Y.Porat wrote:
in More simple words:

the Lorentz factor does not apply to the photon
the photon is a special case that has to be treated separately

and if no Lorentz factor for it- no need anymore to claim the weird
claim
that it has no mass( though having Energy and momentum!!)
and the mass of the photon is defined simply as;

mC^2 = hf
therefore

photon mass is

m (photon) =hf/ C^2

No it is **apparent** mass

R. V. Pound and J. L. Snider, Effect of Gravity on
Nuclear Resonance, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13, 539 (1964)



does it make sense to you??
very simple isn't it??
does it makes so many things much simpler ??!!

(instead of the mountains of junglaring just because one false
assumption
that the L factor applies to the photon as well)??!!

QM is not a theory of propagation.
It is a energy accouning mechanism that
substitutes statististics for electrodynamics.

You cannot design a vaccine for avian flu
from the geographic data which describes
it's propagation. You also need some knowlege
of it's mechanisms.
http://www.sasvrc.qld.gov.au/assets/RNA_V_3.gif

http://web.mit.edu/8.02t/www/802TEAL3D/teal_tour.htm

Sue...



TIA
Y.Porat
-----------------------------

Sue... wrote:
Y.Porat wrote:
in More simple words:

the Lorentz factor does not apply to the photon
the photon is a special case that has to be treated separately

and if no Lorentz factor for it- no need anymore to claim the weird
claim
that it has no mass( though having Energy and momentum!!)
and the mass of the photon is defined simply as;

mC^2 = hf
therefore

photon mass is

m (photon) =hf/ C^2

No it is **apparent** mass


???
how come that 'apparent mass' makes * tangible -not apparent energy*

and *not apparent but very tangible tangible Momentum??*??






R. V. Pound and J. L. Snider, Effect of Gravity on
Nuclear Resonance, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13, 539 (1964)



does it make sense to you??
very simple isn't it??
does it makes so many things much simpler ??!!

(instead of the mountains of junglaring just because one false
assumption
that the L factor applies to the photon as well)??!!

QM is not a theory of propagation.
It is a energy accouning mechanism that
substitutes statististics for electrodynamics.

that energy acounting migh tbe just a convenent technique
but not the coplete understanding of the photon
iow
a partial solution.(and only partial understanding.
-------

You cannot design a vaccine for avian flu
from the geographic data which describes
it's propagation. You also need some knowlege
of it's mechanisms.


i didnt claim that this new understanding of mine is a complete
understanding of the photon

but it settles some crooked understanding of it!
not only crooked but incontradiction to other parts of physics
and that is more than problematic
it is a sign of sickness much worse than a flu (:-)

do you satrt to agree with me even partially??
---------

ATB
Y.Porat
--------------

Y.Porat wrote:
Sue... wrote:
Y.Porat wrote:
in More simple words:

the Lorentz factor does not apply to the photon
the photon is a special case that has to be treated separately

and if no Lorentz factor for it- no need anymore to claim the weird
claim
that it has no mass( though having Energy and momentum!!)
and the mass of the photon is defined simply as;

mC^2 = hf
therefore

photon mass is

m (photon) =hf/ C^2

No it is **apparent** mass


???
how come that 'apparent mass' makes * tangible -not apparent energy*

and *not apparent but very tangible tangible Momentum??*??

Suppose that a body is placed in a beam of

***perfectly collimated***

radiation, which it absorbs completely. The
amount of momentum absorbed per unit time, per
unit cross-sectional area, is simply the amount
of momentum contained in a volume of length
and unit cross-sectional area: i.e., times
the momentum density . An absorbed momentum
per unit time, per unit area, is equivalent
to a pressure. In other words, the radiation
exerts a pressure on the body. Thus, the
radiation pressure is given by...
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teachin...es/node90.html

....similar for radiation recoil Mossbauer)

So EM is a long-range(1/r^2) repulsive force.
Gravity is a long-range attractive force.










R. V. Pound and J. L. Snider, Effect of Gravity on
Nuclear Resonance, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13, 539 (1964)



does it make sense to you??
very simple isn't it??
does it makes so many things much simpler ??!!

(instead of the mountains of junglaring just because one false
assumption
that the L factor applies to the photon as well)??!!

QM is not a theory of propagation.
It is a energy accouning mechanism that
substitutes statististics for electrodynamics.

that energy acounting might tbe just a convenent technique
but not the complete understanding of the photon
iow
a partial solution.(and only partial understanding.
-------

It is more an understanding of matter.
It is built in chunks of 0.511MeV charges.

If you know an animial cell is 1 micron diameter.
That tells you very little about how atoms from
plankton end up in a sharks tail.

Lacking some knowledge of electric and magnetic
forces...
we must assume all possible paths.
http://www.physics.yorku.ca/undergra...ch/Feynm4.html



You cannot design a vaccine for avian flu
from the geographic data which describes
it's propagation. You also need some knowlege
of it's mechanisms.


i didnt claim that this new understanding of mine is a complete
understanding of the photon

but it settles some crooked understanding of it!
not only crooked but incontradiction to other parts of physics
and that is more than problematic
it is a sign of sickness much worse than a flu (:-)

Crooked understanding? LOL
Yes. 99 out of 100 experts on *photonic propagation*
are inept at electromagnetism. I suspect there may
be some causal relationship.

