illuusio

You can't be serious, are you? It doesn't matter what wave length is picked, you get the same mass anyway. We can't discuss the interaction at the moment (gag order) Neither why radius of proton is important. Lets keep the focus on those two hypothesis and derived photon mass.

That's fine with me. I can do it by myself, it takes just a bit longer. Nice attitude! Keep on rocking

Sure it's my fault, at least partially. I'm provocative and arrogant, but I do want to shake you guys up. But it's weird to say that my thoughts are dillusional. You can easily test my theory! And your metafore sucks. You agree that shit is good, you must agree, billions of flies can't be wrong

Could be more specific? What do you mean by choosing bits and ignoring the rest? If I do two hypothesis on photon, what's wrong with that? Maybe you should call your friends to help you and lock this thread You are in trouble here!

I'm actually quite surprised that there is no one willing to collaborate with me. I don't know what to say... other than... interesting.

I'm not making stuff up other than two hypothesis. The rest is pure common physics and math. Can you comprehend? Can you make scientific counter arguments on my reasoning? No shit Sherlock?!

Well, I hope that here is plenty of people with higher understanding of math than high school level.

http://en.wikipedia....violet#Subtypes Radius of photon can't be larger than a radius of proton due to creation of photon between proton and electron (case Hydrogen). What do you mean by proton/antiproton interaction? pair production or annihilation emissions? Photon size might actually grow when energy is increased to the point when photon pair production happens. Hmm... interesting.

No derivations? What derivations you do need in case of rotating moving object? I think that you can Google derivations for energy calculations in this case What reasons you do need? I made hypothesis that should make you happy.

Maybe somebody sent it?

I'm not a religious person, BUT I do wonder how everything got started... There must be some kind of force involved outside our Universe. With force I don't mean force of higher power, but actual force and it's source. Sure it's possible that net energy in Universe is zero, but what ignited it? Some kind of disturbance maybe, but on what and what disturbance?

Unfounded in what sense? Total energy in case of moving rotating object is as I previously stated. Ok, maybe I should make also hypothesis that photon is a solid object. Happy now?

But in that gravitation case object absorbs energy and radiates it too. Photon experiences blue shifting.

It doesn't. It's created from the "stuff" between electron and nucleus, that's my hypothesis. Modern physics don't have answers to your question because physics is nothing but math these days.

I think we are done here Dr. Swanson, do your dirty work!

I don't see any reason why having a mass in photon and Higgs field should contradict. Higgs boson interacts with heavier particles. Photon ain't heavier particle. Right... it's quite subjective to say that given hypothesis is an unfounded assumption. Are you working in science world?

How about hypothesis that photon has a mass? And you think that E_tot = E_kinetic + E_rotational is unfounded if photon has a mass? Think again.

? What a heck you are talking about? Could you be more specific? Could you concentrate on my given hypothesis and results derived from it? Are you a staff member? Can't be You are the worst example of bad behaviour here!

Que? 122 nm wavelength and it's energy 10.16 eV? You mean radius of photon! right? If photon is created because of electron and nuclei compress *piip* then radius can't be much bigger than radius of nuclei.

What are you referring at?

You lost your balance for a short while, yes, I noticed Your question wasn't respectful enough worthwhile to answer. But no, numbers are not from my ass

Wow! I consider this as a victory!

Well, obviously I mean that EM interaction is not understood properly. Photon-electron interactions are real thing, and this time I mean REAL (concrete) thing. If SR agrees with my results, good for it.

I made a hypothesis and it gives reasonable results. It's not a matter of belief. Excellent distribution to the topic! .... not. Interesting... you can derive (with previous hypothesis) equation for redshifting without any constants, sweat!

Ok, tomorrow is the deadline So it seems that I have to pick up that Nobel prize to myself. I'll remember this forum in my speech