| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Tas" |
| Date: |
17 Sep 2005 09:23:22 AM |
| Object: |
"Do Virtual Photons Exist?" |
"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
http://einsteinhoax/hoax.htm ("The Einstein Hoax" {1997});
http://einsteinhoax/gravity.htm; ("Gravity" {1987}); and
http://einsteinhoax/relcor.htm ("Corrections to Special Relativity" {1997}).
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.
All of the Newsposts made by this site may be viewed at
http://einsteinhoax.com/postinglog.htm.
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. Challenges to date have revealed
only
the responder's inadequacy with one exception for which a correction was
provided.
.
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: "Do Virtual Photons Exist?" |
17 Sep 2005 09:32:35 AM |
|
|
Tas wrote:
"Do Virtual Photons Exist?"
Thanks for registering "The Einstein Hoax" at crank dot net.
http://www.google.com/search?q=einstein+hoax+site%3Awww.crank.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jeff_Relf" |
|
| Title: Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam. |
17 Sep 2005 10:04:19 AM |
|
|
Hi Sam_Wormley and Einstein_Hoax,
Wormley, thanks for quoting Einstein_Hoax's post,
Individual.NET censored it, so I wouldn't have seen it otherwise.
Einstein_Hoax, you denounced relativity... but God is relative.
Anyone is both God and an insect, depending on what he compares himself to.
God and Satan, heaven and hell are names assigned to the façades of fate.
Comparisons that make us look like insects are heavily censured topics,
banned from many schools, even in the U.S.,
e.g. evolution and the start of the big bang... zoomed_out views.
Dark energy, described best by Einstein's Cosmological_Constant, is entropy.
Just as randomness is incomplete information, ever virtual, never real,
so too is any reversal of entropy... it's naught but virtual.
Whether an entity is a wave or a particle depends on how one measures it.
Entropy, the second law of thermodymanics, means that
Mass_Energy, a.k.a. Wave_Particles, tend to dissipate,
....making them unavailable for useful work !
We suffer from an entropy crises, not an energy crises.
So_Called Cosmic_Time is really entropy, the fifth _Spatial_ dimension,
....it's Space_Time_Entropy... the entire universe, including protons
are on course to become relatively nothing... a vacuum.
Data from standard candles, e.g type 1-A supernovae,
tell us that space_time is expanding at an accelerated rate
where Einstein's cosmological constant, lambda, is the best fit.
The universe is observed to be dissipating, that is, going from
relatively infinite density and no entropy, to relatively no density,
a perfect vacuum, infinite entopy.
So the net mass_energy of the universe is slightly negative,
i.e. there's a deficit and it's gravitationally repulsive.
I posit that gravity and long_lived protons are naught but left_over density,
from the so_called start of the big bang.
What is the density of protons anyway ? We don't know.
Gravity is like casino winnings,
....irregardless of short_term gains, it loses to the house in the long_run.
The only thing anyone or _Anything_ ever did was burn bright, like a star,
dissipating into the night.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Traveler" |
|
| Title: Re: "Do Virtual Photons Exist?" |
17 Sep 2005 10:00:07 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 14:32:35 GMT, Samantha Wormley
<swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote:
Thanks for registering "The Einstein Hoax" at crank dot net.
http://www.google.com/search?q=einstein+hoax+site%3Awww.crank.net
I'm preparing a special page on my site for inveterate ***** kissers.
You're gonna be somewhere at the top of the list, Samantha. ahahaha...
And so will Uncle *****, ***** van de merde, Tom Roberts and a bunch
of other brown nosers on sci.physics. ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha...
No need for you to register. ahahaha...
Louis Savain
Why Software Is Bad and What We Can Do to Fix It:
http://www.rebelscience.org/Cosas/Reliability.htm
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
