Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
Alex, It's important in science to make a distinction between the data and the model, especially in cases where the model is not entirely consistent with the data, which is often true in physics. Without considering this distinction, a scientist limits his understanding of phenomena to the limitations inherent in the model he is using. My previous statement was not an argument for empiricism, it was a rebuttal of the claim made by many scientists that the universe can be understood completely through reductionism. Knowledge can come from both empirical observation and rational though, but the our ability to do either is warped by emotions and assumptions that are neither empirical nor rational but simply built into our minds, or taught by our culture. In Buddhist philosophy, they identify the idea that the self has an inherent existence separate from the rest of it's environment as an illusion. I think that the reductionist approach often used in science is analogous to this, and significantly limits our understanding of the natural world by pretending that it's elements have separate inherent existence. It is often assumed that subsets of the universe can exhibit (within themselves) properties that are constant, and not affected by their relationship with the rest of the universe. Reductionist models (like the concept of a photon) are not useless, but we should consider, when using them, that they exhibit a fundamental flaw which limits their ability to accurately explain the natural world in certain situations. For example, properties of light only arise when interacting with other matter and energy, and depends on the nature of the given interaction. The natural behavior of a rat only occurs in it's natural environment, not in a lab. There are endless other examples... I am not suggesting that one should abandon all rational mental constructs and models- clearly they are very useful. Just that we don't ignore their limitations, because they can enlighten us to things we would otherwise overlook. Tyler Alex Chamberlain wrote: As someone who almost went to grad school to study 20th-century metaphysics and philosophy of mind, I can't let this go by without comment. Tyler, you've already strayed in this discussion far out of physics per se into philosophy of science, not that there's anything wrong with that! However, the formalist point of view you're advocating (that scientific theories do not describe real entities but rather models consistent with repeatable observation) certainly cannot be generalized in the way you just have without opening the door to an awfully thorny can of metaphysical worms (mixed metaphor very much intentional!). You're glossing over centuries of debate, going back at least to the Enlightenment empiricists (Locke, Hume, Berkeley) in the 17th century, through Wittgenstein in the mid-20th, and beyond. I for one am not at all prepared to abandon wholesale the ontological distinctions among reality, my perceptions of it, and my mental constructs resulting therefrom; I find those distinctions useful, congenial, and well-founded. Many of our perceptions do form patterns to which it is convenient to give names; but let us not confuse the pattern with the thing perceived, lest we put the ontological cart before the horse and begin to think that patterns we have invented out of whole cloth are themselves as real as the perceived ones or the things themselves. For example, I would argue (1) that the computer on which I'm typing this is a real, physical entity; (2) that the computational process going on which puts letters on the screen as I type is not an entity at all, but solely a convenient way to group some of my perceptions (and those of the programmers who wrote the software); and (3) that the numerals on the clock at the bottom of the screen represent real but nonphysical entities, the natural numbers, which (just like the laptop) exist independently of my perception of them---but all three of those assertions are debatable and have been debated by philosophers in recent memory. Alex Chamberlain '87 300D Turbo, or at least a bundle of perceptions of it ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 1:19 PM, tyler wrote: > It applies to almost everything, because that is how the human mind usually > perceives the world. > As someone who almost went to grad school to study 20th-century metaphysics and philosophy of mind, I can't let this go by without comment. Tyler, you've already strayed in this discussion far out of physics per se into philosophy of science, not that there's anything wrong with that! However, the formalist point of view you're advocating (that scientific theories do not describe real entities but rather models consistent with repeatable observation) certainly cannot be generalized in the way you just have without opening the door to an awfully thorny can of metaphysical worms (mixed metaphor very much intentional!). You're glossing over centuries of debate, going back at least to the Enlightenment empiricists (Locke, Hume, Berkeley) in the 17th century, through Wittgenstein in the mid-20th, and beyond. I for one am not at all prepared to abandon wholesale the ontological distinctions among reality, my perceptions of it, and my mental constructs resulting therefrom; I find those distinctions useful, congenial, and well-founded. Many of our perceptions do form patterns to which it is convenient to give names; but let us not confuse the pattern with the thing perceived, lest we put the ontological cart before the horse and begin to think that patterns we have invented out of whole cloth are themselves as real as the perceived ones or the things themselves. For example, I would argue (1) that the computer on which I'm typing this is a real, physical entity; (2) that the computational process going on which puts letters on the screen as I type is not an entity at all, but solely a convenient way to group some of my perceptions (and those of the programmers who wrote the software); and (3) that the numerals on the clock at the bottom of the screen represent real but nonphysical entities, the natural numbers, which (just like the laptop) exist independently of my perception of them---but all three of those assertions are debatable and have been debated by philosophers in recent memory. Alex Chamberlain '87 300D Turbo, or at least a bundle of perceptions of it ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
