Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > sci.physics > #694811 > unrolled thread

Density of Photons ?????

Started by"reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com>
First post2018-07-20 14:16 -0700
Last post2018-07-20 17:30 -0700
Articles 20 on this page of 61 — 9 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics


Contents

  Density of Photons ????? "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 14:16 -0700
    Re: Density of Photons ????? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-07-20 14:24 -0700
    Re: Density of Photons ????? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-07-20 14:31 -0700
      Re: Density of Photons ????? "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 14:44 -0700
        Re: Density of Photons ????? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-07-20 14:58 -0700
        Re: Density of Photons ????? mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-07-20 15:15 -0700
          Re: Density of Photons ????? "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 09:38 -0700
            Re: Density of Photons ????? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-07-21 15:36 -0700
              Re: Density of Photons ????? "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-07-21 17:42 -0700
                Re: Density of Photons ????? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-07-21 18:19 -0700
                Re: Density of Photons ????? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-07-22 15:26 -0700
                  Re: Density of Photons ????? poraty6@gmail.com - 2018-07-22 16:34 -0700
                  Re: Density of Photons ????? "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-07-23 13:44 -0700
                    Re: Density of Photons ????? mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-07-23 13:55 -0700
                    Re: Density of Photons ????? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-07-23 16:03 -0700
              Re: Density of Photons ????? poraty6@gmail.com - 2018-07-21 23:55 -0700
        Re: Density of Photons ????? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-07-20 16:00 -0700
          Gravity is residual eXergy. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-07-20 21:56 -0700
            Re: Gravity is residual eXergy. paulcardinale0@gmail.com - 2018-07-22 19:12 -0700
        Re: Density of Photons ????? paulcardinale0@gmail.com - 2018-07-22 19:09 -0700
          Re: Density of Photons ????? poraty6@gmail.com - 2018-07-23 00:12 -0700
            Re: Density of Photons ????? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-07-23 13:39 -0700
              Re: Density of Photons ????? poraty6@gmail.com - 2018-07-23 18:13 -0700
            Re: Density of Photons ????? "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-07-23 14:01 -0700
              Re: Density of Photons ????? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-07-23 14:54 -0700
                Re: Density of Photons ????? "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-07-23 17:26 -0700
                  Re: Density of Photons ????? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-07-23 21:06 -0700
                Re: Density of Photons ????? poraty6@gmail.com - 2018-07-23 18:30 -0700
                Re: Density of Photons ????? poraty6@gmail.com - 2018-07-23 23:05 -0700
                  Re: Density of Photons ????? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-07-24 14:07 -0700
                    Re: Density of Photons ????? benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-07-24 17:20 -0400
                      Re: Density of Photons ????? Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-07-24 14:57 -0700
                        Re: Density of Photons ????? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2018-07-25 01:57 +0000
                          Re: Density of Photons ????? "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-07-25 12:27 -0700
                            Re: Density of Photons ????? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2018-07-25 19:47 +0000
                              Re: Density of Photons ????? "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-07-25 15:40 -0700
                                Re: Density of Photons ????? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-07-25 15:51 -0700
                                Re: Density of Photons ????? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2018-07-25 23:23 +0000
                            Re: Density of Photons ????? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-07-25 14:52 -0700
                        Re: Density of Photons ????? poraty6@gmail.com - 2018-07-24 20:50 -0700
                    Re: Density of Photons ????? jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2018-07-24 21:50 +0000
                    Re: Density of Photons ????? poraty6@gmail.com - 2018-07-24 16:35 -0700
                      Re: Density of Photons ????? mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-07-24 16:51 -0700
                        Re: Density of Photons ????? poraty6@gmail.com - 2018-07-24 20:56 -0700
                          Re: Density of Photons ????? mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-07-24 21:12 -0700
                            Re: Density of Photons ????? poraty6@gmail.com - 2018-07-25 02:00 -0700
                              Re: Density of Photons ????? mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-07-25 13:27 -0700
                    Re: Density of Photons ????? "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-07-24 19:17 -0700
                      Re: Density of Photons ????? mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-07-24 19:23 -0700
                      Re: Density of Photons ????? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-07-24 20:19 -0700
              Re: Density of Photons ????? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-07-23 15:49 -0700
                Re: Density of Photons ????? poraty6@gmail.com - 2018-07-23 18:30 -0700
              Re: Density of Photons ????? paulcardinale0@gmail.com - 2018-07-26 10:09 -0700
                Re: Density of Photons ????? "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-07-26 15:38 -0700
                  Re: Density of Photons ????? "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-07-26 16:22 -0700
                Re: Density of Photons ????? poraty6@gmail.com - 2018-07-27 01:39 -0700
                  Re: Density of Photons ????? poraty6@gmail.com - 2018-07-27 01:41 -0700
      Re: Density of Photons ????? poraty6@gmail.com - 2018-07-21 00:02 -0700
      Re: Density of Photons ????? paulcardinale0@gmail.com - 2018-07-22 19:08 -0700
    Re: Density of Photons ????? poraty6@gmail.com - 2018-07-20 17:24 -0700
    Re: Density of Photons ????? mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-07-20 17:30 -0700

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →


#695138

Fromporaty6@gmail.com
Date2018-07-23 00:12 -0700
Message-ID<b697f31a-c753-468a-908a-cc292164a287@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#695131
On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 5:09:52 AM UTC+3, paulcar...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:44:34 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:31:28 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:
> > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:16:42 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > > > I believe it relates to its wave length.It goes well with my twin photon constructure.Bert
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Density of photons?  An interesting idea, because it implies that photons have mass!
> > > 
> > > Double-A
> > 
> > Mass they have AA.This is proven when gamma photons can kick electrons off a metal surface.
> 
> No, stupid.  That proves that photons have energy, not mass.

=============================
idiot parrot !!

''have energy but no mass ''?1!

