# Przemyslaw.Gruchala

Senior Members

241

## Posts posted by Przemyslaw.Gruchala

### Expanding Universe

How do we know that universal expansion isn't a thermal event?

Hot particles go up on Earth.

They are moving faster than cooler particles.

The coldest particle should be motion less.

But in practice motion less particle, at rest on Earth, is still moving around Sun, and around galaxy.

Imagine temperature as absorbed (virtual in SM) photons orbiting particle.

Because they are orbiting around particle (it's excited), it's taking more space/volume than cooler equivalent.

There can be less quantity of such particles per 1m3 volume than cooler equivalent.

If hot particles would go down, it would means that surface of planet is the hottest place and constantly increasing it by newly warmed particles from other areas. And nothing would exist at surface other than melted material or plasma.

I don't think so it can be applied to galaxies. On planet temperature is spreading across multiple particles, by constant collisions of them, virtual in SM photons are jumping between one particle to other particle when they're colliding.

Galaxies don't collide so often.

The more pressure (the more particles per 1m3 volume), the more probable is collision of some of them.

### Time - is it reversible?

How I can reverse the time of universe???

You need to become god in the next incarnation..

### How many photons/cm3?

that makes no sense to me.

the less the photons the more energy?

Gamma photons with high energy are created very rarely (in comparison to f.e. visible light).

After all they're created during annihilation. Electron with positron must collide to create gamma particle, etc.

You end up with single particle with energy equal to the energy of electron/positron.

That leads to zero photon=full energy.

I have no idea how you get such conclusion..

### How many photons/cm3?

Sunlight gives us about 1 kW/m^2 or 0.1 W/cm^2, or a flux of 2.77 x 10^18 photons/cm^2-s if they are at 550 nm. To get the number per unit volume you divide by the speed (3 x 10^10 cm/s) so it's just under 10^8 photons/cm^3 if it's all green light.

See visualization below.

Imagine that highlighted polygons on the left has 1 cm width, 1 cm height.

One photon goes out, second is starting intersecting with 1 cm x 1 cm plane, after traveling 550 nm, it's also no longer intersecting with plane.

To have average 1 photon with wavelength 550 nm all the time intersecting with plane 1x1 cm we need in volume 1x1x1 cm, 1cm/550nm number of photons. 1e-2/550e-9= 18182 photons with 550 nm.

(and we still didn't count those that were reflected, and those that are parallel to plane)

### How many photons/cm3?

O.K. thanks.

So it is 2.77 x 10^18 photons/cm^2 sec

10^9 looks too few.

That is 10^3 on each edge.

on each edge? It's 2d plane..

### Mass of Light

The sun converts about 4 billion* kg/s into other forms of energy, which is eventually radiated away at c.

2e+30 / 4e+9 = 5e+20 seconds needed to convert everything.

5e+20 / 3600 / 24 / 365 = almost 16e+12.

16 trillion years to convert everything.

But nuclear reactions are supposed to end after 4e+9 years.

Space should be full of such objects that don't radiate anything anymore, or so little they're not detectable by devices.

In the volume inside the earth, that's 500 s of travel, or the equivalent of 2 x 10^12 kg. The mass of the sun is 2 x 10^30 kg.

That's true, sphere with radius sun+150 million km is containing just "how massive sun was 500 seconds ago".

In mine post I was thinking about 14 billion * 365 * 24 * 3600 * 300,000 km spheres.. radius = 1.32e+23 km

It's not quite that simple. Photons are not particles in a classical sense they also have wave properties.

So the same regular particles, if believing Broglie

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_wave

mm. the 500s is the orbital radius. So you are estimating the volume of the cylinder from Earth to the Sun.

Not cylinder but rather cone.

Cylinder would be correct only when radius of Earth and Sun would be equal.

### Mass of Light

Everything is "sensible" to gravity, because it's bending of space..

### Mass of Light

Oh sorry, no, I ment "observe". The Universe is full of photons that travel in all directions and do not reach the Earth & our eyes.

You can't observe photon that wasn't absorbed by your eye.

By observation you're absorbing photons from world.

Photon detector in double slit experiment is so good in absorption that whole effect is disappearing.

### Photon mass and content

I don't understand (once again).

a photon has no rest mass, O.K.

But the photons that we catch (and the others that we don't catch) are not in state of rest, thus they have mass, be it relativistic. Those photons that travel at C exert and are sensible to gravity, as much as I know. Correct?

Correct.