It applies to almost everything, because that is how the human mind usually perceives the world. Tyler OK Don wrote: Yes - I like that explanation. In fact, I think it applies to a lot more than just physics - like the denizens of this list --- "A list member is really just an imaginary construct or model we have invented to group together a series of closely related events and behavior we have observed in the Internet. The observed phenomena is real, but the list member itself is only an intellectual tool for understanding, describing, and predicting those phenomena." ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
Kaleb wrote: I thought I emailed you and told you I did not have one. If you did, I didn't get it. Anyway, thanks for letting me know. Gerry Archer wrote: OKDon wrote: "A list member is really just an imaginary construct or model we have invented to group together a series of closely related events and behavior we have observed in the Internet. The observed phenomena is real, but the list member itself is only an intellectual tool for understanding, describing, and predicting those phenomena." .. Kaleb is an imaginary construct? Maybe that's why he hasn't gotten around to checking on the part I asked him about; i.e. the climate control module for my '83 300D. Gerry -- next part -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.8/1897 - Release Date: 1/16/2009 6:52 AM ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
I thought I emailed you and told you I did not have one. Archer wrote: OKDon wrote: "A list member is really just an imaginary construct or model we have invented to group together a series of closely related events and behavior we have observed in the Internet. The observed phenomena is real, but the list member itself is only an intellectual tool for understanding, describing, and predicting those phenomena." .. Kaleb is an imaginary construct? Maybe that's why he hasn't gotten around to checking on the part I asked him about; i.e. the climate control module for my '83 300D. Gerry -- next part -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.7/1895 - Release Date: 1/15/2009 7:46 AM ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.8/1896 - Release Date: 1/15/2009 7:10 PM -- Kaleb C. Striplin/Claremore, OK 92 300SD, 92 300E 4Matic, 91 300D, 91 300E, 89 560SEL, 89 300E, 87 300SDL x2, 85 380SE 5.0 Euro, 85 190D, 84 190D x2, 84 300D euro manny, 81 240D, 80 240D, 76 240D, 76 300D, http://www.okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
OKDon wrote: "A list member is really just an imaginary construct or model we have invented to group together a series of closely related events and behavior we have observed in the Internet. The observed phenomena is real, but the list member itself is only an intellectual tool for understanding, describing, and predicting those phenomena." .. Kaleb is an imaginary construct? Maybe that's why he hasn't gotten around to checking on the part I asked him about; i.e. the climate control module for my '83 300D. Gerry -- next part -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.7/1895 - Release Date: 1/15/2009 7:46 AM ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
Gerry wrote: I understand your explanation. Photons are converted from energy to mass when they enter the atom and then convert back to energy when the electrons energy level drops. As an experiment why couldn't you build a cyclotron with multiple sources of intense light permeating the particle path so that atoms travelling around this path would be bombarded with the strongest possible light; raising their electrons energy levels to the maximum. The light would be turned on and the atoms would be circulated in a well defined narrow stream. If the light has added mass to the atoms, when the light was turned off and their electrons had reverted to a lower energy level, settings on the cyclotron would have to be changed in order to keep them flowing in the same well defined narrow stream if the masses of the atoms has changed, wouldn't they? Gerry -- next part -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.7/1895 - Release Date: 1/15/2009 7:46 AM ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
hahahaha!! Craig McCluskey wrote: On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 22:11:16 -0600 "Kaleb C. Striplin" wrote: How long would it take to travel from the Earth to Jupiter if a ship was able to travel 57.2% of light speed? The quick answer is, "Not very long." :-) The real answer would depend upon whether you were on the ship or observing from the outside. Craig ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.7/1895 - Release Date: 1/15/2009 7:46 AM -- Kaleb C. Striplin/Claremore, OK 92 300SD, 92 300E 4Matic, 91 300D, 91 300E, 89 560SEL, 89 300E, 87 300SDL x2, 85 380SE 5.0 Euro, 85 190D, 84 190D x2, 84 300D euro manny, 81 240D, 80 240D, 76 240D, 76 300D, http://www.okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 22:11:16 -0600 "Kaleb C. Striplin" wrote: > How long would it take to travel from the Earth to Jupiter if a ship was > able to travel 57.2% of light speed? The quick answer is, "Not very long." :-) The real answer would depend upon whether you were on the ship or observing from the outside. Craig ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
How long would it take to travel from the Earth to Jupiter if a ship was able to travel 57.2% of light speed? Craig McCluskey wrote: On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:01:01 -0500 "Allan Streib" wrote: "Jeff Zedic" said: I thought that because light bends under intense gravity that shows it has mass Didn't Einstein show this in the 30's??? The light bends because gravity bends space itself. E You can look at it that way, or you can say that m = - and that c^2 gravity affects it. Craig ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.7/1895 - Release Date: 1/15/2009 7:46 AM -- Kaleb C. Striplin/Claremore, OK 92 300SD, 92 300E 4Matic, 91 300D, 91 300E, 89 560SEL, 89 300E, 87 300SDL x2, 85 380SE 5.0 Euro, 85 190D, 84 190D x2, 84 300D euro manny, 81 240D, 80 240D, 76 240D, 76 300D, http://www.okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