E=hf

h is 
Kilogram x meter ^2  times  (scalar f)/second 

now Holly shit 
where do you see in the above
any f en 'relativistic factor''????/!!!!
or
any f en zero multiplier ??!!
==
got it idiot parrot  once and for all ??!!!!
just open your mind
and stop parroting like a parrot 
the photon has mass
the only mass
indeed extremely tiny but yet 
has mass !!!
--
in another analysis I proved that
the mass of the real **single** photon  is
about 
(sit still on your chair)
approximately:

expo -90  Kilogram !!!!!

no one will ever be able to notice it
or detect it !!but 
the  **theoretically* it is important to realize it !!
 even if it is too small for our tools to detect it 
as a real single photon
===
TIA
Y.Porat
=================================  
==
copyright explanation
Y.Porat
=========================



 


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


#695213

FromDouble-A <double-a3@hush.com>
Date2018-07-23 13:39 -0700
Message-ID<e4ebef73-8019-4120-a47d-358fe610a37f@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#695138
On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 12:12:24 AM UTC-7, por...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 5:09:52 AM UTC+3, paulcar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:44:34 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:31:28 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:
> > > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:16:42 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > > > > I believe it relates to its wave length.It goes well with my twin photon constructure.Bert
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Density of photons?  An interesting idea, because it implies that photons have mass!
> > > > 
> > > > Double-A
> > > 
> > > Mass they have AA.This is proven when gamma photons can kick electrons off a metal surface.
> > 
> > No, stupid.  That proves that photons have energy, not mass.
> 
> =============================
> idiot parrot !!
> 
> ''have energy but no mass ''?1!
> 
> E=hf
> 
> h is 
> Kilogram x meter ^2  times  (scalar f)/second 
> 
> now Holly shit 
> where do you see in the above
> any f en 'relativistic factor''????/!!!!
> or
> any f en zero multiplier ??!!
> ==
> got it idiot parrot  once and for all ??!!!!
> just open your mind
> and stop parroting like a parrot 
> the photon has mass
> the only mass
> indeed extremely tiny but yet 
> has mass !!!
> --
> in another analysis I proved that
> the mass of the real **single** photon  is
> about 
> (sit still on your chair)
> approximately:
> 
> expo -90  Kilogram !!!!!
> 
> no one will ever be able to notice it
> or detect it !!but 
> the  **theoretically* it is important to realize it !!
>  even if it is too small for our tools to detect it 
> as a real single photon
> ===
> TIA
> Y.Porat
> =================================  
> ==
> copyright explanation
> Y.Porat
> =========================


As Arthur Eddington put it so elegantly in his poem:

"Oh leave the Wise our measures to collate
One thing at least is certain, LIGHT has WEIGHT,
One thing is certain, and the rest debate –
Light-rays, when near the Sun, DO NOT GO STRAIGHT."

-  Arthur Eddington

Double-A

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


#695302

Fromporaty6@gmail.com
Date2018-07-23 18:13 -0700
Message-ID<5cf2e90c-999d-4d39-9503-62f590755505@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#695213
On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 11:39:57 PM UTC+3, Double-A wrote:
> On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 12:12:24 AM UTC-7, por...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 5:09:52 AM UTC+3, paulcar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:44:34 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:31:28 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:
> > > > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:16:42 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > > > > > I believe it relates to its wave length.It goes well with my twin photon constructure.Bert
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Density of photons?  An interesting idea, because it implies that photons have mass!
> > > > > 
> > > > > Double-A
> > > > 
> > > > Mass they have AA.This is proven when gamma photons can kick electrons off a metal surface.
> > > 
> > > No, stupid.  That proves that photons have energy, not mass.
> > 
> > =============================
> > idiot parrot !!
> > 
> > ''have energy but no mass ''?1!
> > 
> > E=hf
> > 
> > h is 
> > Kilogram x meter ^2  times  (scalar f)/second 
> > 
> > now Holly shit 
> > where do you see in the above
> > any f en 'relativistic factor''????/!!!!
> > or
> > any f en zero multiplier ??!!
> > ==
> > got it idiot parrot  once and for all ??!!!!
> > just open your mind
> > and stop parroting like a parrot 
> > the photon has mass
> > the only mass
> > indeed extremely tiny but yet 
> > has mass !!!
> > --
> > in another analysis I proved that
> > the mass of the real **single** photon  is
> > about 
> > (sit still on your chair)
> > approximately:
> > 
> > expo -90  Kilogram !!!!!
> > 
> > no one will ever be able to notice it
> > or detect it !!but 
> > the  **theoretically* it is important to realize it !!
> >  even if it is too small for our tools to detect it 
> > as a real single photon
> > ===
> > TIA
> > Y.Porat
> > =================================  
> > ==
> > copyright explanation
> > Y.Porat
> > =========================
> 
> 
> As Arthur Eddington put it so elegantly in his poem:
> 
> "Oh leave the Wise our measures to collate
> One thing at least is certain, LIGHT has WEIGHT,
=======================================
>Bingo !!
thank you A A 

even Edington that made that ''historic    experiment
understood that Light (the photon 0 has weight 

AND WHAT IS WEIGHT IF NOT MASS ??!!

so  once again    Old '''Catto (Porat)
Saied 
=====================================================
MASS ** IS THE CREATOR OF **ALL * FORCES *INCLUDING GRAVITY !!
===================================================
if so 
the mass of earth-
 -is attracting the mass of light
just as simple as that:
not curvature 
and not schmervature   of space !! 
==========
copyright 
Y.Porat
============================   

=======================
 One thing is certain, and the rest debate –
> Light-rays, when near the Sun, DO NOT GO STRAIGHT."
> 
> -  Arthur Eddington
> 
> Double-A

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


#695221

From"reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com>
Date2018-07-23 14:01 -0700
Message-ID<d5b497b4-ad18-4b27-a9e2-b86990a6dcae@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#695138
On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 12:12:24 AM UTC-7, por...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 5:09:52 AM UTC+3, paulcar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:44:34 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:31:28 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:
> > > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:16:42 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > > > > I believe it relates to its wave length.It goes well with my twin photon constructure.Bert
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Density of photons?  An interesting idea, because it implies that photons have mass!
> > > > 
> > > > Double-A
> > > 
> > > Mass they have AA.This is proven when gamma photons can kick electrons off a metal surface.
> > 
> > No, stupid.  That proves that photons have energy, not mass.
> 
> =============================
> idiot parrot !!
> 
> ''have energy but no mass ''?1!
> 
> E=hf
> 
> h is 
> Kilogram x meter ^2  times  (scalar f)/second 
> 
> now Holly shit 
> where do you see in the above
> any f en 'relativistic factor''????/!!!!
> or
> any f en zero multiplier ??!!
> ==
> got it idiot parrot  once and for all ??!!!!
> just open your mind
> and stop parroting like a parrot 
> the photon has mass
> the only mass
> indeed extremely tiny but yet 
> has mass !!!
> --
> in another analysis I proved that
> the mass of the real **single** photon  is
> about 
> (sit still on your chair)
> approximately:
> 
> expo -90  Kilogram !!!!!
> 
> no one will ever be able to notice it
> or detect it !!but 
> the  **theoretically* it is important to realize it !!
>  even if it is too small for our tools to detect it 
> as a real single photon
> ===
> TIA
> Y.Porat
> =================================  
> ==
> copyright explanation
> Y.Porat
> =========================

