"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1141925277.398831.132950@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

SCW wrote:

Bilge wrote:

SCW:

Bilge wrote:

So, how come no one has ever measured a longitudinal polarization

for

light?

Under what circumstances would we exepct to see "longitudinal
polarization for light"?, i.e. what are we testing for?

We would expect to see a non-zero longitudinal polarization if the
photon has a mass.

Is this a resolution issue or is it intrinsic?

SCW

All signals have to be plucked out from background.
If the mass is very, very, very small, then the amount of longitudinal
polarization will be very, very, very small.

Sounds like your neuron.

People are like amplifiers.
Turn the gain up with no signal and all you get is noise.
Modern TVs show a blue screen to hide the snow.
Pity you are not modern.

Fortunately, there are some very sensitive tests of very small signals,
but it still only puts an upper limit on the size of the signal and
therefore an upper limit on the size of the mass, which presently is
very, very, very, very, very small.

And your neuron is very, very, very, very,very, very, very, very,very,
very, very, very,very, very, very, very,very, very, very, very,very, very,
very, very,very, very, very, very,very, very, very, very tiny indeed, but
your noise is well amplified.
Did you know you were very, very, very, very,very, very, very, very,very,
very, very, very,very, very, very, very,very, very, very, very,very, very,
very, very,very, very, very, very,very, very, very, very stupid?
Androcles.

The photon has mass!!

*even according to your mathematical formula**

the trouble is you interpret them wrong !!

the combined energy plus momentum
for particles
*is not valid to the photon !!

you clame that the mc^2 part is zero
and claim that what remains is only
the PC part
but you neglect or overlooking that

PC is actually mC^2 as well
and you came back to the right formula for the photon energy
the only difference is that your understanding of it
is wrong !!

you come back to

E photon is = mC^2 = hf
yet m is and always was
rest mass!!

(even not relativistic mass)
so

m photon is = hf/C^2!!
nothing simpler than that !!

(no relativistic mass remember??
just one kind of mass - rest mass!!
so dont tel me it was claimed 90 years before !!)
so the photon has mass *theoretically*
no need even for experiments
to verify that

and 'very small mass' is still rest mass
Small is not zero
and many many smalls become big !!
got it ??

copyright Y.Porat
---------------------------

Hexenmeister wrote:

"SCW" <doune60@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1141825347.764191.165560@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

Hexenmeister wrote:

"SCW" <doune60@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1141820835.248993.35590@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

Bilge wrote:

Henry Haapalainen:

There are ideas of massles particles in some theories. Nothing of

the
kind

has been found. Mass in itself is nothing solid, it is

accelerating
motion

of space.

So, how come no one has ever measured a longitudinal polarization
for
light?

Under what circumstances would we exepct to see "longitudinal
polarization for light"?, i.e. what are we testing for?

SCW

Mass. It's pretty simple, light has waveLENGTH.
So,
"Mass in itself is nothing solid, how come no one has ever looked for
its
length."
You are up against the most dubious ***** of the lot, look out of
redirection
when that ugly moron sees you disagree with his religion.

He has is arse up in the air five times a day facing Mecca where
Mohammed
lived and another five facing Princeton where Einstein lived.

The FBI have his phone tapped.
Androcles.

I was asking this in relation to something like de Broglie.

Lamda = h/mv

There is no such thing as wave-"length" when discussing a photon,
any more than this oscillator has an intrinsic wavelength:

http://www.kettering.edu/~drussell/Demos/SHO/damp.html

That may be the point the Islamic Turk Bilgay is trying to make.
Ocean waves do not have a wavelength either, any perceived wavelength
is observer dependent. To the surf rider the frequency of waves is zero.
Speed relative to the wave determines wavelength.

so

m = h / Lamda * v

= h/0 and undefined.

How can you detect and measure mass?
Simple. Apply a force and measure the acceleration.
Are there ANY other ways?
Newton's perplexity over action at a distance isn't as perplexing as
"what is mass?" because saying an electron has mass is meaningless.
What's it made of? Flubber? Gunk? "Matter"? No element I know of,
the elements are made of particles called atoms and the particles are
empty. Only the forces between them are measurable, not the
particles themselves. The electron has a whole lot more "charge"
than it does mass, and the proton has a whole lot more "gravity"
than charge.

Androcles.

I would like to disassociate my self from this thread.

.
SCW

I would like to disassociate my self from this thread.

..
SCW