I have come to the conclusion that Craig is smarter than I am. Craig McCluskey wrote: On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 23:57:47 -0800 Tyler wrote: We do have evidence of relativistic time dilation/length contraction on macroscopic objects. Clocks on orbiting satellites and spacecraft tick slightly faster than those on the earths surface, and the difference is measurable. Yes, they calibrate them slow to account for the fact that they will run faster on orbit. But the primary effect is General Relativity, not Special Relativity: a clock in a different gravitational potential (aka height) will run differently. Some frequency standards are getting so accurate now that you can almost tell the difference between a clock on the ground floor of a building and one at the top. Craig ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.7/1895 - Release Date: 1/15/2009 7:46 AM -- Kaleb C. Striplin/Claremore, OK 92 300SD, 92 300E 4Matic, 91 300D, 91 300E, 89 560SEL, 89 300E, 87 300SDL x2, 85 380SE 5.0 Euro, 85 190D, 84 190D x2, 84 300D euro manny, 81 240D, 80 240D, 76 240D, 76 300D, http://www.okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:01:01 -0500 "Allan Streib" wrote: > "Jeff Zedic" said: > > > I thought that because light bends under intense gravity that shows it > > has mass > > > > Didn't Einstein show this in the 30's??? > > The light bends because gravity bends space itself. E You can look at it that way, or you can say that m = - and that c^2 gravity affects it. Craig ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 10:30:42 -0500 "Bill R" wrote: > IIRC [and I might well not] the foreshortening at great speeds would [in > theory] make an object near the size of a particle as it approached the > speed of light It only contracts in the direction it's moving. The transverse dimensions are unaffected. Craig ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 23:57:47 -0800 Tyler wrote: > We do have evidence of relativistic time dilation/length contraction > on macroscopic objects. Clocks on orbiting satellites and spacecraft > tick slightly faster than those on the earths surface, and the > difference is measurable. Yes, they calibrate them slow to account for the fact that they will run faster on orbit. But the primary effect is General Relativity, not Special Relativity: a clock in a different gravitational potential (aka height) will run differently. Some frequency standards are getting so accurate now that you can almost tell the difference between a clock on the ground floor of a building and one at the top. Craig ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 14:08:54 -0600 OK Don wrote: > So, are photons in motion particles or waves? Yes. Craig ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
Yes - I like that explanation. In fact, I think it applies to a lot more than just physics - like the denizens of this list --- "A list member is really just an imaginary construct or model we have invented to group together a series of closely related events and behavior we have observed in the Internet. The observed phenomena is real, but the list member itself is only an intellectual tool for understanding, describing, and predicting those phenomena." On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 2:35 PM, tyler wrote: > Since in science, things can only be considered from the perspective of > observable phenomena, the properties of light are only understood only > through their interaction with other particles and energy in given > situations. Photons exhibit both wave-like and particle-like behavior > depending on the situation (Google wave-particle duality). > > Since the concept of a "particle" or a "wave" describes behavior in certain > situations, I would say that light propagating in free space exhibits no > specific properties. The properties only arise in relation to it's > interaction with the rest of the universe. > > I am not a big fan of the reductionist philosophy where one tries to > understand the universe in terms of individual components with inherent > properties. I do not think it makes sense to discuss a photon (or anything > else for that matter) outside of the context of it's being a small subset or > component of the universe, which is a large interconnected system or > sequence of cause and effect events. > > For clarity, I'll restate it differently: > > A photon is really just an imaginary construct or model we have invented to > group together a series of closely related events and behavior we have > observed in the universe. The observed phenomena is real, but the photon > itself is only an intellectual tool for understanding, describing, and > predicting those phenomena. Neither the "wave" or "particle" models alone > accurately describe these phenomena, so we have invented two different > models which we apply in different situations. It's really not very elegant, > but nobody has come up with something better (yet). > > I hope that makes sense... > > Tyler > > OK Don wrote: >> >> So, are photons in motion particles or waves? -- OK Don W124 Diesels Ubuntu 8.10 KD5NRO ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
Since in science, things can only be considered from the perspective of observable phenomena, the properties of light are only understood only through their interaction with other particles and energy in given situations. Photons exhibit both wave-like and particle-like behavior depending on the situation (Google wave-particle duality). Since the concept of a "particle" or a "wave" describes behavior in certain situations, I would say that light propagating in free space exhibits no specific properties. The properties only arise in relation to it's interaction with the rest of the universe. I am not a big fan of the reductionist philosophy where one tries to understand the universe in terms of individual components with inherent properties. I do not think it makes sense to discuss a photon (or anything else for that matter) outside of the context of it's being a small subset or component of the universe, which is a large interconnected system or sequence of cause and effect events. For clarity, I'll restate it differently: A photon is really just an imaginary construct or model we have invented to group together a series of closely related events and behavior we have observed in the universe. The observed phenomena is real, but the photon itself is only an intellectual tool for understanding, describing, and predicting those phenomena. Neither the "wave" or "particle" models alone accurately describe these phenomena, so we have invented two different models which we apply in different situations. It's really not very elegant, but nobody has come up with something better (yet). I hope that makes sense... Tyler OK Don wrote: So, are photons in motion particles or waves? ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
