Bilge wrote: [his straw DOPPEL] :
I know they say a photon **doesn't** have a [REST] mass.
But do we know the amount of energy a single photon can produce
and then use E=mc^2 thus m = E/c^2 (or another similar equation)?

$$ BEFORE the GR-coup (after Einstein died ~1954-55?), that was TRUE.
$$ SiNCE the GR-coup THAT isN'T TRUE ..Since THEN the m isN'T= E/c^2.
$$ ALSO the following equation has no ANGULAR momentum or LaGrangian,
..ad-hoc-ly assumed Pythagoras Theorem in Heavyside/Lorentz Doublet.
E^2 = (m*c^2)^2 + (p*c)^2 For a photon, m = 0.

Hamiltonian ENTHALPY E = eM + L + eV
= REST mass + LaGrangian, L + Volt*Amp*sec, eV
= m*c^2 + h*fL + nA*hbar*fA
= m*c^2 + pL*c + pA*fA
Where..
pL = LiNEAR momentum ; pA = ANGULAR momentum.
fL = LiNEAR frequency ; fA = ANGULAR frequency.
eK = LaGrangian+eV = E-eM = E-eF-L = KiNETiC energy.
eV = E-eM-L = eG-eM = eF+eK-eM = eK-L, ..OR= -(m1*v1^2/2).

As well there's the equation:
$$ ^.
P*V = n*k*T
$$ [Pa*Vol. = n*k*T]
$$ [Pascal*Vol. = n*k*Temp.]
$$ [Pressure*Volume = n*k*degreeKelvin,] ..
$$ [..note the EARth's AMBiENT photon gas PARTiTiON function k].
Note, k in nkT is Boltzmann's, Pauli's & Bose/Einstein's PARTiTiON k.
[i.e. THAT's "Bose" ..as in BOSON or boson, as in PHOTON GAS, duh.!!]
i.e. THAT equation is NOT LiMiTED for any established EARth ALTiTUDE.

You're so ANTi-Brian sometimes, Bilge. MORE ANTi-Brian; BiGGER loser.

(P = pressure V= volume n = number of molecules k = constant
T = temperature)

$$ There're lots of k's ..you COULD have been a little more specific.
$$ [Bad enough mixing VARiOUS Standard unit SYSTEMs, without notice].

Perhaps mass can be determine someway with the above formula
(since m = density x volume and/or possibly other equations
using planck' s constant)

The theoretical [REST] mass of zero follows from maxwell's
equations. Photons have only transverse polarizations.

$$ Space is full of photon gas.
Photons can be said to have a LONGiTUDiNAL polarization in the SAME
sense YOUR "not reachable" POiNCARE element is not accepted science.
Technically, a photon can only be seen by looking directly UPstream.
[i.e. So, clearly, in that sense, the photon is LiNEARLY polarized].

$$ Hope this helps, ```Brian.

IFor PV = nkT: could the "theoretical" mass be computed in some way
through the temperature of a group of photons (such as sun rays) and if
it's possible to measure the pressure these photons generate within a
specific Volume of space in time (i guess?)? ...or another similar
formula that contains density x volume (= mass) and the number of
molecules?
is there a "theoretical" mass for a photon ???
Space is full of photon gas.

Space is full of photon gas.


It always helps if you discreetly crack open the kitchen window a bit
whenever you eat those gassy photons.

Greysky I once farted near an open flame,and a "blue flame" shot out of
my rectum. Can I relate this to "photon gas" I always thought it was
hydrogen gas. TreBert

Dear G=EMC^2 Glazier:

"G=EMC^2 Glazier" wrote in message
...
Greysky I once farted near an open flame,and a
"blue flame" shot out of my rectum. Can I relate
this to "photon gas"

Blue is a color, and blue is the light emitted... ;)

I always thought it was
hydrogen gas. TreBert

Methane, primarily. With some hydrogen sulfide thrown in for the
smell.

