"Sam Wormley" <email@example.com> wrote in message news:76CdnZl1O_FuobPMnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@giganews.com... > On 2/26/13 9:40 PM, Tom Potter wrote: > >> The equation that Sammy references has several flaws. >> >> 1. It implies that a photon is energy squared. > > It is sad that pitiful Potter doesn't understand the physical > significance of the equation: > > E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2 > > Perhaps a one minute physics video will help Potter sort > things out. > >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnMIhxWRGNw > > Perhaps Potter recalls that a photon's Momentum is > p = h?/c = h/? > > and Photon Energy > E = h? > > > Yet in the first equation, Potter is pointing out > that if mass is zero, then > > p = c/E > > Let Potter cogitate on what he sees as a discrepancy.
I am sadden to see that Sammy did not comprehend my post.
Rather than allowing a YouTube video be the arbitor of what is the best model of reality, I'd rather let the measured facts speak for themselves.
The equation that Sammy referenced has several flaws. ( E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2 )
1. It implies that a photon is energy squared. ( Note that Sammy's YouTube equation equates energy squared to the sum of static and dynamic energy squared terms.)
2. It features the mechanical properties mass and momentum, and ignores the electro-magnetic properties that relate more fundamentally with quanta charge systems. ( Note that the YouTube equation has no provision for electro-magnetics.)
3. It ignores the fact that energy is not quanta, ( Note that Sammy plucks Planck's Constant out of the air and uses h along with the constant c to rationalize the YouTube equation.)
4. If integers and maths are valid and can be used to model physical reality, and we assume that 5^2 = 4^3 + 3^2 the equation that Sammy references implies that mass, momentum and energy have a 3-4-5 relationship, and that energy is represented by the hypotenuse of a right angle.
Detailed examination of electro-magnetic quanta suggests that there is not a 3-4-5 quanta relationship between real power, apparent power and measured power, and consequently between E^2, (mc^2)^2 and (pc)^2 ( If time is homogeneous in the system being observed.)
and it indicates that energy is not located in a hypotenuse, but is the angular displacement lost to external systems, and eventually to the larger universe. (Entropy) ( Observe that observations clearly indicate that energy ( Or more precisely action) is radiated into space (Entropy) and that the 3-4-5 relationship between total energy, static energy and dynamic energy is not the best model of reality.)
5. It ignores the fact that complex conjugation is needed to interface a system that fits Sammmy's equation with outside systems that fit the equation. ( As can be seen by examining a deeper analysis of reality than a YouTube video, to account for heat flow (Photon movement) from system to system to the largest universe, it becomes necessary to apply complex conjugation to get the sources and sinks to line up.)
6. Sammy's equation does not consider that photons are polarized.. ( As can be seen, when i is used to model the most basic property ( Angular displacement), it provides for n units of quanta, and the polarity of the quanta.)
The fact of the matter is that photons are polarized ACTION events,
and can be one fourth, one half, or one wave length,
of ACTION transferred from a source to a sink system.
The square root of minus one "i" is the best way to model an action event, as it conveys both angular displacement and direction of rotation.
As many units of "i" can be added to some resonant systems, those resonant system are boson storage systems.
i^n = number of bosons transferred. i^n / 4 = number of cycles transferred.
A lossy resonant system loses n units of ACTION per cycle, and if m = the number of cycles stored in a system, m / n = the Q of the system.
I suggest that if Sammy does Bing searches on quarter wave stub quanta of action wave guides "Q" decay of an oscillating system complex conjugation entropy Planck's Constant thermodynamics etc.
and reads and understands what he reads,
that he will see that E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2 applies to a limited subset of infinite Q mechanical systems.
The bottom line is that quanta is best modeled using "i^n" which is integer ("n"), is a natural angular displacement unit, and has a definite polarity,
and that models that use higher order properties such as mass and momentum are bulk properties couple to bulk standards, and need constants and assumptions, and must ignore aligning heat flow from system to system, to approximate reality.
Observe that the angular displacement of ONE system can serve as the magnitude and polarity units of all other physical properties and no constants or hacks or hand waving or YouTube videos are needed.
No doubt YouTube is great for beginners but at some point one must address the residuals that arise from incomplete models.