So, are photons in motion particles or waves? On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 1:49 PM, tyler wrote: > The speed of light in a vacuum is constant, but when light is passing > through a medium (air, glass, etc.) it travels much slower. This slower > speed will be relative to the reference frame of the medium, and is not > constant for all observers. > > Let me explain how this does not contradict relativity, and the concept of a > constant light speed: > > The experiments you are referring to involve the speed of light propagating > through a medium. A photon can't propagate straight through a medium, > because there are atoms in the way- one way to think of it is that the > photon is repeatedly absorbed by atoms as it encounters them, which raises > an electron in the atom to a higher energy level. The photon is momentarily > absorbed, and is no longer a photon, but is stored as energy within the > atom. This electron then falls back to a lower energy level, releasing a new > photon after some time has passed since the photon was absorbed. > > Alternately, you can consider that in some situations (such as when a strong > gravitational field actually warps space) that light is traveling slower, > because it's actually following a curved rather than straight path. > > Interestingly, one could say that photons exhibit something similar to rest > mass under the conditions of traveling through a medium. While the light is > inside the medium, it does increase the effective rest mass of the medium > slightly because it's adding energy to the medium without adding momentum. > Rest mass follows the following formula: > > rest mass = sqrt(E^2/c^4 - p^2/c^2) > > Where E is energy, c is the speed of light, and p is momentum. So to keep > the equation balanced, if energy is added to a system without increasing > it's momentum then the rest mass must increase slightly. I wouldn't say that > the photons themselves have rest mass, but that they are momentarily being > converted from energy to mass, and back again as they are momentarily > trapped in a medium. > > I hope my explanation helps. This is my understanding of the phenomenon, but > I could be somewhat wrong about it. It's been a while since I've taken a > class in electrodynamics or optics, and I haven't used the knowledge > since... > > Tyler > > Archer wrote: >> >> Recently several labs have achieved the lowest possible temperature. >> IIRC even "light" or photons came to rest. Did they have "rest mass" >> under those conditions? > > ___ > http://www.okiebenz.com > For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ > > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: > http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com > -- OK Don W124 Diesels Ubuntu 8.10 KD5NRO ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
The speed of light in a vacuum is constant, but when light is passing through a medium (air, glass, etc.) it travels much slower. This slower speed will be relative to the reference frame of the medium, and is not constant for all observers. Let me explain how this does not contradict relativity, and the concept of a constant light speed: The experiments you are referring to involve the speed of light propagating through a medium. A photon can't propagate straight through a medium, because there are atoms in the way- one way to think of it is that the photon is repeatedly absorbed by atoms as it encounters them, which raises an electron in the atom to a higher energy level. The photon is momentarily absorbed, and is no longer a photon, but is stored as energy within the atom. This electron then falls back to a lower energy level, releasing a new photon after some time has passed since the photon was absorbed. Alternately, you can consider that in some situations (such as when a strong gravitational field actually warps space) that light is traveling slower, because it's actually following a curved rather than straight path. Interestingly, one could say that photons exhibit something similar to rest mass under the conditions of traveling through a medium. While the light is inside the medium, it does increase the effective rest mass of the medium slightly because it's adding energy to the medium without adding momentum. Rest mass follows the following formula: rest mass = sqrt(E^2/c^4 - p^2/c^2) Where E is energy, c is the speed of light, and p is momentum. So to keep the equation balanced, if energy is added to a system without increasing it's momentum then the rest mass must increase slightly. I wouldn't say that the photons themselves have rest mass, but that they are momentarily being converted from energy to mass, and back again as they are momentarily trapped in a medium. I hope my explanation helps. This is my understanding of the phenomenon, but I could be somewhat wrong about it. It's been a while since I've taken a class in electrodynamics or optics, and I haven't used the knowledge since... Tyler Archer wrote: Recently several labs have achieved the lowest possible temperature. IIRC even "light" or photons came to rest. Did they have "rest mass" under those conditions? ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
