# Does this math explain lights speed ?

## Recommended Posts

Ψ/ε0=c?

##### Share on other sites

No. You need to say what these things are.

##### Share on other sites

21 hours ago, joigus said:

No. You need to say what these things are.

''A wave function in quantum physics is a mathematical description of the quantum state of an isolated quantum system. The wave function is a complex-valued probability amplitude, and the probabilities for the possible results of measurements made on the system can be derived from it. The most common symbols for a wave function are the Greek letters ψ and Ψ (lower-case and capital psi, respectively).''

'' For the case of vacuum (aka free space), ε = ε0.''

I now withdraw the question though , since I have found out ε0 has a value which is incorrect for what I am attempting to explain .

What symbol in physics math if any would describe a case for a vacuum , aka free space , negative of energy ?

I am trying to explain +/-=c  except the neg applies a force .

Could I desribe Ψ/F=c ? Where F is force

The value of F yet to be determined

Edited by Pbob
##### Share on other sites

Let's try to approach this a different way .

What is there about light speed that needs explaining ?

The quantum wave function has nothing to do with light speed.

##### Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Pbob said:

''A wave function in quantum physics is a mathematical description of the quantum state of an isolated quantum system. The wave function is a complex-valued probability amplitude, and the probabilities for the possible results of measurements made on the system can be derived from it. The most common symbols for a wave function are the Greek letters ψ and Ψ (lower-case and capital psi, respectively).''

'' For the case of vacuum (aka free space), ε = ε0.''

I now withdraw the question though , since I have found out ε0 has a value which is incorrect for what I am attempting to explain .

What symbol in physics math if any would describe a case for a vacuum , aka free space , negative of energy ?

I am trying to explain +/-=c  except the neg applies a force .

Could I desribe Ψ/F=c ? Where F is force

The value of F yet to be determined

What is c?

The speed of light?

Oh, OK. No, that math doesn't even start to talk about speed of light. As said by Studiot, the quantum wave function is a very different thing. For starters, it's a function, while $$\varepsilon_{0}$$ and $$c$$ are constants.

Another thing is that $$\varepsilon_{0}$$ is not really a constant of Nature. Rather, just an artifice in the choice of units for electric charge. Stick to Heaviside-Lorentz units and there's no $$\varepsilon_{0}$$. It disappears!

##### Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, joigus said:

What is c?

The speed of light?

Oh, OK. No, that math doesn't even start to talk about speed of light. As said by Studiot, the quantum wave function is a very different thing. For starters, it's a function, while ε0 and c are constants.

Another thing is that ε0 is not really a constant of Nature. Rather, just an artifice in the choice of units for electric charge. Stick to Heaviside-Lorentz units and there's no ε0 . It disappears!

I see that now thanks .

I am trying to describe why light travels at c and it is my opinion it is pulled along by force .

Can I descibe hf/F=c ?

Where F is an attractive force vector and hf is high frequency photon  ?

38 minutes ago, studiot said:

Let's try to approach this a different way .

What is there about light speed that needs explaining ?

The speed itself !

I think hf/F=c is now correct ?

The force value still to be determined .

##### Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Pbob said:

I am trying to describe why light travels at c and it is my opinion it is pulled along by force .

That is incorrect. It's the Aristotelian mistake. Aristotle thought that in order to have something move you need a force. That's now how Nature operates. You need a force in order to have something change its motion.

Edited by joigus
minor correction
##### Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Pbob said:

I think hf/F=c is now correct ?

Didn't you have dimensional analysis on physics lessons in your elementary school ?

h*f has unit J = kg * m^2 * s^-2

F has unit N = kg * m * s^-2

c has unit m/s

If you divide J/N the result will have a unit in meters.. so it will dismatch with m/s.. so the simple answer to your question is, no it's not correct..

Edited by Sensei
##### Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Sensei said:

Didn't you have dimensional analysis on physics lessons in your elementary school ?

h*f has unit J = kg * m^2 * s^-2

F has unit N = kg * m * s^-2

c has unit m/s

If you divide J/N the result will have a unit in meters.. so it will dismatch with m/s.. so the simple answer to your question is, no it's not correct..

Ok thanks .

The speed of light which is c , is a consequence of force . I want to explain this consequence in formula terms rather than just words . We already have the measure and result which is c . We do not have any math why it is c other than d/t=c

I want to explain the light speed process in formula which doesn't exist .

Light divided by a force , what can we use to describe this ?