David A. Smith

$$ Great PYRAMiD a methane digestor.
Same thing happened to Ezekiel (Ezekiel 4). Once upon a time long ago,
young Ezekiel had often seen other boys igniting their farts, for fun.
Burning dried LiVESTOCK dung cakes is better for SOME peoples ECONOMY.
GOD told him to use HUMAN excrement, for fuel (instead of OTHER dung).
The FAR-i-sees didN'T catch on or couldN'T make METHANE DiGESTORs tic.
Seems the FAR-I-sees saw a COLLECTiON problem ..or status-quo PROBLEM.
[Anyway ..in the end, they CONViNCED GOD to let them BURN OTHER dung].

$$ Pyr-amid means Fire-amid.
But there was no fire "amid"; The fire came out of the control "vents".
Controled burns out the Queen's Chamber "vents", with lower shaft feed.
Mummys areN'T funeral objects ..they're GREAT methane digestor pellets.
Of course, METHANE is what fueled the EARLiEST Egyptian air-ship fleet.

$$ GREAT Pyramid geometry.
The APEX angle of the GREAT Pyramid of Giza in Egypt is ARCtan TWO (2).
The GREAT PYRAMiD served also as an air-ship TRiACON-frame-panel "jig".
Proportionally ..each face is exactly HALF of the required TRiACON jig.
Where BASE edge is FOUR (4), the APOTHEM is sqrt5+1; EDGE 2sqrt(Phi+2).
The MERiDiAN SECTiON is MiNiMUM area fitting TANGENT to an hemi-sphere.

$$ ^.
$$ [ ][ ][ ].
$$ [ ][ (eye) ][ ].
$$ [ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ].
$$ [ ] The silent p in Coup-GR. [ ].
$$ [ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] [ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ].
$$ [ ] Mass m isN'T= E/c^2, in the Coup-GR Tivity. [ ].
$$ [ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ].
$$ [ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ].
[ IAM He, BEFORE iMHOTEP was. ][ ][ Brian A M Stuckless, Ph.Tivity. ].


G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:
Greysky I once farted near an open flame,and a "blue flame" shot out
of my rectum. Can I relate this to "photon gas" I always thought it
was hydrogen gas. TreBert
Space is full of photon gas.

brian a m stuckless wrote:
Hatshepsut snips:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ut_in_Civ4.jpg

I always thought it
was hydrogen gas. TreBert

Approximately 99% of the interstellar medium is
composed of interstellar gas, and of its mass, about
75% is in the form of hydrogen (either molecular or atomic),
with the remaining 25% as helium. The interstellar gas
consists partly of neutral atoms and molecules, as well
as charged particles, such as ions and electrons. This
gas is extremely dilute, with an average density of about
1 atom per cubic centimeter. (For comparison, the air we
breathe has a density of approximately
30,000,000,000,000,000,000
molecules per cubic centimeter.) Even though the interstellar gas
is very dilute, the amount of matter adds up over the vast distances
between the stars. The interstellar gas is typically found in two
forms:
1 Cold clouds of neutral atomic or molecular hydrogen; and
2 Hot ionized hydrogen near hot young stars.

http://www-ssg.sr.unh.edu/ism/what1.html
Space is full of photon gas.

....And what cubic centimeter of space was evacuated to prove that?
Did anyone take a photograph of the space to prove it empty?

Sue...

http://web.mit.edu/8.02t/www/802TEAL3D/teal_tour.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultraviolet_catastrophe
http://nobelprize.org/physics/laurea...n-lecture.html
http://www.physics.yorku.ca/undergra...ch/Feynm4.html

Now, does not the prize to Einstein imply
that the Academy recognised the particle
nature of light? The Nobel Committee says
that Einstein had found that the energy exchange
between matter and ether occurs by atoms emitting
or absorbing a quantum of energy,hv .

As a consequence of the new concept of light quanta
(in modern terminology photons) Einstein proposed the
law that an electron emitted from a substance by
monochromatic light with the frequency has to have
a maximum energy of E=hv-p, where p is the energy needed to
remove the electron from the substance. Robert Andrews
Millikan carried out a series of measurements over a
period of 10 years, finally confirming the validity of this
law in 1916 with great accuracy. Millikan had, however,
found the idea of light quanta to be unfamiliar and strange.

