Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #402250 > unrolled thread

Why is the speed of light slower in glass and regains its normal speeds as it exits from glass?

Started by	kenseto <setoken@att.net>
First post	2016-12-18 21:24 -0800
Last post	2016-12-31 07:09 -0800
Articles	20 on this page of 207 — 26 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Page 1 of 11 [1] 2 3 … 11 Next page →

#402250 — Why is the speed of light slower in glass and regains its normal speeds as it exits from glass?

From	kenseto <setoken@att.net>
Date	2016-12-18 21:24 -0800
Subject	Why is the speed of light slower in glass and regains its normal speeds as it exits from glass?
Message-ID	<0b9e1ba4-d270-446b-b448-af0369f982fd@googlegroups.com>

Why is the speed of light slower in glass and regains its normal speeds as it exits from glass?
Current physics have no valid answer to this question.
However with my E-Matrix theory the valid answer is as follows:
1. Light is being transmitted by the E-Matrix (the aether). In the air the E-Matrix have minimum curvature and thus it tansmits light at c.
2. Inside the glass, the E-Matrix is more curved and thus it is transmitting light at a slower speed.
3. As light exists from the glass it is again being transmitted by the E-Matrix at minimum curvature and thus it regains its normal speed of c.

A description of my E-Matrix theory is available in the following link:
http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015irt.pdf

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#402258

From	"David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date	2016-12-18 21:51 -0800
Message-ID	<20baa3dd-7665-4ef4-b87e-b6a510e9fdf9@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#402250

Why is the speed of light slower in glass and regains its normal speeds as it exits from glass? 
Mass is Entropy is Length contraction is time

Glass has higher Entropy causing a lower c, 
It is SR in action

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#402294

From	Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net>
Date	2016-12-19 09:27 -0600
Message-ID	<e8CdnYqMqLTpYcrFnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to	#402250

On 12/18/16 12/18/16 - 11:24 PM, kenseto wrote:
> Why is the speed of light slower in glass and regains its normal speeds as it exits from glass?
> Current physics have no valid answer to this question.

That is not true. It is merely that kenseto is IGNORANT of how modern physics 
models this. He seems to think his personal limitations apply to everybody; they 
don't.

This is qualitatively and quantitatively described in QED as due to the 
interactions of the light (photons) with the myriad charged particles in the glass.

Tom Roberts

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#402300

From	kenseto <setoken@att.net>
Date	2016-12-19 08:02 -0800
Message-ID	<298ba039-7525-487a-aebe-a6fdeb3a5766@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#402294

On Monday, December 19, 2016 at 10:27:56 AM UTC-5, tjrob137 wrote:
> On 12/18/16 12/18/16 - 11:24 PM, kenseto wrote:
> > Why is the speed of light slower in glass and regains its normal speeds as it exits from glass?
> > Current physics have no valid answer to this question.
> 
> That is not true. It is merely that kenseto is IGNORANT of how modern physics 
> models this. He seems to think his personal limitations apply to everybody; they 
> don't.
> 
> This is qualitatively and quantitatively described in QED as due to the 
> interactions of the light (photons) with the myriad charged particles in the glass.

The problem with this explanation is that the light beam should be dispersed when it exists the glass......but it doesn't, it maintains a coherent beam after it exists from the glass. Also if light is composed of photons then how does the photons regain the necessary energy to make them moving at c again?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#402317

From	Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net>
Date	2016-12-19 11:54 -0600
Message-ID	<t6CdnW5tNtheg8XFnZ2dnUU7_81j4p2d@giganews.com>
In reply to	#402300

On 12/19/16 12/19/16 - 10:02 AM, kenseto wrote:
> On Monday, December 19, 2016 at 10:27:56 AM UTC-5, tjrob137 wrote:
>> On 12/18/16 12/18/16 - 11:24 PM, kenseto wrote:
>>> Why is the speed of light slower in glass and regains its normal speeds
>>> as it exits from glass? Current physics have no valid answer to this
>>> question.
>>
>> That is not true. It is merely that kenseto is IGNORANT of how modern
>> physics models this. He seems to think his personal limitations apply to
>> everybody; they don't.
>>
>> This is qualitatively and quantitatively described in QED as due to the
>> interactions of the light (photons) with the myriad charged particles in
>> the glass.
>
> The problem with this explanation is that the light beam should be dispersed
> when it exists the glass......but it doesn't, it maintains a coherent beam
> after it exists from the glass. Also if light is composed of photons then how
> does the photons regain the necessary energy to make them moving at c again?