But when photon has any mass, relativistic mass equation is not showing something unreal, relativistic, it's showing real mass. Absorbed photons are really in particle that absorbed them. They could join with it for real, or orbiting it (due to bend space around massive particle). Particle will be in such case shrink in one direction and expanded in other direction - in which it's currently moving, looking like american football "ball". The faster it's moving, the more expanded in direction of movement, and the more photons it has absorbed. With v = 0.866c it absorbed so much photons that their overall mass is enough to create 3 protons and 1 antiproton after collision with proton at rest:

m = m0 / sqrt( 1 - v^2 / c ^2 )

where m0 = 938.272 MeV * 2 = 1876.544 MeV

m = 1876.544/sqrt(1 - 0.866c^2/1.0c^2) = 3753.088

3753.088 / 4 = 938.272

In practice we need slightly more than 0.866c, the rest will remain in their K.E. (absorbed photons).

Imagine positive particle in Ultimate Theory, it has general equation:

P N+N+3/N

(made of N+3 positives and N negatives, N is natural number)

what is absorption of photon/energy?

It's equation:

P N+N+3/N + P N2+N2/N2 = P N3+N3+3/N3

where N+N2=N3

adding neutral particle(s) to positive charged particle.

Electric charge remain the same, but overall energy/mass is higher.

Then emission of photon will be:

P N3+N3+3/N3 -> P N4+N4+3/N4 + P N5+N5/N5

where N3=N4+N5

Neutral photons or neutral particle is emitted from our positive particle.

P N2+N2/N2 can be also noted as N2 * P 2/1.
P N5+N5/N5 can be also noted as N5 * P 2/1.

if 1 Hz is the smallest frequency, then N2 and N5 are Standard Model photon wave frequencies.

Collision of proton with other proton at v=0.866c will be:

P N+N+3/N + P N+N+3/N + X * P 2/1 = P N+N+3/N + P N+N+3/N + P N+N+3/N + P N+N+3/N+3

proton + proton + energy = proton + proton + proton + antiproton

X = N+N+3+N+N+3

X is quantity of photons P 2/1 with the smallest frequency needed to absorb to accelerate proton to speed 0.866c.

### Photon mass and content

Let's think about consequences of giving any non 0 mass to photon:

sphere with radius r+c is how massive star was 1 second ago,

sphere with radius r+10*c is how massive star was 10 seconds ago.

sphere with radius r+4 billion * 365 *24*3600 c is how massive star was 4 billion years ago, when it started emitting light.

etc.

With maximum speed of any particle c these are limits of sphere size.

It doesn't matter if light was absorbed by planet, meteor, comet etc. or attracted by black hole, it's still inside of our sphere radius.

(the same thought experiment can be applied to whole galaxy)

Stars are emitting light and other particles and are making lighter, less massive, with time.

But what they emitted during their life span is still influencing entire Universe.

Our galaxy is emitting particles to space, but other galaxies are "giving" us their own particles that traveled space million and billion years from the all directions.

It also means that the entire Universe mass would be exactly the same as in the beginning.

And there is no sense in searching for Dark Matter and Dark Energy.

### Photon mass and content

For light, I'd put a beam splitter in place and see if I get it to split.

But beam splitter is made of regular matter.

So it causes absorption and emittion of photons in transparent material when photons collide with protons and electrons.

Same input wave frequency is causing same result after split.

In essence you don't. You destroy it and create a new one. Even in Compton scattering it is modeled this way.

Actually what you said in #51 is valid for beam splitter like below one:

Imagine situation- we have two lasers, same frequency, same wave length, we're overlapping their beams that they're indistinguishable straight line.

Will you be able with beam splitter (or other device) tell exactly how many lasers we overlapped in the first place?

### Relativity of simultaneous?

But then how can you explain this framework in a predictable way, such that; the entanglement of the particles in question can have the prediction you are arguing about such that the phenomena you are talking about can be completely predictable?

In pion 0 decay to electron and positron example that he gave in #9 post it's very easy, second particle is exact mirror of first one, in the all parameters..

Imagine it in computer program: you're reading bit from memory, it can be 0 or 1. When you read 0, you know that opposite of it will be 1, if you read 1, you know opposite of it will be 0.

Or chess- you can pick up white or black, once somebody pick up from hidden hand white, you know what will be second hidden hand result in advance.

### Photon mass and content

If f.e. two neutral particles with equal momentum and direction have positions with distance between them smaller than f.e. reduced h/2, how would you experimentally find out they're two not one?