Actually, I have yet to meet the 1 of 100
who is skillfull.

I suppose that would be like meeting R.P. Feynman
buying bongo drums at the music store. )
http://ffden-2.phys.uaf.edu/213.web....man/bongo2.jpg


do you satrt to agree with me even partially??

You seem to be saying that the Lorentz transform
does not apply to the far-field part of the path.

With that I agree. It is only near matter where
you need to resolve the problem of retarded
potentials.

http://www.conformity.com/0102reflections.html

Sue...


---------

ATB
Y.Porat
--------------

ok
sp we agree that the Lorentz factor does not apply to the photon

mind you it is a great advance!!
actually a beginning of a revolution that can lead to more advance.

so if you go to a meeting dont forget to quote me there!!......
and we will see how they get it with your help and explanations there.

TIA
Y.Porat
------------------------

Y.Porat wrote:
ok
sp we agree that the Lorentz factor does not apply to the photon

mind you it is a great advance!!
actually a beginning of a revolution that can lead to more advance.

so if you go to a meeting dont forget to quote me there!!......
and we will see how they get it with your help and explanations there.

I will quote you here in this news group...
....where affection is indistinguishible from
abuse. ;-)

Sue...


TIA
Y.Porat
------------------------

In article ,
"Androcles" Androcles@ MyPlace.org wrote:

"Lloyd Parker" wrote in message
...
| In article ,
| "Androcles" Androcles@ MyPlace.org wrote:
|
| "Lloyd Parker" wrote in message
| ...
| | In article ,
| | "Androcles" Androcles@ MyPlace.org wrote:
| |
| | "Edward C, Otto III" wrote in message
| | m...
| | | This whole thread is a waste of time...
| | |
| | | See, the Italians have proven that the speed of light is no
longer
| a
| | | constant...
| | |
| | | Now, the speed is different depending on what frame of reference
| you
| | are
| | | actually measuring it in.
| |
| |
| | It always was.
| |
| | Never was, and never shall be. Einsten.
|
| Who the heck is Einsten? Never heard of her.
|
| | Observation:
| | http://www.britastro.org/vss/gifc/00918-ck.gif
| | Explanation:
| | http://www.ebicom.net/~rsf1/sekerin.htm (fig 3)
| |
| | (Or stars explode twice in three months).
| |
| So you didn't bother to read this part, then?
|
|
| I don't read creationist texts either.
Good for you, but apparently you cannot read at all.

|
| Can't learn physics if you won't look.
|
| Fiction is not physics.

Correct.
"also introduce another postulate, which is only apparently
irreconcilable with the former, namely, that light is always propagated
in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the
state of motion of the emitting body." --- Einstein the fiction writer.
Fiction is not physics.


Relativity has been proven many times. I suggest you stop listening to your
ego and start listening to science.

[quote]
we establish by definition that the "time" required by a turtle to
travel
from A to B equals the "time" it requires to travel from B to A.
[end quote]
Ref: http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
Fiction is not physics.
[quote]
For velocities greater than that of a turtle our deliberations become
meaningless; we shall, however, find in what follows, that the velocity
of a turtle in our theory plays the part, physically, of an infinitely
great velocity.
[quote]
Ref: http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/

Fiction is not physics.
Nothing can go faster than a turtle.
Oops!... Did I say 'a turtle'? Sorry...'light'.
Same phuckwit math, though.
Can't help being a phuckwit, can you?
Androcles.

Photons are different from matter.

so if you go to a meeting dont forget to quote me there!!...

*****************

"Nothing useful is ever accomplished in a meeting"

- Humber's 5th law

try to be more positive and optimistic

btw why do you think so??
do you suggest that in meetings people cultivate too much of their Ego
or private interest to be sympathetic to someone else's achievements??


or even just to listen open mimed to someone else??

ATB
Y.Porat
----------------------

"Sue..." wrote in message
oups.com...

| A *photon* has little if any definition outside
| the near-field of an atomic oscillator. It is
| just a chunk of EM perturbation in a sea of
| other EM perturbations... with some phase information.

There are no beams of light, right?
Androcles.

Can't see a longitudinally polarized photon, .."if you won't look";
Look *DiRECTLY* UPstream, to see a longitudinally polarized photon.
ABSORBED photon mass is h*fL / c^2 = nA*{mph}*ls / rA = [mph] = m1.
DiPOLE & AERiAL mass ABSORBED longitudinally polarized AMBiENT emf.
ALL (n - 1) GUESS mass is SUBMERGED mass ..mathematically speaking.
But you don't have to take my word for it. See jOHN Baez's (n - 1).
brian a m stuckless

Androcles wrote:
| Observation:
| http://www.britastro.org/vss/gifc/00918-ck.gif
| Explanation:
| http://www.ebicom.net/~rsf1/sekerin.htm (fig 3)
|
| (Or stars explode twice in three months).

Can't learn physics if you won't look.

| Androcles.