I repeat: those are all problems with your PERSONAL MISCONCEPTIONS about modern 
physics in general and QED in particular. The actual theory has no such "problems".

Tom Roberts

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#402335

From	alsor@interia.pl
Date	2016-12-19 12:06 -0800
Message-ID	<29d99995-3ae3-4f0f-9053-4d389dc1ff1c@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#402317

W dniu poniedziałek, 19 grudnia 2016 18:54:18 UTC+1 użytkownik tjrob137 napisał:
> On 12/19/16 12/19/16 - 10:02 AM, kenseto wrote:
> > On Monday, December 19, 2016 at 10:27:56 AM UTC-5, tjrob137 wrote:
> >> On 12/18/16 12/18/16 - 11:24 PM, kenseto wrote:
> >>> Why is the speed of light slower in glass and regains its normal speeds
> >>> as it exits from glass? Current physics have no valid answer to this
> >>> question.
> >>
> >> That is not true. It is merely that kenseto is IGNORANT of how modern
> >> physics models this. He seems to think his personal limitations apply to
> >> everybody; they don't.
> >>
> >> This is qualitatively and quantitatively described in QED as due to the
> >> interactions of the light (photons) with the myriad charged particles in
> >> the glass.
> >
> > The problem with this explanation is that the light beam should be dispersed
> > when it exists the glass......but it doesn't, it maintains a coherent beam
> > after it exists from the glass. Also if light is composed of photons then how
> > does the photons regain the necessary energy to make them moving at c again?
> 
> I repeat: those are all problems with your PERSONAL MISCONCEPTIONS about modern 
> physics in general and QED in particular. The actual theory has no such "problems".
> 
> Tom Roberts

You still talk like a stupid babe...
Why?

Because Your stupid QED has nothing to say about the lightspeed!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#402387

From	Mitzi Gilliard <iotoor@iGMaMiai.org>
Date	2016-12-20 03:49 +0000
Message-ID	<o3a9of$2ck$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to	#402317

Tom Roberts wrote:

> I repeat: those are all problems with your PERSONAL MISCONCEPTIONS about
> modern physics in general and QED in particular. The actual theory has
> no such "problems". Tom Roberts

Next would be to say that QED is also to be understood.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#402392

From	kenseto <setoken@att.net>
Date	2016-12-19 20:06 -0800
Message-ID	<eae242bf-7d0b-442b-bba2-4a358a7e1938@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#402317

On Monday, December 19, 2016 at 12:54:18 PM UTC-5, tjrob137 wrote:
> On 12/19/16 12/19/16 - 10:02 AM, kenseto wrote:
> > On Monday, December 19, 2016 at 10:27:56 AM UTC-5, tjrob137 wrote:
> >> On 12/18/16 12/18/16 - 11:24 PM, kenseto wrote:
> >>> Why is the speed of light slower in glass and regains its normal speeds
> >>> as it exits from glass? Current physics have no valid answer to this
> >>> question.
> >>
> >> That is not true. It is merely that kenseto is IGNORANT of how modern
> >> physics models this. He seems to think his personal limitations apply to
> >> everybody; they don't.
> >>
> >> This is qualitatively and quantitatively described in QED as due to the
> >> interactions of the light (photons) with the myriad charged particles in
> >> the glass.
> >
> > The problem with this explanation is that the light beam should be dispersed
> > when it exists the glass......but it doesn't, it maintains a coherent beam
> > after it exists from the glass. Also if light is composed of photons then how
> > does the photons regain the necessary energy to make them moving at c again?
> 
> I repeat: those are all problems with your PERSONAL MISCONCEPTIONS about modern 
> physics in general and QED in particular. The actual theory has no such "problems".
> 