Photons have mass that moves at c.That means they have weight.This has been proven and gave Einstein his Nobel.He deserved two more(SR + GR}  Gravity gives all weight,and if it moves it curves.Nothing can go without a spin.Nothing can spin without a wobble.Neutrinos have the tiny  wobble of all.Yes three of my best theories  I have united into one.Its Nobel time.O Ya  Bert

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


#695242

FromDouble-A <double-a3@hush.com>
Date2018-07-23 14:54 -0700
Message-ID<aee16b1b-7833-418a-9402-167c1eb53fc0@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#695221
On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 2:01:14 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 12:12:24 AM UTC-7, por...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 5:09:52 AM UTC+3, paulcar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:44:34 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:31:28 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:
> > > > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:16:42 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > > > > > I believe it relates to its wave length.It goes well with my twin photon constructure.Bert
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Density of photons?  An interesting idea, because it implies that photons have mass!
> > > > > 
> > > > > Double-A
> > > > 
> > > > Mass they have AA.This is proven when gamma photons can kick electrons off a metal surface.
> > > 
> > > No, stupid.  That proves that photons have energy, not mass.
> > 
> > =============================
> > idiot parrot !!
> > 
> > ''have energy but no mass ''?1!
> > 
> > E=hf
> > 
> > h is 
> > Kilogram x meter ^2  times  (scalar f)/second 
> > 
> > now Holly shit 
> > where do you see in the above
> > any f en 'relativistic factor''????/!!!!
> > or
> > any f en zero multiplier ??!!
> > ==
> > got it idiot parrot  once and for all ??!!!!
> > just open your mind
> > and stop parroting like a parrot 
> > the photon has mass
> > the only mass
> > indeed extremely tiny but yet 
> > has mass !!!
> > --
> > in another analysis I proved that
> > the mass of the real **single** photon  is
> > about 
> > (sit still on your chair)
> > approximately:
> > 
> > expo -90  Kilogram !!!!!
> > 
> > no one will ever be able to notice it
> > or detect it !!but 
> > the  **theoretically* it is important to realize it !!
> >  even if it is too small for our tools to detect it 
> > as a real single photon
> > ===
> > TIA
> > Y.Porat
> > =================================  
> > ==
> > copyright explanation
> > Y.Porat
> > =========================
> 
> Photons have mass that moves at c.That means they have weight.This has been proven and gave Einstein his Nobel.He deserved two more(SR + GR}  Gravity gives all weight,and if it moves it curves.Nothing can go without a spin.Nothing can spin without a wobble.Neutrinos have the tiny  wobble of all.Yes three of my best theories  I have united into one.Its Nobel time.O Ya  Bert


The fact that photons have mass also proves that they do not actually move at c.  Nothing with mass can.  c is an upper limit faster than which nothing can go.  A photon goes as close to it as anything we know, except maybe neutrinos!

Double-A

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


#695288

From"reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com>
Date2018-07-23 17:26 -0700
Message-ID<d0558b3b-f3e8-44d0-8c97-42ed00e59829@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#695242
On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 2:54:22 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:
> On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 2:01:14 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 12:12:24 AM UTC-7, por...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 5:09:52 AM UTC+3, paulcar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:44:34 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > > > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:31:28 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:
> > > > > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:16:42 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > > > > > > I believe it relates to its wave length.It goes well with my twin photon constructure.Bert
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Density of photons?  An interesting idea, because it implies that photons have mass!
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Double-A
> > > > > 
> > > > > Mass they have AA.This is proven when gamma photons can kick electrons off a metal surface.
> > > > 
> > > > No, stupid.  That proves that photons have energy, not mass.
> > > 
> > > =============================
> > > idiot parrot !!
> > > 
> > > ''have energy but no mass ''?1!
> > > 
> > > E=hf
> > > 
> > > h is 
> > > Kilogram x meter ^2  times  (scalar f)/second 
> > > 
> > > now Holly shit 
> > > where do you see in the above
> > > any f en 'relativistic factor''????/!!!!
> > > or
> > > any f en zero multiplier ??!!
> > > ==
> > > got it idiot parrot  once and for all ??!!!!
> > > just open your mind
> > > and stop parroting like a parrot 
> > > the photon has mass
> > > the only mass
> > > indeed extremely tiny but yet 
> > > has mass !!!
> > > --
> > > in another analysis I proved that
> > > the mass of the real **single** photon  is
> > > about 
> > > (sit still on your chair)
> > > approximately:
> > > 
> > > expo -90  Kilogram !!!!!
> > > 
> > > no one will ever be able to notice it
> > > or detect it !!but 
> > > the  **theoretically* it is important to realize it !!
> > >  even if it is too small for our tools to detect it 
> > > as a real single photon
> > > ===
> > > TIA
> > > Y.Porat
> > > =================================  
> > > ==
> > > copyright explanation
> > > Y.Porat
> > > =========================
> > 
> > Photons have mass that moves at c.That means they have weight.This has been proven and gave Einstein his Nobel.He deserved two more(SR + GR}  Gravity gives all weight,and if it moves it curves.Nothing can go without a spin.Nothing can spin without a wobble.Neutrinos have the tiny  wobble of all.Yes three of my best theories  I have united into one.Its Nobel time.O Ya  Bert
> 
> 
> The fact that photons have mass also proves that they do not actually move at c.  Nothing with mass can.  c is an upper limit faster than which nothing can go.  A photon goes as close to it as anything we know, except maybe neutrinos!
> 
> Double-A

Well as you know I posted neutrinos are another type photon.It fits well .It is as close to being a point particle.It has the shortest wave,and yet going at c still gives it reality of weight when it does finally hit an electron,or proton,or neutron.Electrons fit well.Bert

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


#695323

From"hanson" <hanson@quick.net>
Date2018-07-23 21:06 -0700
Message-ID<pj68kt$fif$3@dont-email.me>
In reply to#695288
"reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> gives 
reality that fits well with ------- Glazier's Dossier -------
e.g. <http://tinyurl.com/Swine-Glazier-s-Undertaker>
and <http://tinyurl.com/Glazier-s-de-Minting> by
<http://tinyurl.com/The-Chosen-Graveyard-Vandal>
 of <http://tinyurl.com/Swine-Glazier-s-REAL-intent>