Anology : I divide a cake by force

I am aware F=ma but this force isn't the same force .

Edited by Pbob
##### Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Pbob said:

I want to explain this consequence in formula terms rather than just words .

Scientists don't make up their formulas.. You need source data, and from that you derive formula in the area of interest. e.g. velocity is derived from analyzing the change in position of an object e.g. x0 at time t0, x1 at time t1, dx = x1-x0, dt = t1-t0, so v=dx/dt.

##### Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, joigus said:

That is incorrect. It's the Aristotelian mistake. Aristotle thought that in order to have something move you need a force. That's now how Nature operates. You need a force in order to have something change its motion.

If it is cold outside and I turn up my central heating , there is an increased exothermic process from my house . This is called the transition of energy , high energy states naturally transition to lower energy states . When you turn on a light switch and the bulb lights , the high energy of the filament makes a transition to the room space . The transition force is the force I am looking to explain . Lesser energy states applying a force on high energy states . There is no mistake in considering that a negative of energy applies an attractive  force on energy .

10 minutes ago, Sensei said:

Scientists don't make up their formulas.. You need source data, and from that you derive formula in the area of interest. e.g. velocity is derived from analyzing the change in position of an object e.g. x0 at time t0, x1 at time t1, dx = x1-x0, dt = t1-t0, so v=dx/dt.

Formulas work with the physics , I am not trying to make up a formula , I am trying to discuss a formula and looking for help with this formula .

Velocity is speed and direction , would v(hf) represent the velocity of light ?

v(hf) ∝ F(<hf) ?

Edited by Pbob
##### Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Pbob said:

The transition force is the force I am looking to explain .

There is no force needed.  If I put a hot object in cold water, the heat will be transferred to the cold water without a force.  The rapidly vibrating molecules of the object 'bump' into the slowly vibrating molecules of the water.  This causes the slowly vibrating atoms to vibrate more rapidly and of course the hot molecules vibration will slow.  This is how the energy is transferred and it will continue until there is no delta T between the hot object and the water.

##### Share on other sites

''an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force.''

Proof : Light passing through a medium slows down but once exiting the medium ,speeds back up to c .

Light exiting the medium cannot physically speed up unless there is applied force . Light leaving the medium  could not speed up and push the light ahead back to c without accelerating . The only way light can accelerate to c when leaving a medium is if it is being pulled by a constant force .

Newtons first law fails when light slows down in a medium and speeds back up again on exit of the medium , it is not an explanation of lights momentum .

Edited by Pbob
##### Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Pbob said:

If it is cold outside and I turn up my central heating , there is an increased exothermic process from my house . This is called the transition of energy , high energy states naturally transition to lower energy states . When you turn on a light switch and the bulb lights , the high energy of the filament makes a transition to the room space . The transition force is the force I am looking to explain . Lesser energy states applying a force on high energy states . There is no mistake in considering that a negative of energy applies an attractive  force on energy .

That's not how thermodynamics or heat transfer works. A process is exo or endothermic irrespective of what the temperature of the thermal bath is. Also wrong that high-energy states 'naturally transition' to lower energy states. That depends on the temperature. And force has very little, if anything, to do with heat transfer. Starting with the fact that equations of heat transfer are irreversible, while mechanics equations are reversible --except when friction is involved. There's nothing about what you've said so far that shows any understanding of how physics works, IMO.

##### Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Pbob said:

''an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force.''

Proof : Light passing through a medium slows down but once left the medium ,speeds back up to c .

This a 10 minute video that will explain why light moves more slowly through a transparent material and upon exiting the material returns to c.  If 10 minutes is too long, just watch the last 4 minutes.

##### Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, joigus said:

That's not how thermodynamics or heat transfer works. A process is exo or endothermic irrespective of what the temperature of the thermal bath is. Also wrong that high-energy states 'naturally transition' to lower energy states. That depends on the temperature. And force has very little, if anything, to do with heat transfer. Starting with the fact that equations of heat transfer are irreversible, while mechanics equations are reversible --except when friction is involved. There's nothing about what you've said so far that shows any understanding of how physics works, IMO.

Your opinion is incorrect , all heat can be observed using thermal observation equipment , heat energy is light and has density . The denser the light , the darker in observation it becomes . Observable black light is when light is at its densest form .

Have you heard the term spectral transitions before ? It is natural for any high energy state to disperse energy to lower energy states .

The gravitational transition force is responsible for all natural motion in the universe , I am aware you are not familiar with this term but I assure you that a body in motion that temporal conserves energy , conserves momentum .