Recently several labs have achieved the lowest possible temperature. IIRC even "light" or photons came to rest. Did they have "rest mass" under those conditions? .. Web discussion: What is the mass of a photon? This question falls into two parts: Does the photon have mass? After all, it has energy and energy is equivalent to mass. Photons are traditionally said to be massless. This is a figure of speech that physicists use to describe something about how a photon's particle-like properties are described by the language of special relativity. The logic can be constructed in many ways, and the following is one such. Take an isolated system (called a "particle") and accelerate it to some velocity v (a vector). Newton defined the "momentum" p of this particle (also a vector), such that p behaves in a simple way when the particle is accelerated, or when it's involved in a collision. For this simple behaviour to hold, it turns out that p must be proportional to v. The proportionality constant is called the particle's "mass" m, so that p = mv. In special relativity, it turns out that we are still able to define a particle's momentum p such that it behaves in well-defined ways that are an extension of the newtonian case. Although p and v still point in the same direction, it turns out that they are no longer proportional; the best we can do is relate them via the particle's "relativistic mass"...snip http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/ParticleAndNuclear/photon_mass.html Gerry From: tyler Photons have energy and momentum, but they don't have the sort of "rest mass" that makes a non-moving object experience gravity. The concept of mass doesn't really apply to objects that cannot be at rest. Photons are not tiny classical mechanical particles traveling quickly, but have totally different behavior. Depending on the context, it's generally more useful to think of them as a discrete quanta of energy, rather than as a particle like an electron. I'm not sure about the black cloth experiment you're talking about, perhaps someone else on here knows about it? Because mass and energy and fundamentally equivalent, it is possible for the energy in a photon to increase the mass of an object when absorbed, without the photon itself having mass. Tyler Bill R wrote: No argument here, but light does seem to have weight. The study was done many years ago [I was in HS when I heard about it] using a black cloth subjected to intense light in a controlled environment, and the cloth gained a [very small] amount of weight during the process. It was part of our class on light in HS physics - would have been about 1965. That is my only reference to it, so, once more, scientific types needed ... is this true? BillR -- next part -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.7/1893 - Release Date: 1/14/2009 6:59 AM ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
Tyler wrote: > If you're willing to accept the speed of light as constant in all inertial > reference frames (which has been proven experimentally)... In the past, I have entertained, with interest, the concept that light is not a constant. It was a fascinating concept, I thought. So, yes - I am open to the reality that speed of light may not be constant. Realize, again - we are speaking of timeframes longer than man can know, so the concept was/is theoretical. Plus, your experimental proof is good - but for today only... maybe. mao ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
It was only 9pm, and you could already see tomorrow, eh? lol Ed 300E 2009/1/14 Wilton Strickland > Several years ago, I put new headlights (7 inch dia motorcycle lights - > 'can't remember the name of 'em) on my 81 300D. After it got dark, I went > out to test them; when I turned the lights on, they were so bright, I could > have sworn that they threw so much light forward that I felt some thrust to > the rear - they were BRIGHT. ;<)) > > Wilton > > - Original Message - > From: "tyler" > To: "Mercedes Discussion List" > Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 4:50 PM > Subject: Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded > > > > Photons have energy and momentum, but they don't have the sort of "rest > > mass" that makes a non-moving object experience gravity. The concept of > > mass doesn't really apply to objects that cannot be at rest. Photons are > > not tiny classical mechanical particles traveling quickly, but have > > totally different behavior. Depending on the context, it's generally > > more useful to think of them as a discrete quanta of energy, rather than > > as a particle like an electron. > > > > I'm not sure about the black cloth experiment you're talking about, > > perhaps someone else on here knows about it? Because mass and energy and > > fundamentally equivalent, it is possible for the energy in a photon to > > increase the mass of an object when absorbed, without the photon itself > > having mass. > > > > Tyler > > > > Bill R wrote: > > > No argument here, but light does seem to have weight. The study was > done > > > many years ago [I was in HS when I heard about it] using a black cloth > > > subjected to intense light in a controlled environment, and the cloth > gained > > > a [very small] amount of weight during the process. It was part of our > > > class on light in HS physics - would have been about 1965. That is my > only > > > reference to it, so, once more, scientific types needed ... is this > true? > > > BillR > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: mercedes-boun...@okiebenz.com > [mailto:mercedes-boun...@okiebenz.com] > > > On Behalf Of tyler > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 12:38 PM > > > To: Mercedes Discussion List > > > Subject: Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded > > > > > > Photons don't have mass. > > > > ___ > > http://www.okiebenz.com > > For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com > > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ > > > > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: > > http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com > > > ___ > http://www.okiebenz.com > For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ > > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: > http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://okiebenz.com/pipermail/mercedes_okiebenz.com/attachments/20090114/4af69dd7/attachment.html> ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