Assertion is not a valid argument.....the problems I outlined still exist and QED does not address the problems.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#402394

From	Mitzi Gilliard <iotoor@iGMaMiai.org>
Date	2016-12-20 04:12 +0000
Message-ID	<o3ab39$3jc$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to	#402392

kenseto wrote:

>> I repeat: those are all problems with your PERSONAL MISCONCEPTIONS
>> about modern physics in general and QED in particular. The actual
>> theory has no such "problems".
>
> Assertion is not a valid argument.....the problems I outlined still
> exist and QED does not address the problems.

We agree entirely. Your friend probably does not yet know that QED is 
based wholefully on un-addressed problems and surly also misconception.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#402400

From	moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Date	2016-12-20 06:35 +0000
Message-ID	<o3ajfr$h82$1@pcls7.std.com>
In reply to	#402392

kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes:

>On Monday, December 19, 2016 at 12:54:18 PM UTC-5, tjrob137 wrote:

>> I repeat: those are all problems with your PERSONAL MISCONCEPTIONS about modern 
>> physics in general and QED in particular. The actual theory has no such "problems".
>> 

>Assertion is not a valid argument.....the problems I outlined still 
>exist and QED does not address the problems. 

Assertion is not a valid argument. You assert (falsely) that some sort of
problems exist and that QED doesn't address the alleged problems.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#402434

From	Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date	2016-12-20 07:23 -0600
Message-ID	<o3bbcg$1k4b$4@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to	#402300

On 12/19/2016 10:02 AM, kenseto wrote:
> On Monday, December 19, 2016 at 10:27:56 AM UTC-5, tjrob137 wrote:
>> On 12/18/16 12/18/16 - 11:24 PM, kenseto wrote:
>>> Why is the speed of light slower in glass and regains its normal speeds as it exits from glass?
>>> Current physics have no valid answer to this question.
>>
>> That is not true. It is merely that kenseto is IGNORANT of how modern physics
>> models this. He seems to think his personal limitations apply to everybody; they
>> don't.
>>
>> This is qualitatively and quantitatively described in QED as due to the
>> interactions of the light (photons) with the myriad charged particles in the glass.
>
> The problem with this explanation is that the light beam should be dispersed when it exists

Not according to QED. Why would you think it should be dispersed?

> the glass......but it doesn't, it maintains a coherent beam after it exists from the glass.
> Also if light is composed of photons then how does the photons regain the necessary energy
> to make them moving at c again?

In QED, there is no reduced energy associated with traveling less than 
c. Why would you think there is less energy?


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#402446

From	kenseto <setoken@att.net>
Date	2016-12-20 07:23 -0800
Message-ID	<3af7703c-e0de-49c5-a258-b6c07d8db01d@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#402434

On Tuesday, December 20, 2016 at 8:23:31 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 12/19/2016 10:02 AM, kenseto wrote:
> > On Monday, December 19, 2016 at 10:27:56 AM UTC-5, tjrob137 wrote:
> >> On 12/18/16 12/18/16 - 11:24 PM, kenseto wrote:
> >>> Why is the speed of light slower in glass and regains its normal speeds as it exits from glass?
> >>> Current physics have no valid answer to this question.
> >>
> >> That is not true. It is merely that kenseto is IGNORANT of how modern physics
> >> models this. He seems to think his personal limitations apply to everybody; they
> >> don't.
> >>
> >> This is qualitatively and quantitatively described in QED as due to the
> >> interactions of the light (photons) with the myriad charged particles in the glass.
> >
> > The problem with this explanation is that the light beam should be dispersed when it exists
> 
> Not according to QED. Why would you think it should be dispersed?

It follows from the QED explanation that the reason why light moves slower in glass is due to: Light interacts with the atoms in the glass and that's why it follows a non-linear path in the glass.
> 
> > the glass......but it doesn't, it maintains a coherent beam after it exists from the glass.
> > Also if light is composed of photons then how does the photons regain the necessary energy
> > to make them moving at c again?
> 
> In QED, there is no reduced energy associated with traveling less than 
> c. Why would you think there is less energy?

