User Tag List

First 123 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 27

  1. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    The analogy I once had as kid was that of a wave propagating through a "sea-of electrons", like ocean waves moving through water. But I now think that to be inaccurate, because the signal is an electromagnetic wave (and electromagnetic waves do not necessarily need a medium).

    As far as the relation of all this to quantum mechanics, I am not sure what to make of it.
    Good post.

    I think it is more akin to a potential energy 'wobble' that is passed from electron to electron as a potential energy wave.

    Electrons being to electro-magnetic waves as velocity is to acceleration.

    Quantum is a slippery business and best left to theoretical physicists. Most of it is mindblowing, quantum observation effects and tunnelling featuring prominently in that regard. It's almost like the universe is running with a simplification algorithm. When you don't look the waves can go through objects through a mathematical mistake/probabilistic simplification where it gets away with a finding a route through the barrier and then when you look they can't because the universe starts modelling the barrier with zero permeability/porosity.

  2. #12
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RaptorWizard View Post
    “The day when we shall know exactly what “electricity” is, will chronicle an event probably greater, more important than any other recorded in the history of the human race. The time will come when the comfort, the very existence, perhaps, of man will depend upon that wonderful agent.”

    “We are whirling through endless space, with and inconceivable speed, all around everything is spinning, everything is moving, everywhere there is energy. There must be some way of availing ourselves of this energy more directly. Then, with the light obtained from the medium, with the power derived from it, with every form of energy obtained without effort, from the store forever inexhaustible, humanity will advance with giant strides. The mere contemplation of these magnificent possibilities expand our minds, strengthens our hopes and and fills our hearts with supreme delight.”

    “So astounding are the facts in this connection, that it would seem as though the Creator, himself had electrically designed this planet...” - Nikola Tesla
    Can you recommend a good book by Tesla? I'd love to read one.

  3. #13
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,661

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by entropie View Post
    Hitler wouldnt have said it any better but, we know what electricity is.
    I dont think I've seen a thread Godwin'd so fast that's got to be some kind of record.

  4. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    Will
    Posts
    5,927

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    Can you recommend a good book by Tesla? I'd love to read one.
    http://www.amazon.com/Wizard-Nikola-...70347&sr=1-1#_ - Very good Biography called Wizard

    http://www.amazon.com/Inventions-Res...070270&sr=1-13 - Includes technical blueprints and notes about the engineering called inventions, researches and writings

    Anyway those are the 2 books I own. I think there are lots of others, but I don't know enough about them.

  5. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    Will
    Posts
    5,927

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    Can you recommend a good book by Tesla? I'd love to read one.
    That is a pretty good fun 15 minute video biography.

  6. #16
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JocktheMotie View Post
    He's talking about decoherence, though apparently in his universe light particles have mass. It wouldn't be an INTP post if he didn't embarrass himself. I really wish he'd change his name.

    Many people have been arguing for a long time that it doesn't.
    The arguement is not about the physics of whether photons have mass. Its a debate about the definition of "mass" which will give either a yes or no according to the definition.

    There is a possibility that a photon has a finite rest mass. The best of current measurements of the photon's proper mass does not have the precision to detect any photon proper mass

    Actually what your science book says or is trying to say anyway,is that the photon's rest mass is zero. The concept of the rest mass derives from special relativity. The rest mass is the mass of a particle (in our case the photon) as measured by an observer who sees the particle still and with zero speed. In other words, the particle is at rest as far as this observer is concerned. Thus comes the term REST mass. But according to special relativity, light ALWAYS travels with the light speed c, and is NEVER at rest. And so it has zero REST mass.

    i find it amusing that you say that im embarrassing myself for saying that photons have mass, but its just really small and cant be measured, when neither of the theories has been confirmed to be true. (and even more amusing that you didnt have the balls to quote or mention me)

    instead acting like a brat about this difference in our theories, you could try to prove your theory right. i suggest starting from defining what mass actually is, as i probably see it bit different from you.
    what rules out the possibility of photons having similar mass than resting mass is, but it being so small that it cant be slowed down/stopped by our current equipment, and therefore we just being unable to give it a rest mass(as it needs to be at rest)?

    why is it that when we combine matter and anti-matter(electron + anti-electron(positron) in the picture), we get a photon(gamma waves), which is able to again disintegrate into (possibly) different types of matter and anti-matter(quark and anti-quark) + gluon(it can happen that it becomes electron and positron again)?

