Jump to content
jajrussel

Mass= ?

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, swansont said:

I thonk you can argue this from a classical physics perspective, but photons are quantum, and you have a much harder time applying Newtonian physics.

You can’t really say it’s the same photon coming out as going in. Same thing for refraction.

I remember having a question as to if the light that lets me see a tree was photons emitted by the tree after absorbing photons rather than reflected light. I’m sure I was told that couldn’t occur.

what is the difference between that and what you’re suggesting?

21 hours ago, Strange said:

I’m not disagreeing, since I pretty much knew this ,but I have also pretty much thought a bit differently.

i haven’t visited all these sites yet. Not sure which presents the (and, or)? I’ heard it stated that way. The thought/ question I had was a curve is a longer distant so wouldn’t it measure as the photon slowing down? Photons are said to slow down, so why bother with the he (and, or) explanation?

is there something wrong with the photon curve thought? Isn’t light generally measured straight on? So there would be no mistaken assumption of light going faster than c on a curved path if it was accepted that a curved path measure would measure as slower than c?

This is basically my opinion, but I do change them when I see the light so to speak...

Edited by jajrussel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, jajrussel said:

i haven’t visited all these sites yet. Not sure which presents the (and, or)? I’ heard it stated that way. The thought/ question I had was a curve is a longer distant so wouldn’t it measure as the photon slowing down? Photons are said to slow down, so why bother with the he (and, or) explanation?

It does increase the time taken, because it the light takes a longer path (not because it slows down): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shapiro_time_delay

34 minutes ago, jajrussel said:

This is basically my opinion, but I do change them when I see the light so to speak...

Very good (both the sentiment and the way it is expressed!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jajrussel said:

I remember having a question as to if the light that lets me see a tree was photons emitted by the tree after absorbing photons rather than reflected light. I’m sure I was told that couldn’t occur.

what is the difference between that and what you’re suggesting?

I would have to know the context of the discussion. 

How you analyze the behavior of a wave differs how you analyze the behavior of a photon. They are different models.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/27/2018 at 10:38 AM, swansont said:

I thonk you can argue this from a classical physics perspective, but photons are quantum, and you have a much harder time applying Newtonian physics.

You can’t really say it’s the same photon coming out as going in. Same thing for refraction.

Is this because there is no way to make the observation, or are photons  Indistinguishable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, jajrussel said:

Is this because there is no way to make the observation, or are photons  Indistinguishable?

Indistinguishable and also bosons, so there is no conservation of particle number. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.