If light is composed of photons then it losses energy in the glass and regains energy as it exists from the glass.
My explanation that light is being transmitted by the continuous E-Matrix is the only viable explanation. The E-Matrix inside the glass is more curved.....this causes light to have a slower speed inside the glass.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#402466

From	Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Date	2016-12-20 11:35 -0600
Message-ID	<o3bq5o$g6n$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to	#402446

On 12/20/2016 9:23 AM, kenseto wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 20, 2016 at 8:23:31 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> On 12/19/2016 10:02 AM, kenseto wrote:
>>> On Monday, December 19, 2016 at 10:27:56 AM UTC-5, tjrob137 wrote:
>>>> On 12/18/16 12/18/16 - 11:24 PM, kenseto wrote:
>>>>> Why is the speed of light slower in glass and regains its normal speeds as it exits from glass?
>>>>> Current physics have no valid answer to this question.
>>>>
>>>> That is not true. It is merely that kenseto is IGNORANT of how modern physics
>>>> models this. He seems to think his personal limitations apply to everybody; they
>>>> don't.
>>>>
>>>> This is qualitatively and quantitatively described in QED as due to the
>>>> interactions of the light (photons) with the myriad charged particles in the glass.
>>>
>>> The problem with this explanation is that the light beam should be dispersed when it exists
>>
>> Not according to QED. Why would you think it should be dispersed?
>
> It follows from the QED explanation that the reason why light moves slower in glass is due to:
> Light interacts with the atoms in the glass and that's why it follows a non-linear path in the glass.

No, that does not follow.

>>
>>> the glass......but it doesn't, it maintains a coherent beam after it exists from the glass.
>>> Also if light is composed of photons then how does the photons regain the necessary energy
>>> to make them moving at c again?
>>
>> In QED, there is no reduced energy associated with traveling less than
>> c. Why would you think there is less energy?
>
> If light is composed of photons then it losses energy in the glass

No, it does not. Why do you think so?

> and regains energy as it exists from the glass.
> My explanation that light is being transmitted by the continuous E-Matrix is the only
> viable explanation. The E-Matrix inside the glass is more curved.....this causes light
> to have a slower speed inside the glass.
>


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#402591

From	kenseto <setoken@att.net>
Date	2016-12-21 06:33 -0800
Message-ID	<f4eeb3a6-27e6-4129-b54a-f4d7f9dbe72c@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#402466

On Tuesday, December 20, 2016 at 12:35:56 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 12/20/2016 9:23 AM, kenseto wrote:
> > On Tuesday, December 20, 2016 at 8:23:31 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> >> On 12/19/2016 10:02 AM, kenseto wrote:
> >>> On Monday, December 19, 2016 at 10:27:56 AM UTC-5, tjrob137 wrote:
> >>>> On 12/18/16 12/18/16 - 11:24 PM, kenseto wrote:
> >>>>> Why is the speed of light slower in glass and regains its normal speeds as it exits from glass?
> >>>>> Current physics have no valid answer to this question.
> >>>>
> >>>> That is not true. It is merely that kenseto is IGNORANT of how modern physics
> >>>> models this. He seems to think his personal limitations apply to everybody; they
> >>>> don't.
> >>>>
> >>>> This is qualitatively and quantitatively described in QED as due to the
> >>>> interactions of the light (photons) with the myriad charged particles in the glass.
> >>>
> >>> The problem with this explanation is that the light beam should be dispersed when it exists
> >>
> >> Not according to QED. Why would you think it should be dispersed?
> >
> > It follows from the QED explanation that the reason why light moves slower in glass is due to:
> > Light interacts with the atoms in the glass and that's why it follows a non-linear path in the glass.
> 
> No, that does not follow.
> 
> >>
> >>> the glass......but it doesn't, it maintains a coherent beam after it exists from the glass.
> >>> Also if light is composed of photons then how does the photons regain the necessary energy
> >>> to make them moving at c again?
> >>
> >> In QED, there is no reduced energy associated with traveling less than
> >> c. Why would you think there is less energy?
> >
> > If light is composed of photons then it losses energy in the glass
> 
> No, it does not. Why do you think so?