    like this:



    after you answer those few questions, we should be able to get some adult like discussion going on about these two theories. if you arent able to answer those questions and still are so certain that photon is massless(and im not talking about rest mass, but something alike, since light cant be stopped by our equipment) you basically think that i embarrass myself simply because your lack of knowledge(which in my books counts as being pretty embarrassing).
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  7. #17
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    i find it amusing that you say that im embarrassing myself for saying that photons have mass, but its just really small and cant be measured, when neither of the theories has been confirmed to be true. (and even more amusing that you didnt have the balls to quote or mention me)

    instead acting like a brat about this difference in our theories, you could try to prove your theory right. i suggest starting from defining what mass actually is, as i probably see it bit different from you.
    what rules out the possibility of photons having similar mass than resting mass is, but it being so small that it cant be slowed down/stopped by our current equipment, and therefore we just being unable to give it a rest mass(as it needs to be at rest)?

    why is it that when we combine matter and anti-matter(electron + anti-electron(positron) in the picture), we get a photon(gamma waves), which is able to again disintegrate into (possibly) different types of matter and anti-matter(quark and anti-quark) + gluon(it can happen that it becomes electron and positron again)?

    like this:



    after you answer those few questions, we should be able to get some adult like discussion going on about these two theories. if you arent able to answer those questions and still are so certain that photon is massless(and im not talking about rest mass, but something alike, since light cant be stopped by our equipment) you basically think that i embarrass myself simply because your lack of knowledge(which in my books counts as being pretty embarrassing).
    Simple discussion of photon mass

    It's one thing to discuss the possibility that a photon has zero rest mass, but the level of that discussion entirely depends on the participants. Any discussion of "proof" or "definition of mass" is either going to be incredibly advanced, or little more than idle speculation based on ignorance.

    I'm not seeing the "advanced" part, here.

    Any discussion of photons and rest mass should at least bring up the standard special relativity equation relating energy and momentum:



    This basically means that photons have momentum. If you bombard an object with photons, it will push that object (very lightly). This is also what comprises radiation pressure (which is not the same thing as the solar wind, which is a plasma physics phenomenon).

    If a photon has "zero rest mass", that means that all of its energy is directly proportional to its momentum. "Proving" that the rest mass is zero is necessarily tricky: how does one design an experiment to conclusively demonstrate that the mass is zero? One can always chime in, "Well, you only determined that it's close to zero - it might be closer to zero than you can measure." This kind of thinking makes the concept of zero rest mass essentially not provable. And you can't use concepts like, "Does it exert a gravitational force?" because in general relativity, photons do exert gravitational force, due to their momentum (it's part of the mass-energy density). Karl Popper addressed these concerns long ago: we can disprove whether a theory is true, but we cannot prove conclusively that it is true. Therefore, the job of science is to come up with disprovable hypotheses and try to disprove them. Those hypotheses that continued experiments fail to disprove are considered to be "true". It is always possible that any given theory might be disproved later, thus to bring this possibility up in any sort of scientific discussion contributes absolutely nothing.

    A more clear indication that the rest mass of a photon is very likely zero is that the formulation of quantum electrodynamics (QED) breaks down if it's nonzero. QED has accurately predicted the behavior of electrons and photons to one part in a billion, which is rather extraordinary, considering that quantum mechanics is so "fuzzy", so if one is to postulate and get others to accept the notion of nonzero rest mass for a photon, one will have to reformulate QED and explain why it's OK that a photon has mass.

    These are nontrivial tasks. Given that the current evidence indicates that the photon's rest mass is zero, the burden of proof lies on those who would postulate otherwise, just as those recent experiments showing neutrinos traveling faster than the speed of light had to bear the burden of proof for violating special relativity. One cannot just say, "It might be zero," and have any meaningful discussion, without pursuing at least some of the implications that derive from its being nonzero. And even then, the only real proof that it is nonzero would be derived from experiment, not argumentation.
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

    A discussion is two people sharing their understanding, even when they disagree.

  8. #18
    Habitual Fi LineStepper JocktheMotie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    8,193

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    i find it amusing that you say that im embarrassing myself for saying that photons have mass, but its just really small and cant be measured, when neither of the theories has been confirmed to be true. (and even more amusing that you didnt have the balls to quote or mention me)

    instead acting like a brat about this difference in our theories, you could try to prove your theory right. i suggest starting from defining what mass actually is, as i probably see it bit different from you.
    what rules out the possibility of photons having similar mass than resting mass is, but it being so small that it cant be slowed down/stopped by our current equipment, and therefore we just being unable to give it a rest mass(as it needs to be at rest)?

    why is it that when we combine matter and anti-matter(electron + anti-electron(positron) in the picture), we get a photon(gamma waves), which is able to again disintegrate into (possibly) different types of matter and anti-matter(quark and anti-quark) + gluon(it can happen that it becomes electron and positron again)?

    like this:



    after you answer those few questions, we should be able to get some adult like discussion going on about these two theories. if you arent able to answer those questions and still are so certain that photon is massless(and im not talking about rest mass, but something alike, since light cant be stopped by our equipment) you basically think that i embarrass myself simply because your lack of knowledge(which in my books counts as being pretty embarrassing).
    Oh please. Who's being a brat here? I like how you use a Feynman diagram and a QED explanation as to what's happening in order to somehow prove photons have mass, because if photons did have mass it'd break the model of your visual example. Now that was especially delicious.