Bodies orbit because they are attracted to the space ahead which is a lesser energy state than the body , the body conserves energy that makes the transition with the body .

Light is attracted to any region or point of space that is in a state of less energy .

8 minutes ago, Bufofrog said:

This a 10 minute video that will explain why light moves more slowly through a transparent material and upon exiting the material returns to c.  If 10 minutes is too long, just watch the last 4 minutes.

I don't see your link sorry but light slows down passing through glass because of the permitivity and permeability  of the glass . It travels through the glass because it is been pulled through the glass by beyond the glass which has less energy in the space than the glass .

Edited by Pbob
##### Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pbob said:

The speed itself !

I think hf/F=c is now correct ?

The force value still to be determined .

Light is is not a material object.

Only material objects are subject to the effects of forces.

##### Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pbob said:

Could I desribe Ψ/F=c ? Where F is force

No, you cannot.

Making stuff up is kinda the opposite of science.

1 hour ago, Pbob said:

We do not have any math why it is c other than d/t=c

Sure we do.

The speed of an electromagnetic wave from Maxwell’s equations is c

##### Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Pbob said:

Your opinion is incorrect , [...]

(my emphasis)

SOL*

* Smirking out loud

##### Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Pbob said:

Your opinion is incorrect , all heat can be observed using thermal observation equipment , heat energy is light and has density . The denser the light , the darker in observation it becomes . Observable black light is when light is at its densest form .

Have you heard the term spectral transitions before ? It is natural for any high energy state to disperse energy to lower energy states .

The gravitational transition force is responsible for all natural motion in the universe , I am aware you are not familiar with this term but I assure you that a body in motion that temporal conserves energy , conserves momentum .

Bodies orbit because they are attracted to the space ahead which is a lesser energy state than the body , the body conserves energy that makes the transition with the body .

Light is attracted to any region or point of space that is in a state of less energy .

Sorry, but joigus is right. You are vastly overestimating your understanding of physics

##### Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, swansont said:

The speed of an electromagnetic wave from Maxwell’s equations is c

Pardon ? How can you derive d/t without an exact measure ? How can an equation explain a speed without an actual measure ?

Secondly I am not making stuff up , the argument I presented is being ignored and is actual physics .

Why does light accelerate back to c when exiting a medium ?

Newtons first law can't apply or the light would exit the medium and not accelerate .

F=ma , mass times acceleration, this implies lights acceleration exiting a medium is an act of force .

Are you going to ignore this evidence ?

Edited by Pbob
##### Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Pbob said:

Newtons first law can't apply or the light would exit the medium and not accelerate .

No one has said light obeys Newton's laws of mechanics.

I did say

17 minutes ago, studiot said:

Light is is not a material object.

Only material objects are subject to the effects of forces.

But you obviously weren't listening.

##### Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, swansont said:

Sorry, but joigus is right. You are vastly overestimating your understanding of physics

Tit for tat , or you are underestimating my advanced understanding on certain process's .

The speed of light is zero , the speed light is attracted to lesser energy spatial regions is c . The gravitaional transition force is the consequence of light momentum , proven by Newtons first law of motion and light passing through a medium accelerating when exiting the medium .

##### Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Pbob said:

Pardon ? How can you derive d/t without an exact measure ? How can an equation explain a speed without an actual measure ?

Secondly I am not making stuff up , the argument I presented is being ignored and is actual physics .

Electricity and magnetism is real physics. The wave equation is real physics.

4 minutes ago, Pbob said:

Tit for tat , or you are underestimating my advanced understanding on certain process's .

You haven’t demonstrated any understanding

5 minutes ago, Pbob said:

The speed of light is zero , the speed light is attracted to lesser energy spatial regions is c . The gravitaional transition force is the consequence of light momentum , proven by Newtons first law of motion and light passing through a medium accelerating when exiting the medium .

In a word, no.

If you are claiming this, you need a model and evidence. If you keep engaging in the rectal reach protocol, this will be closed.

##### Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, swansont said:

In a word, no.

If you are claiming this, you need a model and evidence. If you keep engaging in the rectal reach protocol, this will be closed.

I have a model and evidence so please do not close the thread I will try to workout how to upload the model . I have already given evidence in the fact that light accelerates when exiting a medium .

Here is a 3 dimensional matrix of gravitational transition force and 1ev (photon energy)  divided by gravitational transition force in the smallest 3D volume  possible .

Edited by Pbob
##### Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
×