If photons moves slower in glass then it must be because they loose energy.....No?
> 
> > and regains energy as it exists from the glass.
> > My explanation that light is being transmitted by the continuous E-Matrix is the only
> > viable explanation. The E-Matrix inside the glass is more curved.....this causes light
> > to have a slower speed inside the glass.
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#402592

From	"David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date	2016-12-21 06:50 -0800
Message-ID	<22189363-d745-4de4-8e82-275eb16d684c@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#402591

On Wednesday, December 21, 2016 at 8:33:25 AM UTC-6, kenseto wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 20, 2016 at 12:35:56 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> > On 12/20/2016 9:23 AM, kenseto wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, December 20, 2016 at 8:23:31 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> > >> On 12/19/2016 10:02 AM, kenseto wrote:
> > >>> On Monday, December 19, 2016 at 10:27:56 AM UTC-5, tjrob137 wrote:
> > >>>> On 12/18/16 12/18/16 - 11:24 PM, kenseto wrote:
> > >>>>> Why is the speed of light slower in glass and regains its normal speeds as it exits from glass?
> > >>>>> Current physics have no valid answer to this question.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> That is not true. It is merely that kenseto is IGNORANT of how modern physics
> > >>>> models this. He seems to think his personal limitations apply to everybody; they
> > >>>> don't.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> This is qualitatively and quantitatively described in QED as due to the
> > >>>> interactions of the light (photons) with the myriad charged particles in the glass.
> > >>>
> > >>> The problem with this explanation is that the light beam should be dispersed when it exists
> > >>
> > >> Not according to QED. Why would you think it should be dispersed?
> > >
> > > It follows from the QED explanation that the reason why light moves slower in glass is due to:
> > > Light interacts with the atoms in the glass and that's why it follows a non-linear path in the glass.
> > 
> > No, that does not follow.
> > 
> > >>
> > >>> the glass......but it doesn't, it maintains a coherent beam after it exists from the glass.
> > >>> Also if light is composed of photons then how does the photons regain the necessary energy
> > >>> to make them moving at c again?
> > >>
> > >> In QED, there is no reduced energy associated with traveling less than
> > >> c. Why would you think there is less energy?
> > >
> > > If light is composed of photons then it losses energy in the glass
> > 
> > No, it does not. Why do you think so?
> 
> If photons moves slower in glass then it must be because they loose energy.....No?

Yah ... simply apply SR... Space time has less kinetic energy inside glass because of Baryon count per cubic meter

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#402595

From	"Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net>
Date	2016-12-21 07:42 -0800
Message-ID	<05b2f699-0d3f-4c14-8685-be062643a349@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#402591

On Wednesday, December 21, 2016 at 6:33:25 AM UTC-8, kenseto wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 20, 2016 at 12:35:56 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> > On 12/20/2016 9:23 AM, kenseto wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, December 20, 2016 at 8:23:31 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> > >> On 12/19/2016 10:02 AM, kenseto wrote:
> > >>> On Monday, December 19, 2016 at 10:27:56 AM UTC-5, tjrob137 wrote:
> > >>>> On 12/18/16 12/18/16 - 11:24 PM, kenseto wrote:
> > >>>>> Why is the speed of light slower in glass and regains its normal speeds as it exits from glass?
> > >>>>> Current physics have no valid answer to this question.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> That is not true. It is merely that kenseto is IGNORANT of how modern physics
> > >>>> models this. He seems to think his personal limitations apply to everybody; they
> > >>>> don't.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> This is qualitatively and quantitatively described in QED as due to the
> > >>>> interactions of the light (photons) with the myriad charged particles in the glass.
> > >>>
> > >>> The problem with this explanation is that the light beam should be dispersed when it exists
> > >>
> > >> Not according to QED. Why would you think it should be dispersed?
> > >
> > > It follows from the QED explanation that the reason why light moves slower in glass is due to:
> > > Light interacts with the atoms in the glass and that's why it follows a non-linear path in the glass.
> > 
> > No, that does not follow.
> > 
> > >>
> > >>> the glass......but it doesn't, it maintains a coherent beam after it exists from the glass.
> > >>> Also if light is composed of photons then how does the photons regain the necessary energy
> > >>> to make them moving at c again?
> > >>
> > >> In QED, there is no reduced energy associated with traveling less than
> > >> c. Why would you think there is less energy?
> > >
> > > If light is composed of photons then it losses energy in the glass
> > 
> > No, it does not. Why do you think so?
> 
> If photons moves slower in glass then it must be because they loose energy.....No?
No, the photons continue to move at "c", it is just that their path is a zig-zag, so they only appear to move slower.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#402596

