If light was literally a projectile, then it should be literally subject to the laws of mechanics and momentum changes should vary continuously. However, we know empirically that light of a particular wavelength can only bring about discrete changes of momentum.
Harry Michel Jullian wrote: > Well, it does bounce back from the object (e.g. solar sail) it imparted > momentum to, with total momentum being conserved and all. > > Michel > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Harry Veeder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 6:09 PM > Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: Re: Di-Ozone > > >> In my natural philosophy, light has an _apparent_ momentum, because the >> nature of light is such that it refuses to be subjected to a mechanical >> force. (I do mean "refuses" and not simply "resists"). >> >> Harry >> >> Michel Jullian wrote: >> >>> For a projectile what matters is momentum, and light does have momentum, >>> that's what pushes solar sails. >>> >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_pressure >>> >>> Michel >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "R.C.Macaulay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: <[email protected]> >>> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 2:03 PM >>> Subject: [Vo]: Re: Di-Ozone >>> >>> >>>> Howdy Jones, >>>> >>>> You amaze me with your ability to stretch the elastic of the mind. One >>>> must eat a heartly breakfast and tighten the safety belt before launching >>>> into one of your posts <grin> that can range from rail guns to Ormus... and >>>> that is a stretch. >>>> >>>> Now that light has been accepted as having "particle" or "weight", it can >>>> be >>>> taken to the next step and think of light having "projectile force" >>>> qualities. A rail gun projectile would not necessarily require a socalled >>>> "mass" ( I have always been abhorred by the term mass). A better >>>> constructed >>>> railgun would fire a " projectile of light"... hmmm.. a strange beasty >>>> indeed.. Why so ? >>>> Because the projectile could be " tuned" to either/or focus or impact. >>>> Strange account of a battle predicted centuries ago where the flesh,eyes >>>> and >>>> tongue will rot while they are still standing ( bones remain) Zec: 14. >>>> This >>>> description seeems to indicate a type of a ray gun, however, the projectile >>>> does not knock the person off their feet.. only dissolves the flesh. >>>> >>>> You referred to Barry Carter's Subtleenergy website that mentions a new >>>> method of producing O3 and O6 but does not describe the process. He does >>>> describe the healing qualities of vortex induced ormus water. Reminds me of >>>> the account of the angel that would "stir" or "trouble" the waters in the >>>> pool. Whoever would be the first sick person to enter the pool thereafter >>>> would be healed. If the "stirring" means inducing a water vortex and only >>>> the first person would be healed, could this mean the vortex was destroyed >>>> by entering the pool and the residual remains of the vortex properties >>>> dissappear? >>>> >>>> Out in the wildwood behind the Dime Box Saloon lurks an old whisky still >>>> left over from the old days. The tale goes that sippin some that " thinkin >>>> drinkin" stuff could make a person believe the earth was flat. >>>> >>>> Richard >>>> >>> >> >
