On Apr 22, 12:45*am, "Paul Mays" wrote:
"NoEinstein" wrote in message

...
On Apr 21, 7:55 am, "Paul Mays" wrote:



--http://fast.filespace.org/PaulRMays/Postulate.pdf

--
Paul R. Mays
"I Believe in Nothing, I Know, I think I Know or I Do Not Know
I Never Believe... For to Believe is a Religious Incantation"

"NoEinstein" wrote in message

...
On Apr 19, 4:51 am, "Paul Mays" wrote:

"Paul Mays" wrote in message

.. .

"BradGuth" wrote in message

...
On Apr 18, 12:52 pm, "Paul Mays" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message

...

On Apr 18, 11:19 am, Sanny wrote:
When in School I learnt 2 things about Light

1. Light is a Wave

I was shown Lenses and other Experiments to proove Light is a
wave.

2. When I grew up I was told Light is Electro Magnetic Wave.

Later I was Told
3. Magnetic and Electric Field in a light travel at 90`

Can we Change the angle of movement of Electric & Magnetic
Field?
How
can we say they are perpendicular.

Later I was told Light has photons and its energy is = h*u

So light is a Particle moving at light Speed.

Then I was told Light is both Particle and Wave

Dont you feel things are getting Complex and Absurd.

After 12 years of my passing out of school I still want to
know
whats
the correct description of light.

Bye
Sanny

Extreme Discussions at:http://www.getclub.com/Discussion.php

Perhaps you'll become the first to know the answer, because
Einstein
didn't have a clue.

I might care to rethink of those photons we see and of all those
photons we can't see as simply slow moving gravitons, or perhaps
as
somewhat quantum string like items. Of course, this still
doesn't
tell us specifically as to "what is light".

Is there even any such thing as an original photon, or is each
and
every available photon merely a secondary/recoil result of
gravitons
interacting with other gravitons, or of gravitons interacting
with
mass?

Pure energy seems to create photons, but without available
gravitons
it doesn't hardly matter, does it.
. - Brad Guth

I gota definition I like too...

--
Paul R. Mays
"I Believe in Nothing, I Know, I think I Know or I Do Not Know
I Never Believe... For to Believe is a Religious Incantation"

I like your interpretation as much as that one provided by '"dlzc"..

However, if gravity/gravitons didn't exist, neither would the
quantum
string like photon. In other words, without the spin of atoms, we
got
nothing.
. - Brad Guth

Well my interpretation Explains why there no need for gravitons to
denote the Causation of Gravity, What specifically light is and why its
detectable as a Wave or Little ball of stuff (Photon), Why its velocity
will always be independent of source or target, and seemingly a
constant..

Yet allows all existing physical rules to remain valid to a
Intrinsically
Biased
observer.

--
Paul R. Mays
"I Believe in Nothing, I Know, I think I Know or I Do Not Know
I Never Believe... For to Believe is a Religious Incantation"- Hide
quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

Dear Paul: You're right on all but one point: "The velocity of
emitted (or reflected) light ALWAYS increases or decreases depending
on the velocity and direction of the source or reflecting surface." —
NoEinstein —

No .. A car is going 50mph at a brick wall... if the wall is moving at the
car
at 50 mpg yes the impact comes sooner and with more force but the car
is still doing 50mph..- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Dear Paul: Closing velocity is confusing you.

No its not.. Never said a thang bout closing v

Think of a baseball
pitcher on the bow of a boat. *If the boat is going 10 mph, and he
throws a 90 mph fast ball (relative to the boat) in the direction the
boat is headed, the baseball will be increased in speed to 100 mph.
But if the same pitcher throws the ball 90 mph from the stern, the
ball will only be traveling 80 mph relative to the shore. *Light does
EXACTLY the same thing! *— NoEinstein —

Light does not work the same way.. *

Balls don't even work that way. Baseballs and light behave exactly the
same way.
In the ball/boat example, the speed of the thrown ball relative to the
shore is (90 mph + 10 mph) / (1 + (90 mph)(10 mph)/c^2).
In the light/boat case, swap c for the 90 mph of the thrown ball, and
see what you get.

Been validated many,many times.
not even a questional point... *Physics is ruled by the Relitive. * Nothing
has
any velocity without relitive measure to some other moving thing. *When
I spoke of the car the 50mph was Relitive to Ground State. *I could say
the car was the referance and the wall and ground was moving under it at
50mph.. But if the wall was moving at 50mph relitive to ground and the car
at 50mph relitive to ground at each other closing is 100.

Light on the other hand is independent of source or target. As its referance
is the UGC (Universal Gravitational Constant) not matter

--http://fast.filespace.org/PaulRMays/Postulate.pdf

--
Paul R. Mays
"I Believe in Nothing, I Know, I think I Know or I Do Not Know
*I Never Believe... For to Believe is a Religious Incantation"