Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #473779 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-10-02 09:47 +0100 |
| Last post | 2018-10-16 19:13 +0100 |
| Articles | 15 on this page of 155 — 14 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 09:47 +0100
Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-02 04:20 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:21 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-02 06:02 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 14:12 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-02 12:39 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 14:08 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-07 08:40 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-07 07:22 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-07 14:42 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-07 17:41 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 13:19 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-02 06:56 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 14:00 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-02 07:12 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-02 07:14 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-02 07:12 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 14:15 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-02 08:49 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-02 13:31 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-03 06:06 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 06:09 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:05 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-03 07:14 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 15:38 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 16:43 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-03 08:51 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 16:06 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 09:17 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-04 07:24 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:25 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-04 08:53 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 19:22 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-04 14:38 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-04 21:47 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 22:03 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 08:30 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-05 04:26 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 15:01 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 08:11 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-06 08:32 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 20:20 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-07 07:19 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 19:19 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 01:00 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 21:40 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 16:45 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-02 17:10 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-02 09:15 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-02 09:18 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-03 06:41 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 19:06 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-04 07:52 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Hilton Packett <wod@wcotahr.ce> - 2018-10-02 20:28 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com> - 2018-10-03 03:32 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 05:18 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 05:06 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 10:51 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 09:58 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 03:19 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 12:28 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 12:44 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 05:57 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 14:05 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 09:16 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 19:36 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 18:59 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 19:53 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-03 21:56 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 04:45 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 00:06 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 09:58 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 02:46 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 10:03 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 03:31 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 12:21 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 11:49 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 05:42 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 14:46 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:25 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 09:41 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 18:26 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-04 11:45 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 07:15 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 06:39 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-05 00:31 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 06:53 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 08:51 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-05 00:58 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 12:17 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 14:54 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 08:10 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 19:17 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-06 20:20 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 05:37 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 09:17 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-07 04:57 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-07 04:59 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-07 05:39 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-07 20:36 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-06 22:59 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-04 07:13 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 15:25 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-04 09:00 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 12:33 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-10-03 05:38 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-04 11:30 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-03 06:18 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-03 13:41 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-03 20:01 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tt> - 2018-10-03 20:00 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-04 14:28 -0400