From	Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com>
Date	2016-12-21 16:58 +0100
Message-ID	<o3e8o1$ds9$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#402595

On 12/21/2016 04:42 PM, Dono, wrote:
>>
>> If photons moves slower in glass then it must be because they loose energy.....No?
> No, the photons continue to move at "c", it is just that their path is a zig-zag, so they only appear to move slower.

Similar occurs in vacuum for non zero OAM light beams,
with the beam propagation speed < c,
as path is prolonged by a helix like wavefront propagation.

How about media with n < 1 and phase speed > c like water for X rays ?
Wave-like optic with reversed phase shifts explains it as well,
but how is it on quantum level ?

-- 
Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer )

A wise man guards words he says,
as they say about him more,
than he says about the subject.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#402598

From	Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com>
Date	2016-12-21 17:05 +0100
Message-ID	<o3e96c$hrp$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#402596

On 12/21/2016 04:58 PM, Poutnik wrote:
> On 12/21/2016 04:42 PM, Dono, wrote:
>>>
>>> If photons moves slower in glass then it must be because they loose
>>> energy.....No?
>> No, the photons continue to move at "c", it is just that their path is
>> a zig-zag, so they only appear to move slower.
>
> Similar occurs in vacuum for non zero OAM light beams,
> with the beam propagation speed < c,
> as path is prolonged by a helix like wavefront propagation.
>
> How about media with n < 1 and phase speed > c like water for X rays ?
> Wave-like optic with reversed phase shifts explains it as well,
> but how is it on quantum level ?
>

P.S.: As for normal cases with n > 1 it can be explained
( simplified as Tom said ) by slowing via longer paths.
But n < 1 cannot be explained
by shortening paths nor speeding them up.

I suppose - but I can be wrong as not a quantum physics experts,
- that there should be universal quantum description
for both n > 1 and n < 1 scenarios.


-- 
Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer )

A wise man guards words he says,
as they say about him more,
than he says about the subject.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#402602

From	"David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com>
Date	2016-12-21 08:51 -0800
Message-ID	<5cbe60ec-13ee-42d7-a87d-e3ac0c2dc666@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#402595

On Wednesday, December 21, 2016 at 9:42:50 AM UTC-6, Dono, wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 21, 2016 at 6:33:25 AM UTC-8, kenseto wrote:
> > On Tuesday, December 20, 2016 at 12:35:56 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> > > On 12/20/2016 9:23 AM, kenseto wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, December 20, 2016 at 8:23:31 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> > > >> On 12/19/2016 10:02 AM, kenseto wrote:
> > > >>> On Monday, December 19, 2016 at 10:27:56 AM UTC-5, tjrob137 wrote:
> > > >>>> On 12/18/16 12/18/16 - 11:24 PM, kenseto wrote:
> > > >>>>> Why is the speed of light slower in glass and regains its normal speeds as it exits from glass?
> > > >>>>> Current physics have no valid answer to this question.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> That is not true. It is merely that kenseto is IGNORANT of how modern physics
> > > >>>> models this. He seems to think his personal limitations apply to everybody; they
> > > >>>> don't.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> This is qualitatively and quantitatively described in QED as due to the
> > > >>>> interactions of the light (photons) with the myriad charged particles in the glass.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> The problem with this explanation is that the light beam should be dispersed when it exists
> > > >>
> > > >> Not according to QED. Why would you think it should be dispersed?
> > > >
> > > > It follows from the QED explanation that the reason why light moves slower in glass is due to:
> > > > Light interacts with the atoms in the glass and that's why it follows a non-linear path in the glass.
> > > 
> > > No, that does not follow.
> > > 
> > > >>
> > > >>> the glass......but it doesn't, it maintains a coherent beam after it exists from the glass.
> > > >>> Also if light is composed of photons then how does the photons regain the necessary energy
> > > >>> to make them moving at c again?
> > > >>
> > > >> In QED, there is no reduced energy associated with traveling less than
> > > >> c. Why would you think there is less energy?
> > > >
> > > > If light is composed of photons then it losses energy in the glass
> > > 
> > > No, it does not. Why do you think so?
> > 
> > If photons moves slower in glass then it must be because they loose energy.....No?
> 
> 
> No, the photons continue to move at "c", it is just that their path is a zig-zag, so they only appear to move slower.