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


#695305

Fromporaty6@gmail.com
Date2018-07-23 18:30 -0700
Message-ID<6fae0753-54a7-439d-8f30-4cc664abd360@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#695242
On Tuesday, July 24, 2018 at 12:54:22 AM UTC+3, Double-A wrote:
> On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 2:01:14 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 12:12:24 AM UTC-7, por...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 5:09:52 AM UTC+3, paulcar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:44:34 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > > > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:31:28 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:
> > > > > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:16:42 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > > > > > > I believe it relates to its wave length.It goes well with my twin photon constructure.Bert
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Density of photons?  An interesting idea, because it implies that photons have mass!
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Double-A
> > > > > 
> > > > > Mass they have AA.This is proven when gamma photons can kick electrons off a metal surface.
> > > > 
> > > > No, stupid.  That proves that photons have energy, not mass.
> > > 
> > > =============================
> > > idiot parrot !!
> > > 
> > > ''have energy but no mass ''?1!
> > > 
> > > E=hf
> > > 
> > > h is 
> > > Kilogram x meter ^2  times  (scalar f)/second 
> > > 
> > > now Holly shit 
> > > where do you see in the above
> > > any f en 'relativistic factor''????/!!!!
> > > or
> > > any f en zero multiplier ??!!
> > > ==
> > > got it idiot parrot  once and for all ??!!!!
> > > just open your mind
> > > and stop parroting like a parrot 
> > > the photon has mass
> > > the only mass
> > > indeed extremely tiny but yet 
> > > has mass !!!
> > > --
> > > in another analysis I proved that
> > > the mass of the real **single** photon  is
> > > about 
> > > (sit still on your chair)
> > > approximately:
> > > 
> > > expo -90  Kilogram !!!!!
> > > 
> > > no one will ever be able to notice it
> > > or detect it !!but 
> > > the  **theoretically* it is important to realize it !!
> > >  even if it is too small for our tools to detect it 
> > > as a real single photon
> > > ===
> > > TIA
> > > Y.Porat
> > > =================================  
> > > ==
> > > copyright explanation
> > > Y.Porat
> > > =========================
> > 
> > Photons have mass that moves at c.That means they have weight.This has been proven and gave Einstein his Nobel.He deserved two more(SR + GR}  Gravity gives all weight,and if it moves it curves.Nothing can go without a spin.Nothing can spin without a wobble.Neutrinos have the tiny  wobble of all.Yes three of my best theories  I have united into one.Its Nobel time.O Ya  Bert
> 
> 
> The fact that photons have mass also proves that they do not actually move at c.  Nothing with mass can.  c is an upper limit faster than which nothing can go.  A photon goes as close to it as anything we know, except maybe neutrinos!
=====
yet I claim
that photons are an exception  to the rule  that
no mass can   move at c !!

since the mass of the single  photon is about 
exp -90 Kilogram !!
it does** can move at c !!
see an old thread of mine  in Google :
=====================================
the mass of the real single photon !!
=========================================
it is based on the fact that

e=hf
has mass
while   f is*** one second** defined 
while
nature does not know 'one second' as the smallest/shortest 
time duration !!!!!

THE **PLANK TIME**  IS MUCH MUCH SHORTHER !!!!
=============
old  historic copyright     
Eng
Yehiel Porat
=============================  





> 
> Double-A

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


#695332

Fromporaty6@gmail.com
Date2018-07-23 23:05 -0700
Message-ID<f7b56ebe-b186-4805-ad13-c9b2cd5af854@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#695242
On Tuesday, July 24, 2018 at 12:54:22 AM UTC+3, Double-A wrote:
> On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 2:01:14 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 12:12:24 AM UTC-7, por...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 5:09:52 AM UTC+3, paulcar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:44:34 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > > > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:31:28 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:
> > > > > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:16:42 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > > > > > > I believe it relates to its wave length.It goes well with my twin photon constructure.Bert
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Density of photons?  An interesting idea, because it implies that photons have mass!
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Double-A
> > > > > 
> > > > > Mass they have AA.This is proven when gamma photons can kick electrons off a metal surface.
> > > > 
> > > > No, stupid.  That proves that photons have energy, not mass.
> > > 
> > > =============================
> > > idiot parrot !!
> > > 
> > > ''have energy but no mass ''?1!
> > > 
> > > E=hf
> > > 
> > > h is 
> > > Kilogram x meter ^2  times  (scalar f)/second 
> > > 
> > > now Holly shit 
> > > where do you see in the above
> > > any f en 'relativistic factor''????/!!!!
> > > or
> > > any f en zero multiplier ??!!
> > > ==
> > > got it idiot parrot  once and for all ??!!!!
> > > just open your mind
> > > and stop parroting like a parrot 
> > > the photon has mass
> > > the only mass
> > > indeed extremely tiny but yet 
> > > has mass !!!
> > > --
> > > in another analysis I proved that
> > > the mass of the real **single** photon  is
> > > about 
> > > (sit still on your chair)
> > > approximately:
> > > 
> > > expo -90  Kilogram !!!!!
> > > 
> > > no one will ever be able to notice it
> > > or detect it !!but 
> > > the  **theoretically* it is important to realize it !!
> > >  even if it is too small for our tools to detect it 
> > > as a real single photon
> > > ===
> > > TIA
> > > Y.Porat
> > > =================================  
> > > ==
> > > copyright explanation
> > > Y.Porat
> > > =========================
> > 
> > Photons have mass that moves at c.That means they have weight.This has been proven and gave Einstein his Nobel.He deserved two more(SR + GR}  Gravity gives all weight,and if it moves it curves.Nothing can go without a spin.Nothing can spin without a wobble.Neutrinos have the tiny  wobble of all.Yes three of my best theories  I have united into one.Its Nobel time.O Ya  Bert
> 
> 
> The fact that photons have mass also proves that they do not actually move at c.  Nothing with mass can.  c is an upper limit faster than which nothing can go.  A photon goes as close to it as anything we know, except maybe neutrinos!
> 
> Double-A
=============================
photons move at c !! even having mass the only mass 
thy are an exception to the rule
do you know why 
because the mass of the real single photon is about
(sit still  on your chair ..)
it is 
about 
exp  -90   kilogram !!!