It was only 9pm, and you could already see tomorrow, eh? lol Ed 300E 2009/1/14 Wilton Strickland > Several years ago, I put new headlights (7 inch dia motorcycle lights - > 'can't remember the name of 'em) on my 81 300D. After it got dark, I went > out to test them; when I turned the lights on, they were so bright, I could > have sworn that they threw so much light forward that I felt some thrust to > the rear - they were BRIGHT. ;<)) > > Wilton > > - Original Message - > From: "tyler" > To: "Mercedes Discussion List" > Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 4:50 PM > Subject: Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded > > > > Photons have energy and momentum, but they don't have the sort of "rest > > mass" that makes a non-moving object experience gravity. The concept of > > mass doesn't really apply to objects that cannot be at rest. Photons are > > not tiny classical mechanical particles traveling quickly, but have > > totally different behavior. Depending on the context, it's generally > > more useful to think of them as a discrete quanta of energy, rather than > > as a particle like an electron. > > > > I'm not sure about the black cloth experiment you're talking about, > > perhaps someone else on here knows about it? Because mass and energy and > > fundamentally equivalent, it is possible for the energy in a photon to > > increase the mass of an object when absorbed, without the photon itself > > having mass. > > > > Tyler > > > > Bill R wrote: > > > No argument here, but light does seem to have weight. The study was > done > > > many years ago [I was in HS when I heard about it] using a black cloth > > > subjected to intense light in a controlled environment, and the cloth > gained > > > a [very small] amount of weight during the process. It was part of our > > > class on light in HS physics - would have been about 1965. That is my > only > > > reference to it, so, once more, scientific types needed ... is this > true? > > > BillR > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: mercedes-boun...@okiebenz.com > [mailto:mercedes-boun...@okiebenz.com] > > > On Behalf Of tyler > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 12:38 PM > > > To: Mercedes Discussion List > > > Subject: Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded > > > > > > Photons don't have mass. > > > > ___ > > http://www.okiebenz.com > > For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com > > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ > > > > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: > > http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com > > > ___ > http://www.okiebenz.com > For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ > > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: > http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://okiebenz.com/pipermail/mercedes_okiebenz.com/attachments/20090114/ca339b25/attachment.html> ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
Several years ago, I put new headlights (7 inch dia motorcycle lights - 'can't remember the name of 'em) on my 81 300D. After it got dark, I went out to test them; when I turned the lights on, they were so bright, I could have sworn that they threw so much light forward that I felt some thrust to the rear - they were BRIGHT. ;<)) Wilton - Original Message - From: "tyler" To: "Mercedes Discussion List" Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 4:50 PM Subject: Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded > Photons have energy and momentum, but they don't have the sort of "rest > mass" that makes a non-moving object experience gravity. The concept of > mass doesn't really apply to objects that cannot be at rest. Photons are > not tiny classical mechanical particles traveling quickly, but have > totally different behavior. Depending on the context, it's generally > more useful to think of them as a discrete quanta of energy, rather than > as a particle like an electron. > > I'm not sure about the black cloth experiment you're talking about, > perhaps someone else on here knows about it? Because mass and energy and > fundamentally equivalent, it is possible for the energy in a photon to > increase the mass of an object when absorbed, without the photon itself > having mass. > > Tyler > > Bill R wrote: > > No argument here, but light does seem to have weight. The study was done > > many years ago [I was in HS when I heard about it] using a black cloth > > subjected to intense light in a controlled environment, and the cloth gained > > a [very small] amount of weight during the process. It was part of our > > class on light in HS physics - would have been about 1965. That is my only > > reference to it, so, once more, scientific types needed ... is this true? > > BillR > > > > -Original Message- > > From: mercedes-boun...@okiebenz.com [mailto:mercedes-boun...@okiebenz.com] > > On Behalf Of tyler > > Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 12:38 PM > > To: Mercedes Discussion List > > Subject: Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded > > > > Photons don't have mass. > > ___ > http://www.okiebenz.com > For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ > > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: > http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
"Jeff Zedic" said: > I thought that because light bends under intense gravity that shows it > has mass > > Didn't Einstein show this in the 30's??? The light bends because gravity bends space itself. Allan ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
I thought that because light bends under intense gravity that shows it has mass Didn't Einstein show this in the 30's??? Zedic ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
Photons have energy and momentum, but they don't have the sort of "rest mass" that makes a non-moving object experience gravity. The concept of mass doesn't really apply to objects that cannot be at rest. Photons are not tiny classical mechanical particles traveling quickly, but have totally different behavior. Depending on the context, it's generally more useful to think of them as a discrete quanta of energy, rather than as a particle like an electron. I'm not sure about the black cloth experiment you're talking about, perhaps someone else on here knows about it? Because mass and energy and fundamentally equivalent, it is possible for the energy in a photon to increase the mass of an object when absorbed, without the photon itself having mass. Tyler Bill R wrote: No argument here, but light does seem to have weight. The study was done many years ago [I was in HS when I heard about it] using a black cloth subjected to intense light in a controlled environment, and the cloth gained a [very small] amount of weight during the process. It was part of our class on light in HS physics - would have been about 1965. That is my only reference to it, so, once more, scientific types needed ... is this true? BillR -Original Message- From: mercedes-boun...@okiebenz.com [mailto:mercedes-boun...@okiebenz.com] On Behalf Of tyler Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 12:38 PM To: Mercedes Discussion List Subject: Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded Photons don't have mass. ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