The Nobel Committee avoids committing itself to the
particle concept. Light-quanta or with modern terminology,
photons, were explicitly mentioned in the reports on
which the prize decision rested only in connection with
emission and absorption processes. The Committee says
that the most important application of Einstein's photoelectric
law and also its most convincing confirmation has come from
the use Bohr made of it in his theory of atoms, which explains
a vast amount of spectroscopic data.
http://nobelprize.org/physics/articl...ong/index.html

KnightsKnives wrote:
"Sue..." wrote in message
ups.com...

brian a m stuckless wrote:
Hatshepsut snips:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ut_in_Civ4.jpg

I always thought it
was hydrogen gas. TreBert

Approximately 99% of the interstellar medium is
composed of interstellar gas, and of its mass, about
75% is in the form of hydrogen (either molecular or atomic),
with the remaining 25% as helium. The interstellar gas
consists partly of neutral atoms and molecules, as well
as charged particles, such as ions and electrons. This
gas is extremely dilute, with an average density of about
1 atom per cubic centimeter. (For comparison, the air we
breathe has a density of approximately
30,000,000,000,000,000,000
molecules per cubic centimeter.) Even though the interstellar gas
is very dilute, the amount of matter adds up over the vast distances
between the stars. The interstellar gas is typically found in two
forms:
1 Cold clouds of neutral atomic or molecular hydrogen; and
2 Hot ionized hydrogen near hot young stars.

http://www-ssg.sr.unh.edu/ism/what1.html
Space is full of photon gas.

...And what cubic centimeter of space was evacuated to prove that?
Did anyone take a photograph of the space to prove it empty?

Sue...

http://web.mit.edu/8.02t/www/802TEAL3D/teal_tour.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultraviolet_catastrophe
http://nobelprize.org/physics/laurea...n-lecture.html
http://www.physics.yorku.ca/undergra...ch/Feynm4.html

Now, does not the prize to Einstein imply
that the Academy recognised the particle
nature of light? The Nobel Committee says
that Einstein had found that the energy exchange
between matter and ether occurs by atoms emitting
or absorbing a quantum of energy,hv .

As a consequence of the new concept of light quanta
(in modern terminology photons) Einstein proposed the
law that an electron emitted from a substance by
monochromatic light with the frequency has to have
a maximum energy of E=hv-p, where p is the energy needed to
remove the electron from the substance. Robert Andrews
Millikan carried out a series of measurements over a
period of 10 years, finally confirming the validity of this
law in 1916 with great accuracy. Millikan had, however,
found the idea of light quanta to be unfamiliar and strange.

The Nobel Committee avoids committing itself to the
particle concept. Light-quanta or with modern terminology,
photons, were explicitly mentioned in the reports on
which the prize decision rested only in connection with
emission and absorption processes. The Committee says
that the most important application of Einstein's photoelectric
law and also its most convincing confirmation has come from
the use Bohr made of it in his theory of atoms, which explains
a vast amount of spectroscopic data.
http://nobelprize.org/physics/articl...ong/index.html


Either you know your physics or you are good at Google.
Googlers are highly motivated skeptics.
Skeptics are highly motivated Googlers.
I claim to be both by the principle of duality...
whatever that means. )
In either case,
thanks for this post. It is good to know there are educated posters in the
newsgroups.
I have not been to sci.physics.relativity because of some of the posts
that I have seen posted here from that newsgroup.

Yes... a lot of posters that won't admit their buyer's remorse
to themselves so just make others miserable so they'll
have some company.

If you have an insult filter, you might be able to
skim off the 10% that is worth reading.

My question is, are there other people in that newsgroup that are
as brief and concise to the topic as you?
If so, I think I will add the newsgroup to my newsreader.

Brief and concise? I am just the worst writer in the ng so
I cut and paste alot... hopefully from public domain stuff
ending in .edu .gov .ec .org... )

Yes... there are a few. Just ask for a list of authoritate
posters.... then put the list in your killfile. )
Just Kidding!

On behalf of more moderates:

Welcome.!

They are usually periodically advertised. I expect the FAQ for
the physics newsgroup to be advertised here in a couple of days.
http://hermes.physics.adelaide.edu.au/~dkoks/Faq/

David A. Smith
"N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)"
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...c?dmode=source

--------------------------
Kind regards,
Sue...










