On Aug 17, 11:35 am, "Androcles" wrote:
"Randy Poe" wrote in message

oups.com...
: On Aug 17, 10:06 am, socratus wrote:
: Another comment .
: ===========
: Let me try:
: We know that
: E=hv
: v=E/h
:
: This relates the energy of a photon to the frequency
: of the associated EM radiation.
:
: Now, h is a constant so it is directly proportional to energy E.
: Let me further classify this equation.
: We also know that E=0.5kT
:
: This relates the average kinetic energy of a
: molecule to temperature in Kelvin.
:
: Putting it into the above equation v=(0.5kT)/h
:
: What are you modeling that involves equating the
: average KE of a molecule in a gas with the energy of
: a photon?
:
No, you idiot, he's just proven colour is proportional to
temperature, as you've been told before.

You're talking about Wein's Displacement Law, derived
from the blackbody radiation curve (as I recall, you
don't believe blackbodies have anything to do with
temperature).

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...tum/wien2.html

The relationship between peak wavelength and
temperature is:

lambda*T = 2.9*10^-3 m*K

The relationship above gives

lambda*T = (c/f)*T = hcT/(0.5kT)
= 2hc/k
= 0.029 m*K

Right proportionality, but off by a factor of 10. The
resemblance to the actual relationship (Wien's Law)
is purely accidental, since there is no physical
basis for equating those two energies.

- Randy

"Randy Poe" wrote in message
ps.com...
: On Aug 17, 11:35 am, "Androcles" wrote:
: "Randy Poe" wrote in message
:
: oups.com...
: : On Aug 17, 10:06 am, socratus wrote:
: : Another comment .
: : ===========
: : Let me try:
: : We know that
: : E=hv
: : v=E/h
: :
: : This relates the energy of a photon to the frequency
: : of the associated EM radiation.
: :
: : Now, h is a constant so it is directly proportional to energy E.
: : Let me further classify this equation.
: : We also know that E=0.5kT
: :
: : This relates the average kinetic energy of a
: : molecule to temperature in Kelvin.
: :
: : Putting it into the above equation v=(0.5kT)/h
: :
: : What are you modeling that involves equating the
: : average KE of a molecule in a gas with the energy of
: : a photon?
: :
: No, you idiot, he's just proven colour is proportional to
: temperature, as you've been told before.
:
: You're talking about Wein's Displacement Law,

No I'm not, I'm talking about you being an idiot with no knowledge
of basic physics, relying as you do on government DOT publications.
Buses stop as quickly and in as short a distance as cars, colour is
temperature, "we establish by definition that the ``time'' required by
light to travel from A to B equals the ``time'' it requires to travel from
B to A" is pure, unadulterated nonsense and you are a lying troll
who said "I'm trolling you if you like".
As Uncle Stooopid asserts, "ignorance is educable, stupidity is forever".
You are eternally stupid, a mere pest on those that think it through
as "socratus" has done. Leave the students alone, haemorrhoid; you,
Phuckwit Duck and Humpty Roberts are royal pains in the arse and
Uncle Stooopid isn't much better, even if he's amusing which you are not.

On Aug 17, 3:41 pm, "Androcles" wrote:
"Randy Poe" wrote in message

ps.com...
: On Aug 17, 11:35 am, "Androcles" wrote:
: "Randy Poe" wrote in message
:
: roups.com...
: : On Aug 17, 10:06 am, socratus wrote:
: : Another comment .
: : ===========
: : Let me try:
: : We know that
: : E=hv
: : v=E/h
: :
: : This relates the energy of a photon to the frequency
: : of the associated EM radiation.
: :
: : Now, h is a constant so it is directly proportional to energy E.
: : Let me further classify this equation.
: : We also know that E=0.5kT
: :
: : This relates the average kinetic energy of a
: : molecule to temperature in Kelvin.
: :
: : Putting it into the above equation v=(0.5kT)/h
: :
: : What are you modeling that involves equating the
: : average KE of a molecule in a gas with the energy of
: : a photon?
: :
: No, you idiot, he's just proven colour is proportional to
: temperature, as you've been told before.
:
: You're talking about Wein's Displacement Law,