No argument here, but light does seem to have weight. The study was done many years ago [I was in HS when I heard about it] using a black cloth subjected to intense light in a controlled environment, and the cloth gained a [very small] amount of weight during the process. It was part of our class on light in HS physics - would have been about 1965. That is my only reference to it, so, once more, scientific types needed ... is this true? BillR -Original Message- From: mercedes-boun...@okiebenz.com [mailto:mercedes-boun...@okiebenz.com] On Behalf Of tyler Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 12:38 PM To: Mercedes Discussion List Subject: Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded Photons don't have mass. Bill R wrote: > IIRC [and I might well not] the foreshortening at great speeds would [in > theory] make an object near the size of a particle as it approached the > speed of light [so perhaps light - which does have weight - is just very > fast 'stuff']. If the mass is a constant and the size diminishes then it > get's confusing as to the relative effort it takes to continue speeding it > up, until the effort to speed it further takes far more energy than we can > produce. Some scientific type needs to take over here. > Bill ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
Photons don't have mass. Bill R wrote: IIRC [and I might well not] the foreshortening at great speeds would [in theory] make an object near the size of a particle as it approached the speed of light [so perhaps light - which does have weight - is just very fast 'stuff']. If the mass is a constant and the size diminishes then it get's confusing as to the relative effort it takes to continue speeding it up, until the effort to speed it further takes far more energy than we can produce. Some scientific type needs to take over here. Bill ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
IIRC [and I might well not] the foreshortening at great speeds would [in theory] make an object near the size of a particle as it approached the speed of light [so perhaps light - which does have weight - is just very fast 'stuff']. If the mass is a constant and the size diminishes then it get's confusing as to the relative effort it takes to continue speeding it up, until the effort to speed it further takes far more energy than we can produce. Some scientific type needs to take over here. BillR -Original Message- From: mercedes-boun...@okiebenz.com [mailto:mercedes-boun...@okiebenz.com] On Behalf Of OK Don Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 10:12 PM To: Mercedes Discussion List Subject: Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded Doesn't mass increase as you approach the speed of light also, according to the theory? On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 7:46 PM, Mountain Man wrote: > Tyler wrote: >> Let's say you travel someplace 100 light years away at 99.99% the speed of >> light. When you return to earth at the same speed about 200 years will >> have passed, but you will only have aged and experienced 3 years. > > Theoretically - purely - that is all. > The effort to get a quark to that speed is - um, phenomenal, muchless > a 200 pound human. > Plus, while the theoretical seems to work out with a quark, there is > no telling what a human in a spacecraft would realize. > > I agree - interesting, but purely not science. There is no testing of > the theory, except as mentioned with sub-atomic "particles." Beyond > that "reality" there is only speculation or theory to say that it can > be done with atomic or multi-atomic sized entities. > > Whereas, science is more like this - I put diesel into my 240D and it > drives - it has been doing that for 25 years - over and over again. > mao -- OK Don W124 Diesels Ubuntu 8.10 KD5NRO ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
Keep in mind I was only mentioning this in relation to interstellar travel being theoretically possible within a human lifetime, as shown in science fiction. I wasn't trying to say that it was practical or that it will ever be accomplished, but I do think it's absurd to discredit relativity as non-science! We do have evidence of relativistic time dilation/length contraction on macroscopic objects. Clocks on orbiting satellites and spacecraft tick slightly faster than those on the earths surface, and the difference is measurable. I don't think it's bad science to assume that relativistic effects hold for macroscopic objects at near light speed, when they have been observed at slower speeds, and the theory has so far accurately predicted all testable phenomenon. If you're willing to accept the speed of light as constant in all inertial reference frames (which has been proven experimentally), then it follows logically that the universe must have the sort of non- euclidean geometry that requires all objects to experience relativistic effects. So relativity can both be observed directly to act on objects of all sizes, and it can be derived logically/mathematically as a necessary consequence of the speed of light, which can also be tested/observed directly (see the Michelson–Morley experiment). It is indeed real science. Tyler On Jan 13, 2009, at 5:46 PM, Mountain Man wrote: Tyler wrote: Let's say you travel someplace 100 light years away at 99.99% the speed of light. When you return to earth at the same speed about 200 years will have passed, but you will only have aged and experienced 3 years. Theoretically - purely - that is all. The effort to get a quark to that speed is - um, phenomenal, muchless a 200 pound human. Plus, while the theoretical seems to work out with a quark, there is no telling what a human in a spacecraft would realize. I agree - interesting, but purely not science. There is no testing of the theory, except as mentioned with sub-atomic "particles." Beyond that "reality" there is only speculation or theory to say that it can be done with atomic or multi-atomic sized entities. Whereas, science is more like this - I put diesel into my 240D and it drives - it has been doing that for 25 years - over and over again. mao ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
