffeomorphisms. The Poincare group is
the group of *isometries* of the metric in special relativity.
The Special Relativity metric is *non-dynamical* (unlike GR). It
defines the coupling *constants* of your theory. If you change the
metric in any nontrivial way you are changing your theory. An
operation can only be called a "symmetry" of a special-relativistic
(non-gravitational) theory if it preserves the metric, and therefore
the symmetry of special-relativistic theories is the Poincare group
only. General Relativity (gravitation) has a dynamic metric.
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!
.
|
|
|
| User: "G=EMC^2 Glazier" |
|
| Title: Re: Do Virtual Photons Exist? |
29 Feb 2004 08:40:48 AM |
|
|
Hi Uncle Al What do you think of this idea? Virtual event horizons of
blackholes. We use virtual photons as creating action at a distance.
Virtual event horizons create attraction at a distance. Both can't be
seen,and we only see their measurable effects. Seems to me Uncle Al it
fits. Be kind Bert PS they both have to give back what they
borrowed.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jeff Relf" |
|
| Title: A virtual horizon. |
01 Mar 2004 02:46:03 AM |
|
|
Hi G=EMC^2 Glazier, You posited,
" Virtual event horizons of black holes. " .
Just as Einstein's general relativity predicted,
when we humans fix our gaze on a very distant frozen star,
we can't see the star directly,
but we can see it's gravitational effects.
( For example: We see fast orbiting stars )
But given what we know about thermodynamics,
what is the horizon really like ?
I assume that it's almost infinitely hot.
But because I can't actually go there to test that,
it's just an abstract idea ... a virtual horizon.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