Thanks,

KnightsKnives

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

KnightsKnives wrote:
"Sue..." wrote in message
ups.com...

brian a m stuckless wrote:
Hatshepsut snips:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ut_in_Civ4.jpg

I always thought it
was hydrogen gas. TreBert

Approximately 99% of the interstellar medium is
composed of interstellar gas, and of its mass, about
75% is in the form of hydrogen (either molecular or atomic),
with the remaining 25% as helium. The interstellar gas
consists partly of neutral atoms and molecules, as well
as charged particles, such as ions and electrons. This
gas is extremely dilute, with an average density of about
1 atom per cubic centimeter. (For comparison, the air we
breathe has a density of approximately
30,000,000,000,000,000,000
molecules per cubic centimeter.) Even though the interstellar gas
is very dilute, the amount of matter adds up over the vast distances
between the stars. The interstellar gas is typically found in two
forms:
1 Cold clouds of neutral atomic or molecular hydrogen; and
2 Hot ionized hydrogen near hot young stars.

http://www-ssg.sr.unh.edu/ism/what1.html
Space is full of photon gas.

...And what cubic centimeter of space was evacuated to prove that?
Did anyone take a photograph of the space to prove it empty?

Sue...

http://web.mit.edu/8.02t/www/802TEAL3D/teal_tour.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultraviolet_catastrophe
http://nobelprize.org/physics/laurea...n-lecture.html
http://www.physics.yorku.ca/undergra...ch/Feynm4.html

Now, does not the prize to Einstein imply
that the Academy recognised the particle
nature of light? The Nobel Committee says
that Einstein had found that the energy exchange
between matter and ether occurs by atoms emitting
or absorbing a quantum of energy,hv .

As a consequence of the new concept of light quanta
(in modern terminology photons) Einstein proposed the
law that an electron emitted from a substance by
monochromatic light with the frequency has to have
a maximum energy of E=hv-p, where p is the energy needed to
remove the electron from the substance. Robert Andrews
Millikan carried out a series of measurements over a
period of 10 years, finally confirming the validity of this
law in 1916 with great accuracy. Millikan had, however,
found the idea of light quanta to be unfamiliar and strange.

The Nobel Committee avoids committing itself to the
particle concept. Light-quanta or with modern terminology,
photons, were explicitly mentioned in the reports on
which the prize decision rested only in connection with
emission and absorption processes. The Committee says
that the most important application of Einstein's photoelectric
law and also its most convincing confirmation has come from
the use Bohr made of it in his theory of atoms, which explains
a vast amount of spectroscopic data.
http://nobelprize.org/physics/articl...ong/index.html


Either you know your physics or you are good at Google.
Googlers are highly motivated skeptics.
Skeptics are highly motivated Googlers.
I claim to be both by the principle of duality...
whatever that means. )
In either case,
thanks for this post. It is good to know there are educated posters in
the
newsgroups.
I have not been to sci.physics.relativity because of some of the
posts
that I have seen posted here from that newsgroup.

Yes... a lot of posters that won't admit their buyer's remorse
to themselves so just make others miserable so they'll
have some company.

If you have an insult filter, you might be able to
skim off the 10% that is worth reading.

My question is, are there other people in that newsgroup that are
as brief and concise to the topic as you?
If so, I think I will add the newsgroup to my newsreader.

Brief and concise? I am just the worst writer in the ng so
I cut and paste alot... hopefully from public domain stuff
ending in .edu .gov .ec .org... )

Yes... there are a few. Just ask for a list of authoritate
posters.... then put the list in your killfile. )
Just Kidding!

On behalf of more moderates:

Welcome.!

They are usually periodically advertised. I expect the FAQ for
the physics newsgroup to be advertised here in a couple of days.
http://hermes.physics.adelaide.edu.au/~dkoks/Faq/

David A. Smith
"N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)"
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...c?dmode=source

--------------------------
Kind regards,
Sue...










Thanks,

KnightsKnives


It would be nice to have the insult gone from the ng's, but I am afraid
you are right, they show contempt for contempt's sake.
Though you paste - you have to have an understanding of what it is that
you are pasting in order to get the formulas correct and considering what I
have read in this ng, on physics, and other posts, your post was brief
enough to read without having to get bored and close it.
Not only that but you probably helped a lot of people who do not
understand science by the way it was explained. It was simply put.
I have decided to add the ng. Thanks for your comments.

KnightsKnives