The Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Single photon
Replies: 22   Last Post: Mar 4, 2013 8:25 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Tom Potter

Posts: 497
Registered: 8/9/06
Re: Single photon
Posted: Feb 27, 2013 9:01 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

"Sam Wormley" <> wrote in message
> 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.

> 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^1 = 1/4 cycle
i^2 = 1/2 cycle
i^3 = 3/4 cycle
i^4 = 1 cycle

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
decay of an oscillating system
complex conjugation
Planck's Constant

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.

Tom Potter

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.