not relativistic an not schmelativistic 
Kilogram !!
nature  does not know what is a second 

NATURE DOES KNOW!! WAHT IS THE PLABK TIME !!!
as the shortest time 

(nature  does know about PLANK TIME as the shortest time duration  )
SO
IF YOU TAKE INSTEAD hf/second ^2 with f as one  second defined
but plank time defined and divide it by c^2
to get  its mass (E/c^2)
you get photon ** mass**of a  single photon  (the only mass) 

about exp -90 Kilogram !!!
===============================
historic  old copyright 
2
=====================================================
MASS IS THE CREATOR OF ALL FORCES INCLUDINGGRAVITY !!
======================================================
Eng

Y.Porat (old Catto )..
===============================

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


#695412

FromDouble-A <double-a3@hush.com>
Date2018-07-24 14:07 -0700
Message-ID<00c95fe7-1cdc-4949-bc4b-88a4d33830b7@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#695332
On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 11:05:27 PM UTC-7, por...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 24, 2018 at 12:54:22 AM UTC+3, Double-A wrote:
> > On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 2:01:14 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > > On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 12:12:24 AM UTC-7, por...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 5:09:52 AM UTC+3, paulcar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:44:34 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > > > > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:31:28 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:
> > > > > > > On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:16:42 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > > > > > > > I believe it relates to its wave length.It goes well with my twin photon constructure.Bert
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Density of photons?  An interesting idea, because it implies that photons have mass!
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Double-A
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Mass they have AA.This is proven when gamma photons can kick electrons off a metal surface.
> > > > > 
> > > > > No, stupid.  That proves that photons have energy, not mass.
> > > > 
> > > > =============================
> > > > idiot parrot !!
> > > > 
> > > > ''have energy but no mass ''?1!
> > > > 
> > > > E=hf
> > > > 
> > > > h is 
> > > > Kilogram x meter ^2  times  (scalar f)/second 
> > > > 
> > > > now Holly shit 
> > > > where do you see in the above
> > > > any f en 'relativistic factor''????/!!!!
> > > > or
> > > > any f en zero multiplier ??!!
> > > > ==
> > > > got it idiot parrot  once and for all ??!!!!
> > > > just open your mind
> > > > and stop parroting like a parrot 
> > > > the photon has mass
> > > > the only mass
> > > > indeed extremely tiny but yet 
> > > > has mass !!!
> > > > --
> > > > in another analysis I proved that
> > > > the mass of the real **single** photon  is
> > > > about 
> > > > (sit still on your chair)
> > > > approximately:
> > > > 
> > > > expo -90  Kilogram !!!!!
> > > > 
> > > > no one will ever be able to notice it
> > > > or detect it !!but 
> > > > the  **theoretically* it is important to realize it !!
> > > >  even if it is too small for our tools to detect it 
> > > > as a real single photon
> > > > ===
> > > > TIA
> > > > Y.Porat
> > > > =================================  
> > > > ==
> > > > copyright explanation
> > > > Y.Porat
> > > > =========================
> > > 
> > > Photons have mass that moves at c.That means they have weight.This has been proven and gave Einstein his Nobel.He deserved two more(SR + GR}  Gravity gives all weight,and if it moves it curves.Nothing can go without a spin.Nothing can spin without a wobble.Neutrinos have the tiny  wobble of all.Yes three of my best theories  I have united into one.Its Nobel time.O Ya  Bert
> > 
> > 
> > The fact that photons have mass also proves that they do not actually move at c.  Nothing with mass can.  c is an upper limit faster than which nothing can go.  A photon goes as close to it as anything we know, except maybe neutrinos!
> > 
> > Double-A
> =============================
> photons move at c !! even having mass the only mass 
> thy are an exception to the rule
> do you know why 
> because the mass of the real single photon is about
> (sit still  on your chair ..)
> it is 
> about 
> exp  -90   kilogram !!!
> 
> not relativistic an not schmelativistic 
> Kilogram !!
> nature  does not know what is a second 
> 
> NATURE DOES KNOW!! WAHT IS THE PLABK TIME !!!
> as the shortest time 
> 
> (nature  does know about PLANK TIME as the shortest time duration  )
> SO
> IF YOU TAKE INSTEAD hf/second ^2 with f as one  second defined
> but plank time defined and divide it by c^2
> to get  its mass (E/c^2)
> you get photon ** mass**of a  single photon  (the only mass) 
> 
> about exp -90 Kilogram !!!
> ===============================
> historic  old copyright 
> 2
> =====================================================
> MASS IS THE CREATOR OF ALL FORCES INCLUDINGGRAVITY !!
> ======================================================
> Eng
> 
> Y.Porat (old Catto )..
> ===============================


Why insist that the photon moves at c?  It makes much more consistent theory to say that the photon merely gets very close to c, because its mass has gotten very small, since you do agree that the photon has mass.  Scientific tests are not yet precise enough to prove it one way or the other.