OK Don wrote: > Doesn't mass increase as you approach the speed of light also, > according to the theory? That is the theoretical reason it takes so much energy to bring a quark up to the speed of light. The theory also says that at that speed of light, mass becomes energy, so, poof - you're gone. Yes, the theory says that mass increases as you approach the speed of light. However, there is not conclusive scientific proof. For the time being, we operate - as much as we do operate in that realm - using the theory as the truth. But, science does not enter into this practice... yet. No testing, test again, and refine theory - as is classical science. mao ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
Doesn't mass increase as you approach the speed of light also, according to the theory? On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 7:46 PM, Mountain Man wrote: > Tyler wrote: >> Let's say you travel someplace 100 light years away at 99.99% the speed of >> light. When you return to earth at the same speed about 200 years will >> have passed, but you will only have aged and experienced 3 years. > > Theoretically - purely - that is all. > The effort to get a quark to that speed is - um, phenomenal, muchless > a 200 pound human. > Plus, while the theoretical seems to work out with a quark, there is > no telling what a human in a spacecraft would realize. > > I agree - interesting, but purely not science. There is no testing of > the theory, except as mentioned with sub-atomic "particles." Beyond > that "reality" there is only speculation or theory to say that it can > be done with atomic or multi-atomic sized entities. > > Whereas, science is more like this - I put diesel into my 240D and it > drives - it has been doing that for 25 years - over and over again. > mao -- OK Don W124 Diesels Ubuntu 8.10 KD5NRO ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
Tyler wrote: > Let's say you travel someplace 100 light years away at 99.99% the speed of > light. When you return to earth at the same speed about 200 years will > have passed, but you will only have aged and experienced 3 years. Theoretically - purely - that is all. The effort to get a quark to that speed is - um, phenomenal, muchless a 200 pound human. Plus, while the theoretical seems to work out with a quark, there is no telling what a human in a spacecraft would realize. I agree - interesting, but purely not science. There is no testing of the theory, except as mentioned with sub-atomic "particles." Beyond that "reality" there is only speculation or theory to say that it can be done with atomic or multi-atomic sized entities. Whereas, science is more like this - I put diesel into my 240D and it drives - it has been doing that for 25 years - over and over again. mao ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
Those are incredible photos! Distances get "shorter" in the direction you're going, as you get closer to the speed of light (due to special relativity)- so travelling around the galaxy is theoretically possible within one human lifetime at sub/near light speed, it's just that when you got home everyone you know would have died from old age! Let's say you travel someplace 100 light years away at 99.99% the speed of light. When you return to earth at the same speed about 200 years will have passed, but you will only have aged and experienced 3 years. Tyler > A major WOW on those. > The vastness of space shoes the basic fallacies of the Star Trek series > and > Star Wars movies. Even at some multiples of the speed of light, weeks, > months, and years are not enough to cover the distances. Lifetimes would > be > needed, at least. I still enjoy them, though. > BillR > > On Jan 13, 2009, at 7:14 AM, Rich Thomas wrote: > >> I am feeling a bit infinitesimal and inconsequential this morning. >> >> > http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2008/12/hubble_space_telescope_advent.html >> >> --R >> >> ___ >> http://www.okiebenz.com >> For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com >> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ >> >> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: >> http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com > > > ___ > http://www.okiebenz.com > For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ > > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: > http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com > > > ___ > http://www.okiebenz.com > For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ > > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: > http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com > > ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
A major WOW on those. The vastness of space shoes the basic fallacies of the Star Trek series and Star Wars movies. Even at some multiples of the speed of light, weeks, months, and years are not enough to cover the distances. Lifetimes would be needed, at least. I still enjoy them, though. BillR On Jan 13, 2009, at 7:14 AM, Rich Thomas wrote: > I am feeling a bit infinitesimal and inconsequential this morning. > > http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2008/12/hubble_space_telescope_advent.html > > --R > > ___ > http://www.okiebenz.com > For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ > > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: > http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
Re: [MBZ] OT Prepare to be Amazed and Astounded
That is intense clay On Jan 13, 2009, at 7:14 AM, Rich Thomas wrote: I am feeling a bit infinitesimal and inconsequential this morning. http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2008/12/hubble_space_telescope_advent.html --R ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