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 06:32 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-05 06:44 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-05 09:03 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-07 08:59 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-07 07:33 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-07 16:37 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-08 12:30 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tc> - 2018-10-08 17:41 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-08 20:00 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-08 22:12 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-08 23:39 -0400
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-08 20:46 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-09 13:30 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-15 22:21 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-10-15 21:14 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-15 22:10 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-16 08:50 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-16 18:43 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-17 03:30 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-16 22:47 -0400
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-15 22:07 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-15 22:14 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-16 08:39 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2018-10-16 05:03 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-16 21:08 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-16 18:50 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-17 03:31 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 06:28 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 13:02 -0400
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-17 18:47 +0100
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-10-19 19:15 +0000
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-22 11:44 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2018-10-16 23:11 +0200
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-16 18:41 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-22 13:04 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-09 06:06 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-10-09 08:45 -0500
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-09 07:27 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-09 07:40 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2018-10-09 07:43 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2018-10-10 07:08 -0700
Re: Why the *Medium* Matters. Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tc> - 2018-10-09 14:04 +0000
Another Reason "Why the *Medium* Matters." Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-10-16 19:13 +0100
Page 8 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8]
| From | benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-17 13:02 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pq7pug$1hjh$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #475078 |
On 10/17/2018 1:28 AM, Keith Stein wrote: > On 17/10/2018 00:50, Tom Roberts wrote: >> On 10/16/18 3:08 PM, Keith Stein wrote: > >>> At the macroscopic level we know what it is. >>> LIGHT IS AN ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVE >> >> No. We only MODEL it as an EM wave, and only in certain physical >> situations. Underlying that model is a better one in which a light ray >> consists of myriad photons. >> >>> There are many experiments that >>> cannot be explained with any sort of wave model, >>> >>> Not at the macroscopic level there aren't. >> >> Lasers are certainly macroscopic objects, > > Yes macroscopic objects with resonant chambers in which > the ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVE is amplified as it bounces between > the mirrors, which are an integral number of *WAVELENGTHS* apart. > >> as are the light beams they generate. But their light cannot be >> modeled as a wave. > > On the contrary Mr.Roberts, laser light is modeled as an almost > MONOCHROMATIC, COHERENT, *WAVE*, 'cos that's what it IS eh! > > For instance, >> coherence length makes no sense for a wave. > Strange you would say that Mr.Roberts, because i would say > that "coherence length" ONLY MAKES SENSE for a *WAVE*. > > keith stein Mr. Roberts as usual has no clue, but then you have failed to explain the nature of laser light when the intensity is reduced to VERY low levels. If Light is a wave, then you need a wave theory to explain those effects. OK? (phlogiston theory)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-17 18:47 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <2BKxD.126203$wF4.64823@fx27.am4> |
| In reply to | #475111 |
On 17/10/2018 18:02, benj wrote: > On 10/17/2018 1:28 AM, Keith Stein wrote: >> On 17/10/2018 00:50, Tom Roberts wrote: >>> On 10/16/18 3:08 PM, Keith Stein wrote: >> >>>> At the macroscopic level we know what it is. >>>> LIGHT IS AN ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVE >>> >>> No. We only MODEL it as an EM wave, and only in certain physical >>> situations. Underlying that model is a better one in which a light >>> ray consists of myriad photons. >>> >>>> There are many experiments that >>>> cannot be explained with any sort of wave model, >>>> >>>> Not at the macroscopic level there aren't. >>> >>> Lasers are certainly macroscopic objects, >> >> Yes macroscopic objects with resonant chambers in which >> the ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVE is amplified as it bounces between >> the mirrors, which are an integral number of *WAVELENGTHS* apart. >> >>> as are the light beams they generate. But their light cannot be >>> modeled as a wave. >> >> On the contrary Mr.Roberts, laser light is modeled as an almost >> MONOCHROMATIC, COHERENT, *WAVE*, 'cos that's what it IS eh! >> >> For instance, >>> coherence length makes no sense for a wave. >> Strange you would say that Mr.Roberts, because i would say >> that "coherence length" ONLY MAKES SENSE for a *WAVE*. >> >> keith stein > > Mr. Roberts as usual has no clue, but then you have failed to explain > the nature of laser light when the intensity is reduced to VERY low > levels. If Light is a wave, then you need a wave theory to explain those > effects. OK? (phlogiston theory) Well i don't know much phlogiston theory myself Benj, but at the macroscopic level light is an electromagnetic wave in a medium, i.e. Maxwell's Theory rather than phlogiston theory, i think, but i thank you for the response. keith stein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-19 19:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pqdagd$947$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #475046 |
Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> writes: >On 16/10/2018 13:03, Paparios wrote: >>>>> Tom Roberts wrote: >>>>>> I agree that we do not know what light actually is. >At the macroscopic level we know what it is. >LIGHT IS AN ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVE No, it resembles a wave in many ways. In many other ways, it does not. >at the macroscopic level it surely IS. Not for very short wavelength photons such as gamma rays in interstellar space, where the spacing between atoms is very large, and the photons/ "waves" spend most of their time in a perfect vacuum. > But we _DO_ know >>>>>> what it is not: light is NOT a wave. >You certainly can not explain the working of a diffraction grating, >without modeling light AS a wave Mr.Roberts And you cannot explain the photoelectric effect with light as a wave. > There are many experiments that >>>>>> cannot be explained with any sort of wave model, >Not at the macroscopic level there aren't. Wrong. The photoelectric effect just mentioned.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-22 11:44 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <-ZmdnWUWpJesY1DGnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #475046 |
On 10/16/18 3:08 PM, Keith Stein wrote: > You certainly can not explain the working of a diffraction grating, > without modeling light AS a wave Mr.Roberts Sure I can: The probability of detecting a photon from a monochromatic source, after being diffracted by the grating, yields a pattern that is indistinguishable from an analysis using waves. Even though photons aren't waves, and don't posses a wavelength, the integral over all paths that determines detection amplitudes/probabilities is certainly capable of generating interference effects; for many optical situations this is indistinguishable from a wave analysis. After all, wave optics is an approximation to Maxwell's equations, which are an approximation to QED. You need to come down off your high horse and recognize that physics has moved on without you, and the ONLY way you can catch up is to STUDY. Whatever it is that you think you are doing is not working, as you repeatedly display no insights, and no understanding, just IGNORANCE. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-16 23:11 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <e2dfc36e-abe9-601e-8fdf-7eee2163504a@PointedEars.de> |
| In reply to | #475024 |
Paparios wrote: > Your arrogance, as a student, is showing here (as in many of your posts)!! <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem> > Tom has a long history (since more than 20 years in this forum) of providing > good and up to date insights into all these subjects. He was/is a working > scientist while you are what?? <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority> -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-16 18:41 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <tIqdnU_usYXc6lvGnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #475015 |
On 10/16/18 1:39 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > [...] I am not a lawyer quibbling over minutiae in the wording of a contract. Nor am I interested in a Talmudic analysis of such text. The text you quoted CLEARLY envisions two different models for light. An astronomy textbook is NOT the place to look for accurate descriptions of the physical processes involved in light. BTW if light is modeled as quanta, then it IS NOT A WAVE. If there are experiments and observations that no conceivable wave model can explain, then light IS NOT A WAVE. Both apply. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-22 13:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ffda8d09-d34b-4fa0-891d-da0c7d4f4a68@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #475060 |
On Tuesday, October 16, 2018 at 7:42:00 PM UTC-4, tjrob137 wrote: > On 10/16/18 1:39 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > > [...] > > I am not a lawyer quibbling over minutiae in the wording of a contract. > Nor am I interested in a Talmudic analysis of such text. > > The text you quoted CLEARLY envisions two different models for light. An > astronomy textbook is NOT the place to look for accurate descriptions of > the physical processes involved in light. > > BTW if light is modeled as quanta, then it IS NOT A WAVE. > If there are experiments and observations that no conceivable > wave model can explain, then light IS NOT A WAVE. Both apply. Can you tell us what experiments and observations that no conceivable wave-packet model can explain?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-09 06:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8fb47bca-7675-4b1a-9118-ce8790bac8ac@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474471 |
On Monday, October 8, 2018 at 1:30:48 PM UTC-4, tjrob137 wrote: > On 10/7/18 9:37 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > > There can be no doubt that light can be *modeled* as an electromagnetic > > wave, a self-propagating excitation of the electromagnetic field. There > > is a *wave* equation that describes that: > > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_wave_equation> > > Sure, IN CERTAIN PHYSICAL SITUATIONS. But this model is quite limited in domain, > and is completely useless for modeling a laser, or frequency-doubling crystals, > or many other aspects of quantum optics. Photons as wave-packet can explain laser nicely. I don’t know what frequency-doubling crystals mean. > > > That it can be *modeled* like a collection of _myriads of_ photons in > > certain specific physical situations, as *elementary* excitations of that > > field when that interacts with matter, does NOT mean that it actually "is > > a collection of myriad photons" either. > > Yeah. This is a MUCH better model, that includes the wave model, and all known > optical phenomena. But you're right, we don't really know what light actually > is, this is just a much better model of its behavior. Photons as wave-packets can explain all phenomena....they include both particle and wave models of light. > > > You can’t have your cake and eat it too. > > Hmmm. I can have a better model, and it's QUITE CLEAR that light is not a wave, > for the simple reason that many observed phenomena involving light cannot be > modeled as a wave. Wave-packet of light can explain all observed phenomena of light.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-09 08:45 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <o4ednVKN8bRgLSHGnZ2dnUU7_81j4p2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #474534 |