Double-A

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


#695414

Frombenj <benj.fake@gmail.com>
Date2018-07-24 17:20 -0400
Message-ID<pj857d$58r$1@gioia.aioe.org>
In reply to#695412
On 7/24/2018 5:07 PM, Double-A wrote:
> On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 11:05:27 PM UTC-7, por...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Tuesday, July 24, 2018 at 12:54:22 AM UTC+3, Double-A wrote:
>>> On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 2:01:14 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
>>>> On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 12:12:24 AM UTC-7, por...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 5:09:52 AM UTC+3, paulcar...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:44:34 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
>>>>>>> On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:31:28 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:16:42 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I believe it relates to its wave length.It goes well with my twin photon constructure.Bert
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Density of photons?  An interesting idea, because it implies that photons have mass!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Double-A
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mass they have AA.This is proven when gamma photons can kick electrons off a metal surface.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, stupid.  That proves that photons have energy, not mass.
>>>>>
>>>>> =============================
>>>>> idiot parrot !!
>>>>>
>>>>> ''have energy but no mass ''?1!
>>>>>
>>>>> E=hf
>>>>>
>>>>> h is
>>>>> Kilogram x meter ^2  times  (scalar f)/second
>>>>>
>>>>> now Holly shit
>>>>> where do you see in the above
>>>>> any f en 'relativistic factor''????/!!!!
>>>>> or
>>>>> any f en zero multiplier ??!!
>>>>> ==
>>>>> got it idiot parrot  once and for all ??!!!!
>>>>> just open your mind
>>>>> and stop parroting like a parrot
>>>>> the photon has mass
>>>>> the only mass
>>>>> indeed extremely tiny but yet
>>>>> has mass !!!
>>>>> --
>>>>> in another analysis I proved that
>>>>> the mass of the real **single** photon  is
>>>>> about
>>>>> (sit still on your chair)
>>>>> approximately:
>>>>>
>>>>> expo -90  Kilogram !!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> no one will ever be able to notice it
>>>>> or detect it !!but
>>>>> the  **theoretically* it is important to realize it !!
>>>>>   even if it is too small for our tools to detect it
>>>>> as a real single photon
>>>>> ===
>>>>> TIA
>>>>> Y.Porat
>>>>> =================================
>>>>> ==
>>>>> copyright explanation
>>>>> Y.Porat
>>>>> =========================
>>>>
>>>> Photons have mass that moves at c.That means they have weight.This has been proven and gave Einstein his Nobel.He deserved two more(SR + GR}  Gravity gives all weight,and if it moves it curves.Nothing can go without a spin.Nothing can spin without a wobble.Neutrinos have the tiny  wobble of all.Yes three of my best theories  I have united into one.Its Nobel time.O Ya  Bert
>>>
>>>
>>> The fact that photons have mass also proves that they do not actually move at c.  Nothing with mass can.  c is an upper limit faster than which nothing can go.  A photon goes as close to it as anything we know, except maybe neutrinos!
>>>
>>> Double-A
>> =============================
>> photons move at c !! even having mass the only mass
>> thy are an exception to the rule
>> do you know why
>> because the mass of the real single photon is about
>> (sit still  on your chair ..)
>> it is
>> about
>> exp  -90   kilogram !!!
>>
>> not relativistic an not schmelativistic
>> Kilogram !!
>> nature  does not know what is a second
>>
>> NATURE DOES KNOW!! WAHT IS THE PLABK TIME !!!
>> as the shortest time
>>
>> (nature  does know about PLANK TIME as the shortest time duration  )
>> SO
>> IF YOU TAKE INSTEAD hf/second ^2 with f as one  second defined
>> but plank time defined and divide it by c^2
>> to get  its mass (E/c^2)
>> you get photon ** mass**of a  single photon  (the only mass)
>>
>> about exp -90 Kilogram !!!
>> ===============================
>> historic  old copyright
>> 2
>> =====================================================
>> MASS IS THE CREATOR OF ALL FORCES INCLUDINGGRAVITY !!
>> ======================================================
>> Eng
>>
>> Y.Porat (old Catto )..
>> ===============================
> 
> 
> Why insist that the photon moves at c?  It makes much more consistent theory to say that the photon merely gets very close to c, because its mass has gotten very small, since you do agree that the photon has mass.  Scientific tests are not yet precise enough to prove it one way or the other.
> 
> Double-A
> 
Nonsense. We say photons move at c because that is the speed they move 
at in a vacuum. We are precise enough! Imperial thinking says that 
photons are waves and waves move through a medium (aether) with a fixed 
speed of propagation. c It's simple as that AA.

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


#695421

FromDouble-A <double-a3@hush.com>
Date2018-07-24 14:57 -0700
Message-ID<dabc597d-4951-41b0-abdd-18b360a242f6@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#695414
On Tuesday, July 24, 2018 at 2:20:51 PM UTC-7, benj wrote:
> On 7/24/2018 5:07 PM, Double-A wrote:
> > On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 11:05:27 PM UTC-7, por...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Tuesday, July 24, 2018 at 12:54:22 AM UTC+3, Double-A wrote:
> >>> On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 2:01:14 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> >>>> On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 12:12:24 AM UTC-7, por...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 5:09:52 AM UTC+3, paulcar...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>> On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:44:34 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:31:28 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:16:42 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> I believe it relates to its wave length.It goes well with my twin photon constructure.Bert
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Density of photons?  An interesting idea, because it implies that photons have mass!
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Double-A
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Mass they have AA.This is proven when gamma photons can kick electrons off a metal surface.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> No, stupid.  That proves that photons have energy, not mass.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> =============================
> >>>>> idiot parrot !!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ''have energy but no mass ''?1!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> E=hf
> >>>>>
> >>>>> h is
> >>>>> Kilogram x meter ^2  times  (scalar f)/second
> >>>>>
> >>>>> now Holly shit
> >>>>> where do you see in the above
> >>>>> any f en 'relativistic factor''????/!!!!
> >>>>> or
> >>>>> any f en zero multiplier ??!!
> >>>>> ==
> >>>>> got it idiot parrot  once and for all ??!!!!
> >>>>> just open your mind
> >>>>> and stop parroting like a parrot
> >>>>> the photon has mass
> >>>>> the only mass
> >>>>> indeed extremely tiny but yet
> >>>>> has mass !!!
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> in another analysis I proved that
> >>>>> the mass of the real **single** photon  is
> >>>>> about
> >>>>> (sit still on your chair)
> >>>>> approximately:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> expo -90  Kilogram !!!!!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> no one will ever be able to notice it
> >>>>> or detect it !!but
> >>>>> the  **theoretically* it is important to realize it !!
> >>>>>   even if it is too small for our tools to detect it
> >>>>> as a real single photon
> >>>>> ===
> >>>>> TIA
> >>>>> Y.Porat
> >>>>> =================================
> >>>>> ==
> >>>>> copyright explanation
> >>>>> Y.Porat
> >>>>> =========================
> >>>>
> >>>> Photons have mass that moves at c.That means they have weight.This has been proven and gave Einstein his Nobel.He deserved two more(SR + GR}  Gravity gives all weight,and if it moves it curves.Nothing can go without a spin.Nothing can spin without a wobble.Neutrinos have the tiny  wobble of all.Yes three of my best theories  I have united into one.Its Nobel time.O Ya  Bert
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The fact that photons have mass also proves that they do not actually move at c.  Nothing with mass can.  c is an upper limit faster than which nothing can go.  A photon goes as close to it as anything we know, except maybe neutrinos!
> >>>
> >>> Double-A
> >> =============================
> >> photons move at c !! even having mass the only mass
> >> thy are an exception to the rule
> >> do you know why
> >> because the mass of the real single photon is about
> >> (sit still  on your chair ..)
> >> it is
> >> about
> >> exp  -90   kilogram !!!
> >>
> >> not relativistic an not schmelativistic
> >> Kilogram !!
> >> nature  does not know what is a second
> >>
> >> NATURE DOES KNOW!! WAHT IS THE PLABK TIME !!!
> >> as the shortest time
> >>
> >> (nature  does know about PLANK TIME as the shortest time duration  )
> >> SO
> >> IF YOU TAKE INSTEAD hf/second ^2 with f as one  second defined
> >> but plank time defined and divide it by c^2
> >> to get  its mass (E/c^2)
> >> you get photon ** mass**of a  single photon  (the only mass)
> >>
> >> about exp -90 Kilogram !!!
> >> ===============================
> >> historic  old copyright
> >> 2
> >> =====================================================
> >> MASS IS THE CREATOR OF ALL FORCES INCLUDINGGRAVITY !!
> >> ======================================================
> >> Eng
> >>
> >> Y.Porat (old Catto )..
> >> ===============================
> > 
> > 
> > Why insist that the photon moves at c?  It makes much more consistent theory to say that the photon merely gets very close to c, because its mass has gotten very small, since you do agree that the photon has mass.  Scientific tests are not yet precise enough to prove it one way or the other.
> > 
> > Double-A
> > 
> Nonsense. We say photons move at c because that is the speed they move 
> at in a vacuum. We are precise enough! Imperial thinking says that 
> photons are waves and waves move through a medium (aether) with a fixed 
> speed of propagation. c It's simple as that AA.


Funny thing is, there is no actual vacuum anywhere in the universe.

Double-A

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


#695460

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2018-07-25 01:57 +0000
Message-ID<p12l2f-s6c.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#695421
Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> wrote:

<snip old babble>

 
> Funny thing is, there is no actual vacuum anywhere in the universe.
> 
> Double-A

Space is close enough to a vacuum for EMR to travel at c.

Are you starting to lose it? 

-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#695551

From"reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com>
Date2018-07-25 12:27 -0700
Message-ID<49303623-a666-41ac-9725-920810b7039b@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#695460
On Tuesday, July 24, 2018 at 7:01:10 PM UTC-7, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> wrote:
> 
> <snip old babble>
> 
>  
> > Funny thing is, there is no actual vacuum anywhere in the universe.
> > 
> > Double-A
> 
> Space is close enough to a vacuum for EMR to travel at c.
> 
> Are you starting to lose it? 
> 
> -- 
> Jim Penninoo

Its possible a neutrino has less mass than a photon and gets to A to B faster.It also has less of a curve too.Bert

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


#695560

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2018-07-25 19:47 +0000
Message-ID<nm0n2f-0ii.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#695551
reber G=emc^2 <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 24, 2018 at 7:01:10 PM UTC-7, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> wrote:
>> 
>> <snip old babble>
>> 
>>  
>> > Funny thing is, there is no actual vacuum anywhere in the universe.
>> > 
>> > Double-A
>> 
>> Space is close enough to a vacuum for EMR to travel at c.
>> 
>> Are you starting to lose it? 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Jim Penninoo
> 
> Its possible a neutrino has less mass than a photon and gets to A to B faster.It also has less of a curve too.Bert

Senile babble.

-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#695597

From"reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com>
Date2018-07-25 15:40 -0700
Message-ID<1c859556-7d6f-4f96-b4a0-2617c18ddcf6@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#695560
On Wednesday, July 25, 2018 at 1:01:05 PM UTC-7, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> reber G=emc^2 <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, July 24, 2018 at 7:01:10 PM UTC-7, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> >> Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >> <snip old babble>
> >> 
> >>  
> >> > Funny thing is, there is no actual vacuum anywhere in the universe.
> >> > 
> >> > Double-A
> >> 
> >> Space is close enough to a vacuum for EMR to travel at c.
> >> 
> >> Are you starting to lose it? 
> >> 
> >> -- 
> >> Jim Penninoo
> > 
> > Its possible a neutrino has less mass than a photon and gets to A to B faster.It also has less of a curve too.Bert
> 
> Senile babble.
> 
> -- 
> Jim Pennino

Not babble but stuff over your pointed head. Bert

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


#695600

From"hanson" <hanson@quick.net>
Date2018-07-25 15:51 -0700
Message-ID<pjauun$224$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#695597
"reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> wrote
"babble stuff over Bert's pointed head" with which
ALL that Glazier wants, is SwineBert doing this:
(1)
On 07Feb 2015 & on 08Feb2015, Face-Shitter Glazier wrote:
Harlow Campbell HVAC, Mr.HVAC@gmail.com,
& Saul Levy <saullevy1@cox.net
& Jacoby Benj, <nobody@gmail.com>:
"I'll be sitting on your faces to take a shit & say: "Open wide".
<http://pbs.twimg.com/media/A8MGOU-CQAEaZw4.jpg>
>
(2)
On 06Dec2014, when the Christian-Hater, JewPigBert Glazier
said to "benj" <nobody@gmail.com>:
"Reality is you always post under me for you are an ass kisser.
For Christmas I'll shit on your kisser."
<http://pbs.twimg.com/media/A8MGOU-CQAEaZw4.jpg>
"Benj, you can thank me in advance". - TreBert. ... addinng
>
(3)
On 03Aug2017:
"benj, you eat shit and your shitty brain is coming out your ears."
On 20Jul2018:
Benj, my posts are way over your head.Reality is your head
is up your ass.So fart it out before you get constipated.Bert
>
(4)
On 25Mar2008, Graveyard Vandal Glazier wrote in:
<https://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/3ffe7b2257cf8a9a>
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/sci.physics/uYtpFTRnW4k/morPVyJ7_j8J>
"Hanson, I will piss on your grave. And have a good laugh
when it seeps down on your face". --  Bert
>
(5)
On 24Jun2018 SwineBert Glazier said to
Mark Earnest <gmearnest@att.net> "your nose is
in a shit bucket all the time. Eat shit and you fit" -- Bert



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


#695603

Fromjimp@specsol.spam.sux.com
Date2018-07-25 23:23 +0000
Message-ID<fcdn2f-poj.ln1@mail.specsol.com>
In reply to#695597
reber G=emc^2 <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 25, 2018 at 1:01:05 PM UTC-7, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> reber G=emc^2 <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Tuesday, July 24, 2018 at 7:01:10 PM UTC-7, ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> >> Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> <snip old babble>
>> >> 
>> >>  
>> >> > Funny thing is, there is no actual vacuum anywhere in the universe.
>> >> > 
>> >> > Double-A
>> >> 
>> >> Space is close enough to a vacuum for EMR to travel at c.
>> >> 
>> >> Are you starting to lose it? 
>> >> 
>> >> -- 
>> >> Jim Penninoo
>> > 
>> > Its possible a neutrino has less mass than a photon and gets to A to B faster.It also has less of a curve too.Bert
>> 
>> Senile babble.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Jim Pennino
> 
> Not babble but stuff over your pointed head. Bert

Babble is being charitable.