https://goo.gl/photos/AiDGr7WiipqK2dWf9

Yah ... Zig Zig? is that something you are Smoking ???

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#402604

From	kenseto <setoken@att.net>
Date	2016-12-21 08:57 -0800
Message-ID	<ff358812-43c0-4d7e-aa97-9db921656ae4@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#402595

On Wednesday, December 21, 2016 at 10:42:50 AM UTC-5, Dono, wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 21, 2016 at 6:33:25 AM UTC-8, kenseto wrote:
> > On Tuesday, December 20, 2016 at 12:35:56 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> > > On 12/20/2016 9:23 AM, kenseto wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, December 20, 2016 at 8:23:31 AM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> > > >> On 12/19/2016 10:02 AM, kenseto wrote:
> > > >>> On Monday, December 19, 2016 at 10:27:56 AM UTC-5, tjrob137 wrote:
> > > >>>> On 12/18/16 12/18/16 - 11:24 PM, kenseto wrote:
> > > >>>>> Why is the speed of light slower in glass and regains its normal speeds as it exits from glass?
> > > >>>>> Current physics have no valid answer to this question.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> That is not true. It is merely that kenseto is IGNORANT of how modern physics
> > > >>>> models this. He seems to think his personal limitations apply to everybody; they
> > > >>>> don't.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> This is qualitatively and quantitatively described in QED as due to the
> > > >>>> interactions of the light (photons) with the myriad charged particles in the glass.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> The problem with this explanation is that the light beam should be dispersed when it exists
> > > >>
> > > >> Not according to QED. Why would you think it should be dispersed?
> > > >
> > > > It follows from the QED explanation that the reason why light moves slower in glass is due to:
> > > > Light interacts with the atoms in the glass and that's why it follows a non-linear path in the glass.
> > > 
> > > No, that does not follow.
> > > 
> > > >>
> > > >>> the glass......but it doesn't, it maintains a coherent beam after it exists from the glass.
> > > >>> Also if light is composed of photons then how does the photons regain the necessary energy
> > > >>> to make them moving at c again?
> > > >>
> > > >> In QED, there is no reduced energy associated with traveling less than
> > > >> c. Why would you think there is less energy?
> > > >
> > > > If light is composed of photons then it losses energy in the glass
> > > 
> > > No, it does not. Why do you think so?
> > 
> > If photons moves slower in glass then it must be because they loose energy.....No?
> No, the photons continue to move at "c", it is just that their path is a zig-zag, so they only appear to move slower.

In that case why isn't the beam completely dispersed as soon as it enter into the glass? Since they aren't dispersed that mean your explanation zig-zag path is wrong.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 11 [1] 2 3 … 11 Next page →

csiph-web

Why is the speed of light slower in glass and regains its normal speeds as it exits from glass?

Contents

#402250 — Why is the speed of light slower in glass and regains its normal speeds as it exits from glass?

#402258

#402294

#402300

#402317

#402335

#402387

#402392

#402394

#402400

#402434

#402446

#402466

#402591

#402592

#402595

#402596

#402598

#402602

#402604