    Stick to copying Jung verbatim, as any attempt at independent thought from you it seems is doomed.

    EDIT:

    @uumlau's explanation is more thorough, more accurate, and far nicer so I'd just go with what he said.



  9. #19
    Senior Member KDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    8,263

    Default

    Electricity makes sushibots superior human beings and Angus Young more than just a schoolboy with a piece of wood in his hands.

  10. #20
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    Simple discussion of photon mass

    It's one thing to discuss the possibility that a photon has zero rest mass, but the level of that discussion entirely depends on the participants. Any discussion of "proof" or "definition of mass" is either going to be incredibly advanced, or little more than idle speculation based on ignorance.

    I'm not seeing the "advanced" part, here.

    Any discussion of photons and rest mass should at least bring up the standard special relativity equation relating energy and momentum:



    This basically means that photons have momentum. If you bombard an object with photons, it will push that object (very lightly). This is also what comprises radiation pressure (which is not the same thing as the solar wind, which is a plasma physics phenomenon).

    If a photon has "zero rest mass", that means that all of its energy is directly proportional to its momentum. "Proving" that the rest mass is zero is necessarily tricky: how does one design an experiment to conclusively demonstrate that the mass is zero? One can always chime in, "Well, you only determined that it's close to zero - it might be closer to zero than you can measure." This kind of thinking makes the concept of zero rest mass essentially not provable. And you can't use concepts like, "Does it exert a gravitational force?" because in general relativity, photons do exert gravitational force, due to their momentum (it's part of the mass-energy density). Karl Popper addressed these concerns long ago: we can disprove whether a theory is true, but we cannot prove conclusively that it is true. Therefore, the job of science is to come up with disprovable hypotheses and try to disprove them. Those hypotheses that continued experiments fail to disprove are considered to be "true". It is always possible that any given theory might be disproved later, thus to bring this possibility up in any sort of scientific discussion contributes absolutely nothing.

    A more clear indication that the rest mass of a photon is very likely zero is that the formulation of quantum electrodynamics (QED) breaks down if it's nonzero. QED has accurately predicted the behavior of electrons and photons to one part in a billion, which is rather extraordinary, considering that quantum mechanics is so "fuzzy", so if one is to postulate and get others to accept the notion of nonzero rest mass for a photon, one will have to reformulate QED and explain why it's OK that a photon has mass.

    These are nontrivial tasks. Given that the current evidence indicates that the photon's rest mass is zero, the burden of proof lies on those who would postulate otherwise, just as those recent experiments showing neutrinos traveling faster than the speed of light had to bear the burden of proof for violating special relativity. One cannot just say, "It might be zero," and have any meaningful discussion, without pursuing at least some of the implications that derive from its being nonzero. And even then, the only real proof that it is nonzero would be derived from experiment, not argumentation.
    i started to write long response few days ago, but got bored with it and cba to continue with it, so ill just make it simple.

    matter is basically just small scale movement of energy, which is separate from larger scale, somewhat similar to our solar system to galaxy, what happens in the larger scale of galaxy, doesent really affect the earth, but affects the solar system as a whole. right?

    matter and antimatter are essentially the same movement of same thing, except that they spin in opposite directions. right?

    when you combine these two movements that run in opposite directions, they turn into an unstable photon, which disintegrates again into matter + antimatter(of same or different type). right?

    so back to my theory. photons are also moving all the time, except that they arent in these "loops" that make up mass, but move straight forward in space.

    if you think this straight forward movement(photon) as being 0, and(ill use electron/positron as an example) this "loop" type of movement of electron as 1, now positron would have the same sort of movement as electron, except running in opposite direction, so it would be -1. -1 + 1 = 0.
    now if you take another type of matter and antimatter and give their "loop" type of movement values of 2 and -2. -2 + 2 = 0.

    so wouldnt it be accurate to say that -1 + 1 = 0 = -2 + 2?

    am i missing something? if not, i can explain how i see these "loops" manifesting in quantum physics, or more like how the possibilities happening in quantum field are manifesting themselves into concrete reality in the form of similar type of loops.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

Similar Threads

  1. What is truth (split from post poll)
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 01-27-2013, 09:47 AM
  2. What is Philosophy?
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 01-09-2013, 09:10 PM
  3. What is the craziest bit of technology you have read about in SF?
    By macjoven in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-14-2009, 08:15 PM
  4. What is the point of the MBTI?
    By Dufresne in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 05-31-2007, 04:37 AM
  5. Just what is on your desk?
    By disregard in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 05-25-2007, 08:19 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO