The attraction of massless particles to other massless particles and to matter

Oct 2017
676
348
Glasgow
I think that position is true for many physicists .... They don't quiet get it themselves , but assume the problem is with their understanding .... How could Einstein be wrong??? how could all mainstream physics be wrong???

I suggest to you this is all part of the conspiracy...
No... it's experimental evidence that shows that he's right, not some secret society XD
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Mar 2019
935
50
cosmos
interaction vs uniaction

Woody:
My addtional analysis is below:
1. "Gravity" and "space - time curvature" are equivalent descriptions. "Gravity" is the classical description while "space - time curvature" is the modern description. It's masses generate "gravity" and also it's masses generate "space - time curvature".
2. "Gravity" is a bilateral concept. It's mass - mass "interaction". But if people consider that photon is massless, "space - time curvature" will turn to be unilateral concept. It's mass - massless and should be called "uniaction". Logically, they will not be equivalent any more. That will lead to the inconsistency between classic and modern physics.
3."Space" is a bilateral concept. If there is only one planet in cosmos, will the "outside" "space" exist and warp? If people consider that it's the mass of a planet render "space - time" warping from the angle of the planet, then how about from the angle of the "massless" photon? What render "space - time" warping?
 

topsquark

Forum Staff
Apr 2008
3,106
659
On the dance floor, baby!
Energy = Mass * c^2
Actually here we need the full equation:
\(\displaystyle E^2 = (pc)^2 + (mc^2)^2\)

Since m = 0 for the photon:
\(\displaystyle E = pc\)

Ala deBroglie: \(\displaystyle p = \dfrac{h}{\lambda}\)
where \(\displaystyle \lambda\) is the wavelength.

So we finally have
\(\displaystyle E = \dfrac{hc}{\lambda}\)

We can also get the same result more directly using \(\displaystyle E = h \nu\).

-Dan
 
Mar 2019
935
50
cosmos
neila9876 vs ****9876

Actually I care more about if special electric character exist between released photons as well as if a released photon is a simple basic structure or a bi-layer complicated structure just alike one man Chen two guys neila9876 and ***9876 in PHF (are those two guys seperated or back to back). According to my own theory, I can't exclude those possibility.
 

topsquark

Forum Staff
Apr 2008
3,106
659
On the dance floor, baby!
Actually I care more about if special electric character exist between released photons as well as if a released photon is a simple basic structure or a bi-layer complicated structure just alike one man Chen two guys neila9876 and ***9876 in PHF (are those two guys seperated or back to back). According to my own theory, I can't exclude those possibility.
You might be able to make this kind of argument for a non-elementary particle such as a pion (where you may be correct at least as a first approximation) but elementary particles such as photons, neutrinos, quarks, etc. have no internal (spatial) structure. (They do have a kind of structure in internal spaces where we have symmetry relationships.)

If we find that any of these elementary particles have a structure then they aren't elementary after all and there may be a structure as you are suggesting.

-Dan
 
Mar 2019
935
50
cosmos
modern physics vs mystery

Dan:
No internal (physical) structure = what's the internal (physical) structure?
Elementary particle vs basic particle, which term is reasonable?
A special question:
Where's the photon gone after it has been absorbed by atom?
 
May 2019
2
1
Thanks so much everyone!

I’m so thrilled so many of you have taken the time to share your thoguhts, I really appreciate it.

I have had to go away for a weeks but I’m excited to look into what you’re shared and I will respond and thank you all, hopefully soon

Best wishes
Paul
 

topsquark

Forum Staff
Apr 2008
3,106
659
On the dance floor, baby!
Dan:
No internal (physical) structure = what's the internal (physical) structure?
Elementary particle vs basic particle, which term is reasonable?
A special question:
Where's the photon gone after it has been absorbed by atom?
The internal structure of a particle, let's say an electron, does not exist in real space. However there is something called "weak hypercharge" that an electron does have. (Actually it's a left handed electron but let's not go there for now.) In that sense the electron has structure in weak hyperspace, but weak hyperspace is not part of space-time. It's more a Mathematical property rather than a physical one.

Where does the photon go? It's gone. What happens is that the electron is now in a higher energy state. (Which the electron may emit a new photon and fall back into a lower energy state.)

-Dan
 
Mar 2019
935
50
cosmos
@ dragon
Yeah...ah...yeah, no physical...just hyper...hyper...hyper...mathematical...
Oh, yeah...just gone, nowhere...everywhere...
Finished.
 

topsquark

Forum Staff
Apr 2008
3,106
659
On the dance floor, baby!
@ dragon
Yeah...ah...yeah, no physical...just hyper...hyper...hyper...mathematical...
Oh, yeah...just gone, nowhere...everywhere...
Finished.
It is what it is. It's nice to have things be the simplest we can get but QM operates by vastly different rules than what we are used to using Classical Physics. It's practically a whole different world.

-Dan