No I'm not, I'm talking about you being an idiot with no knowledge
of basic physics, relying as you do on government DOT publications.
Buses stop as quickly and in as short a distance as cars, colour is
temperature, "we establish by definition that the ``time'' required by
light to travel from A to B equals the ``time'' it requires to travel from
B to A" is pure, unadulterated nonsense and you are a lying troll
who said "I'm trolling you if you like".
As Uncle Stooopid asserts, "ignorance is educable, stupidity is forever".
You are eternally stupid, a mere pest on those that think it through
as "socratus" has done. Leave the students alone, haemorrhoid; you,
Phuckwit Duck and Humpty Roberts are royal pains in the arse and
Uncle Stooopid isn't much better, even if he's amusing which you are not.

Androcles ,sorry !!!
Your jargon is .....
Can you speak calmly ?

"Androcles" wrote in message
news

"socratus" wrote in message
ups.com...
: Some more comment.
: =================
: According to general relativity

You can stop right there.

GR is based on SR and SR is based on
"we establish by definition that the ``time'' required by light to travel
from A to B equals the ``time'' it requires to travel from B to A" because
I
say so. -- Einstein.

Sad .. very sad. Why would you thinkg that light should take different
times to travel the same distance?

"socratus" wrote in message
oups.com...
: Androcles ,sorry !!!
: Your jargon is .....
: Can you speak calmly ?

Not to Poe, he's an idiot and a haemorrhoid.

He who knows not and knows not that he knows not, he is a fool. Shun him.
He who knows not and knows that he knows not, he is a student. Teach him.
He who knows and knows not that he knows, he is a tool. Use him.
He who knows and knows that he knows, he is a sage. Follow him.

What is a maximum frequency limit for light quanta
in respect to its constant velocity: c=1?
1.
Jeckyl wrote:
As far as regular physics is concerned, there is no theoretical
limit ..
=============..
My opinion.
It means when photon moves with speed limit c=1.
the frequency is also limited f=1. And it happens because
the spin/impulse (h ) of photon is also equal to one h=1.
Then the energy oh this photon is also: E=1.
In this situation photon moves simply from point A to point B.
In such movement photon doesn't work, doesn't make
positive work. Why doesn't the photon make positive work?
Because photon moves as a wheel (with infinity density)
in a straight line. Photon doesn't create waves in such movement.
But it is impossible for photon to be always in such movement,
in such condition. Because we know what an important,
positive role photon plays in our planet, in our life.
So, it is possible to say that we know nothing about photon.
=========..

"socratus" wrote in message
oups.com...
What is a maximum frequency limit for light quanta
in respect to its constant velocity: c=1?
1.
Jeckyl wrote:
As far as regular physics is concerned, there is no theoretical
limit ..
=============..
My opinion.
It means when photon moves with speed limit c=1.

You mean with speed = 1 .. not just a limit

the frequency is also limited f=1.

1 what? And by your logic, it would not be a limit, but a fixed frequency
of 1

And it happens because
the spin/impulse (h ) of photon is also equal to one h=1.

eh?

Then the energy oh this photon is also: E=1.

If you choose your units that way

In this situation photon moves simply from point A to point B.

Umm .. ok

In such movement photon doesn't work, doesn't make
positive work. Why doesn't the photon make positive work?
Because photon moves as a wheel (with infinity density)

So it rolls?

in a straight line. Photon doesn't create waves in such movement.

So light waves aren't waves?

But it is impossible for photon to be always in such movement,
in such condition. Because we know what an important,
positive role photon plays in our planet, in our life.
So, it is possible to say that we know nothing about photon.
=========..

It is clear that you don't, yes.

For Jeckyl .
To agree with you on 100%, please, tell me:
" Which geometrical form does photon have
moving with speed c=1?"
Thank you.
=============..

"socratus" wrote in message
ups.com...
For Jeckyl .
To agree with you on 100%, please, tell me:
" Which geometrical form does photon have
moving with speed c=1?"
Thank you.
=============..

AFAIKm as a point particle it doesn't have a shape.