-- 
Jim Pennino

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


#695591

From"hanson" <hanson@quick.net>
Date2018-07-25 14:52 -0700
Message-ID<pjarfp$eji$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#695551
"reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> alias
"Bert, for you there's  now another Rhyme:
Glazier, you are a STUPID Swine". Bert
Read the previous post above

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


#695480

Fromporaty6@gmail.com
Date2018-07-24 20:50 -0700
Message-ID<e13f4e6a-85a3-4f61-b494-0b9765d79023@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#695421
On Wednesday, July 25, 2018 at 12:57:30 AM UTC+3, Double-A wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 24, 2018 at 2:20:51 PM UTC-7, benj wrote:
> > On 7/24/2018 5:07 PM, Double-A wrote:
> > > On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 11:05:27 PM UTC-7, por...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >> On Tuesday, July 24, 2018 at 12:54:22 AM UTC+3, Double-A wrote:
> > >>> On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 2:01:14 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > >>>> On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 12:12:24 AM UTC-7, por...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >>>>> On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 5:09:52 AM UTC+3, paulcar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >>>>>> On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:44:34 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > >>>>>>> On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:31:28 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 2:16:42 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> I believe it relates to its wave length.It goes well with my twin photon constructure.Bert
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Density of photons?  An interesting idea, because it implies that photons have mass!
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Double-A
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Mass they have AA.This is proven when gamma photons can kick electrons off a metal surface.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> No, stupid.  That proves that photons have energy, not mass.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> =============================
> > >>>>> idiot parrot !!
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> ''have energy but no mass ''?1!
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> E=hf
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> h is
> > >>>>> Kilogram x meter ^2  times  (scalar f)/second
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> now Holly shit
> > >>>>> where do you see in the above
> > >>>>> any f en 'relativistic factor''????/!!!!
> > >>>>> or
> > >>>>> any f en zero multiplier ??!!
> > >>>>> ==
> > >>>>> got it idiot parrot  once and for all ??!!!!
> > >>>>> just open your mind
> > >>>>> and stop parroting like a parrot
> > >>>>> the photon has mass
> > >>>>> the only mass
> > >>>>> indeed extremely tiny but yet
> > >>>>> has mass !!!
> > >>>>> --
> > >>>>> in another analysis I proved that
> > >>>>> the mass of the real **single** photon  is
> > >>>>> about
> > >>>>> (sit still on your chair)
> > >>>>> approximately:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> expo -90  Kilogram !!!!!
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> no one will ever be able to notice it
> > >>>>> or detect it !!but
> > >>>>> the  **theoretically* it is important to realize it !!
> > >>>>>   even if it is too small for our tools to detect it
> > >>>>> as a real single photon
> > >>>>> ===
> > >>>>> TIA
> > >>>>> Y.Porat
> > >>>>> =================================
> > >>>>> ==
> > >>>>> copyright explanation
> > >>>>> Y.Porat
> > >>>>> =========================
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Photons have mass that moves at c.That means they have weight.This has been proven and gave Einstein his Nobel.He deserved two more(SR + GR}  Gravity gives all weight,and if it moves it curves.Nothing can go without a spin.Nothing can spin without a wobble.Neutrinos have the tiny  wobble of all.Yes three of my best theories  I have united into one.Its Nobel time.O Ya  Bert
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> The fact that photons have mass also proves that they do not actually move at c.  Nothing with mass can.  c is an upper limit faster than which nothing can go.  A photon goes as close to it as anything we know, except maybe neutrinos!
> > >>>
> > >>> Double-A
> > >> =============================
> > >> photons move at c !! even having mass the only mass
> > >> thy are an exception to the rule
> > >> do you know why
> > >> because the mass of the real single photon is about
> > >> (sit still  on your chair ..)
> > >> it is
> > >> about
> > >> exp  -90   kilogram !!!
> > >>
> > >> not relativistic an not schmelativistic
> > >> Kilogram !!
> > >> nature  does not know what is a second
> > >>
> > >> NATURE DOES KNOW!! WAHT IS THE PLABK TIME !!!
> > >> as the shortest time
> > >>
> > >> (nature  does know about PLANK TIME as the shortest time duration  )
> > >> SO
> > >> IF YOU TAKE INSTEAD hf/second ^2 with f as one  second defined
> > >> but plank time defined and divide it by c^2
> > >> to get  its mass (E/c^2)
> > >> you get photon ** mass**of a  single photon  (the only mass)
> > >>
> > >> about exp -90 Kilogram !!!
> > >> ===============================
> > >> historic  old copyright
> > >> 2
> > >> =====================================================
> > >> MASS IS THE CREATOR OF ALL FORCES INCLUDINGGRAVITY !!
> > >> ======================================================
> > >> Eng
> > >>
> > >> Y.Porat (old Catto )..
> > >> ===============================
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Why insist that the photon moves at c?  It makes much more consistent theory to say that the photon merely gets very close to c, because its mass has gotten very small, since you do agree that the photon has mass.  Scientific tests are not yet precise enough to prove it one way or the other.
> > > 
> > > Double-A
> > > 
> > Nonsense. We say photons move at c because that is the speed they move 
> > at in a vacuum. We are precise enough! Imperial thinking says that 
> > photons are waves and waves move through a medium (aether) with a fixed 
> > speed of propagation. c It's simple as that AA.
> 
> 
> Funny thing is, there is no actual vacuum anywhere in the universe.
> 
> Double-A
=======================
right !!!
yet more funny iss to think that thid vacuum 

IS CURVED ''
AND EVEN MORE STUPID IS 
THAT THIS ENTITY THAT HAS NOTHING IN IT 
NORE ANY PHYSICS ENTITES (TOOLS)
IS BECOMES 'OUT OF THE  BLUE' ==  CURVED ''
AND EVEN MORE STUPID 
THAT IT CAN CURVE THE MASSES WAY
TO CHANGE THIER PATH OF MOVENTT !!

btw sorry !!

google  has no spell checker for
words with  capital   letters ..!!??
TIA
Y. Porat
=================


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


Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics


csiph-web