On Tue, Apr 24, 2007, Nadav Har'El wrote about "Re: [off topic] Some new articles I wrote about science": > I also don't understand your "conclusion" (not seemed to be based on the > previous arguments) that the speed of light is not well-defined at the small > scale of quantum mechanics. Heisenberg's uncertainty princple indeed says > that you cannot know a photon's position and momentum at absolute precision > at the same time. But even if you don't know these, why does it mean that > you can't know its *speed*? Mind you, that unlike matter particles, a photon's > momentum is a function of its wavelength, not its speed.
I take what I said back. If there's a non-zero probability that a photon is at position X1 at time T1, and a non-zero probability that the photon is at position X2 at a later time T2, then it might be said that there's a probility that this photon travelled at speed (X2-X1)/(T2-T1), which might very well be higher than c (the speed of light). But I'm not sure if that really matters - over longerer distances, these random fluctuations average out. -- Nadav Har'El | Tuesday, Apr 24 2007, 7 Iyyar 5767 [EMAIL PROTECTED] |----------------------------------------- Phone +972-523-790466, ICQ 13349191 |I am thinking about a new signature. Stay http://nadav.harel.org.il |tuned. ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