### Photon mass and content

Photon momentum depends on energy, which depends on frequency. You don't change the KE of a photon, per se, but you can create photons of different energies.

And SM photons with different frequencies might be caused by different overall masses..

SM photon with frequency 1 Hz might be made of 1 real photon.

SM photon with frequency 2 Hz might be made of 2 real photons.

SM photon with frequency 10000 Hz might be made of 10000 real photons.

And so on.

They can interact each other attracting neighborhood photons from the same packet (SM photon).

They all have the same speed of light, so the only thing we observe/detect is different frequency.

And frequency is result, not source..

E=h*f

E=p*c

h*f=p*c, p=m*c, f=1

h*1=m*c*c

m=h/c^2 for 1 Hz

### Mass of Light

O.K.

How then do you change the energy of a particular photon?

It must collide with other particle to give it part of energy. Which will be observed as acceleration of that particle, and changing frequency and direction of photon.

### Environmental modification, ENMOD and our changing climate

The United States used weather modification in the Vietnam War to limit the movement of enemy vehicles. I wonder at what stage of advancement in this technology the world is at now.

Let me guess- CIA destroyed WTC and Pentagon too.. ?

### Relativity of simultaneous?

You should better ask NASA why they don't use entanglement to transfer commands to devices or satellites on 2nd end of Solar System such as Voyager and pictures or movies from them back to Earth, if it really allows transfer of information instantaneously at so big distances.. What for waiting for radio waves minutes, or hours?

### Do black holes technically have less net gravity than the original star?

or is there another reason for the collapse?

Lack of nuclear reaction and fusion.

p+ + p+ + some energy -> p+ + n0 + e+

proton colliding with other proton with enough kinetic energy can produce proton, neutron and positron. Proton and neutron will join to deuterium.

Other time neutron will again decay to proton, electron and neutrino. Electron and positron will annihilate producing photons.

Other combination is:

p+ + e- + some energy -> n0

Proton with electron and some energy will convert to neutron. Which will join with surrounding proton and construct deuterium.

Heavy particles are going to core. Lighter particles reverse, to outer areas.

This process is making sure that core is not collapsing.

But only until there is enough matter to continue nuclear reaction.

### How can light go back to it's original angle after being refracted?

No, we are discussing what established physics has to say.

Which means nothing has to say, because Standard Model has no gravitation included.

### How can light go back to it's original angle after being refracted?

No. Gravity is far too weak to explain such a phenomenon.

We are speculating what happens very close to particle. Something that happens in almost radius of proton, or electron.

force = mass / ( distance * distance ).

if distance between two particles is very small then any mass will be dominating over anything else.

mass=1, distance=1

force = 1/ (1*1) = 1

mass=10000, distance=100

force=10000/(100*100)=1

mass=1000000,distance=1000

force=1000000/(1000*1000)=1

### How can light go back to it's original angle after being refracted?

Technically it's absorbed by whatever material into virtual excitation states. You're splitting hairs here that are beyond the level of the question that was asked.

I just pointed out obvious thing that it's not just electron that's absorbing photons... Somebody from that statement can conclude that only electrons are absorbing photons, and protons/atom cores don't.

Actually I should also mention positrons, and antiprotons as well as electrons and protons, to complete list.

### How can light go back to it's original angle after being refracted?

It slows down due to interactions with the electrons in the medium. The photons themselves always move at c, but they are absorbed and reemitted by the electrons in the material.

Above explanation can be true only if we experience that ionized hydrogen, alone protons without electrons, is not slowing down photons..

Is there some experiment showing this?

Otherwise if proton can absorb photon then you should say:

"It slows down due to interactions with the electrons and protons in the medium. The photons themselves always move at c, but they are absorbed and reemitted by the electrons and protons in the material."

ps. Proton can even absorb electron and some additional energy and convert to neutron..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_capture

### Mass of Light

The equation swansont gave applies in all inertial frames,

E=p*c

p=E/c

Honestly this way everything can be explained..

### Center of Mass

Or dual-star system- center of mass won't be in any of star, but somewhere between them.

### Is the Standard Model consistent with current observation?

If we assume that Einstein was right (otherwise why to use his special relativity equations in the first place?), then gravitation is not force, but bending of space.

Either macro scale and micro scale object should bend space, accordingly to their masses.

Either proton, electron, neutrino and photon should be bending space.

Bending of space in cosmic scale is result of sum of bending in micro scale.

In that case electron orbiting around proton is simply traveling straight line from it's own point of view, but space around proton is bend, therefor we're observing it's orbiting proton..

×