On 10/9/18 8:06 AM, kenseto wrote: > Wave-packet of light can explain all observed phenomena of light. Not if it is a CLASSICAL wave packet. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-09 07:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fca4970a-e97b-4694-84b7-adde825202cb@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474536 |
tjrob137 escrito On 10/9/18 8:06 AM, kenseto wrote: > Wave-packet of light can explain all observed phenomena of light. Not if it is a CLASSICAL wave packet. Tom Roberts Wave packet = ((c^7) / (hbar * (G^2))) * (planck length^3) = 1.95611386e+9 joules (((((c^7) / (hbar * (G^2))) * (planck length^3)) / (G / (c^2))) * hbar)^(1 / 3) = 6.5248935 m kg / s https://photos.app.goo.gl/rN6DR4aPANaSXQGCA https://photos.app.goo.gl/uAHcnqP3nd9TFd8y1 https://photos.app.goo.gl/dnYHeIu3criKWutK2 (Classical Friedmann Kinematic Viscosity) to (electron Compton Kinematic Viscosity) to (Planck Kinematic Viscosity) https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ljusv5jFVIiNWHzOEejwQJyrToKbJkoq68XLLuOnEkk Fluid Dynamics
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-09 07:40 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4c468271-88ce-43aa-822e-4b64632edcb4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474542 |
tjrob137 escrito On 10/9/18 8:06 AM, kenseto wrote: > Wave-packet of light can explain all observed phenomena of light. Not if it is a CLASSICAL wave packet. Tom Roberts Wave packet = ((c^7) / (hbar * (G^2))) * (planck length^3) = 1.95611386e+9 joules (((((c^7) / (hbar * (G^2))) * (planck length^3)) / (G / (c^2))) * hbar)^(1 / 3) = 6.5248935 m kg / s https://photos.app.goo.gl/rN6DR4aPANaSXQGCA https://photos.app.goo.gl/uAHcnqP3nd9TFd8y1 https://photos.app.goo.gl/dnYHeIu3criKWutK2 (Classical Friedmann Kinematic Viscosity) to (electron Compton Kinematic Viscosity) to (Planck Kinematic Viscosity) https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ljusv5jFVIiNWHzOEejwQJyrToKbJkoq68XLLuOnEkk Fluid Dynamics (Combination of Bjerknes oscillating forces ) = https://photos.app.goo.gl/dimWxqM5DQGUcgVu9 = https://photos.app.goo.gl/ZTaLZhmBeTcemJMJ7
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-09 07:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <334a4e38-7aba-4312-8f02-d28b0cdcd515@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474545 |
tjrob137 escrito On 10/9/18 8:06 AM, kenseto wrote: > Wave-packet of light can explain all observed phenomena of light. Not if it is a CLASSICAL wave packet. Tom Roberts Wave packet = ((c^7) / (hbar * (G^2))) * (planck length^3) = 1.95611386e+9 joules (((((c^7) / (hbar * (G^2))) * (planck length^3)) / (G / (c^2))) * hbar)^(1 / 3) = 6.5248935 m kg / s https://photos.app.goo.gl/rN6DR4aPANaSXQGCA https://photos.app.goo.gl/uAHcnqP3nd9TFd8y1 https://photos.app.goo.gl/dnYHeIu3criKWutK2 (Classical Friedmann Kinematic Viscosity) to (electron Compton Kinematic Viscosity) to (Planck Kinematic Viscosity) https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ljusv5jFVIiNWHzOEejwQJyrToKbJkoq68XLLuOnEkk Fluid Dynamics (Combination of Bjerknes oscillating forces ) = https://photos.app.goo.gl/dimWxqM5DQGUcgVu9 = https://photos.app.goo.gl/ZTaLZhmBeTcemJMJ7 Also explains & gives justification for Einstein’s photoelectric effect = https://photos.app.goo.gl/ZTaLZhmBeTcemJMJ7
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | kenseto <setoken@att.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-10 07:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <bf7cc055-266f-410a-b141-b62bc908145a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #474536 |
On Tuesday, October 9, 2018 at 9:45:40 AM UTC-4, tjrob137 wrote: > On 10/9/18 8:06 AM, kenseto wrote: > > Wave-packet of light can explain all observed phenomena of light. > > Not if it is a CLASSICAL wave packet. > > Tom Roberts All the quantum properties of photons in the following past famous experiments are explained, by photons as wave-packets, in the following link: http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015experiment.pdf 1. The Photoelectric Experiment. 2. The Double-Slit Experiment. 3. The Compton Shift Experiment.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Gish <uop@uwrwuao.tc> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-09 14:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ppici1$16e9$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #474534 |
kenseto wrote: > On Monday, October 8, 2018 at 1:30:48 PM UTC-4, tjrob137 wrote: >> Hmmm. I can have a better model, and it's QUITE CLEAR that light is not >> a wave, for the simple reason that many observed phenomena involving >> light cannot be modeled as a wave. > > Wave-packet of light can explain all observed phenomena of light. Not if the light is not observable. The phenomenon is still explainable. Nice try. You are testinging him.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-10-16 19:13 +0100 |
| Subject | Another Reason "Why the *Medium* Matters." |
| Message-ID | <qTpxD.28166$VQ4.13276@fx20.am4> |
| In reply to | #473779 |
Another Reason Why the "Medium" Matters
It is the "medium" or average value, or rather variations of it,
that carry the information.
Any one event, say the click of a photon detector, carries zero
information.
Some of you are no doubt thinking "just like this post eh!"
B U T
If you wish to really understand the MUSIC, then study it at the
*atomic level*, and keep studying until either you or the atoms
go deaf and blind eh!
keith stein
On 02/10/2018 09:47, Keith Stein wrote:
> The 'medium' for any wave is just the matter through which
> the wave travels, and in all cases the wave velocity is
> relative to the medium.
>
> Relativists ignore the medium, which is why they can't
> unambiguously synchronize two clocks.
>
> I think so.
>
> keith stein
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web