Light

  • 28 Replies
  • 5417 Views
*

General Douchebag

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 10957
  • King of charred bones and cooked meat
Light
« on: January 30, 2009, 01:50:23 PM »
What is it, wave-particle duality, electromagnetic wave, wizards?
No but I'm guess your what? 90? Cause you just so darn mature </sarcasm>

Re: Light
« Reply #1 on: January 30, 2009, 02:18:27 PM »
It is a particle that loves to give Einstein the finger
Only 2 things are infinite the universe and human stupidity, but I am not sure about the former.

Re: Light
« Reply #2 on: February 04, 2009, 02:42:33 AM »
Its the opposite of heavy.

?

Wakka Wakka

  • 1525
  • Beat The Hell Outta Spheres!
Re: Light
« Reply #3 on: February 04, 2009, 04:03:27 PM »
Its the opposite of heavy.
Unfunny troll is unfunny.

Wave of particles I guess.  Made of photons which come in packets but they still have mass.  Not clear but...ya.
Normally when I'm not sure I just cop a feel.

Re: Light
« Reply #4 on: February 04, 2009, 09:24:16 PM »
What is it, wave-particle duality, electromagnetic wave, wizards?

Light is an electromagnetic wave.

*

General Douchebag

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 10957
  • King of charred bones and cooked meat
Re: Light
« Reply #5 on: February 05, 2009, 01:25:10 PM »
Its the opposite of heavy.
Unfunny troll is unfunny.

Wave of particles I guess.  Made of photons which come in packets but they still have mass.  Not clear but...ya.

If they have mass, where does it come from? Conservation of mass and all that.
No but I'm guess your what? 90? Cause you just so darn mature </sarcasm>

Re: Light
« Reply #6 on: February 05, 2009, 01:37:06 PM »
maybe i'm failing now but is conservation of mass a physical principle? conservation of energy is the important thing. and i think it's better to say relativistic mass in that case.

Re: Light
« Reply #7 on: February 05, 2009, 04:35:06 PM »
maybe i'm failing now but is conservation of mass a physical principle? conservation of energy is the important thing. and i think it's better to say relativistic mass in that case.

Energy is proportional to mass, so really it is conservation of mass-energy, but people call it conservation of energy because mass has intrinsic energy.

Conservation of mass says the same thing, if you allow for the fact the energy is equivalent to mass (multiplied by c2, obviously).

?

Wakka Wakka

  • 1525
  • Beat The Hell Outta Spheres!
Re: Light
« Reply #8 on: February 05, 2009, 06:15:51 PM »
Its the opposite of heavy.
Unfunny troll is unfunny.

Wave of particles I guess.  Made of photons which come in packets but they still have mass.  Not clear but...ya.

If they have mass, where does it come from? Conservation of mass and all that.
Some theories say they don't have mass which honestly makes no sense to me.
Normally when I'm not sure I just cop a feel.

Re: Light
« Reply #9 on: February 06, 2009, 03:06:50 PM »
maybe i'm failing now but is conservation of mass a physical principle? conservation of energy is the important thing. and i think it's better to say relativistic mass in that case.

Energy is proportional to mass, so really it is conservation of mass-energy, but people call it conservation of energy because mass has intrinsic energy.

Conservation of mass says the same thing, if you allow for the fact the energy is equivalent to mass (multiplied by c2, obviously).

ok, that's what i expected it to be, conservation of mass sounded a bit strange in first place

*

Euclid

  • 943
Re: Light
« Reply #10 on: February 06, 2009, 08:39:45 PM »
Its the opposite of heavy.
Unfunny troll is unfunny.

Wave of particles I guess.  Made of photons which come in packets but they still have mass.  Not clear but...ya.

If they have mass, where does it come from? Conservation of mass and all that.
Some theories say they don't have mass which honestly makes no sense to me.

Relativity requires that it have no mass if it indeed does travel at c.
Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist
Yes, thanks to the tireless efforts of Euclid and a few other mathematically-inclined members, electromagnetic acceleration is fast moving into the forefront of FE research.
8)

*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5179
Re: Light
« Reply #11 on: February 07, 2009, 11:38:57 AM »
Made of photons which come in packets but they still have mass.
Replace mass with energy.

Re: Light
« Reply #12 on: February 07, 2009, 09:53:21 PM »
What is it, wave-particle duality, electromagnetic wave, wizards?

Depends on what you do to it, I am told.

http://my.morningside.edu/slaven/Physics/uncertainty/uncertainty2.html



Although deep down inside I suspect it is wizards.
The Earth rests on an Infinite stack of Turtles...
Stop raping the llamas!
I'm a platypus gynecologist, damn it!
"I once taught a rabbit to fly with only a string..." -Now

?

Wakka Wakka

  • 1525
  • Beat The Hell Outta Spheres!
Re: Light
« Reply #13 on: February 09, 2009, 04:02:04 PM »
Made of photons which come in packets but they still have mass.
Replace mass with energy.
Ahh, I see...but where does this energy come from, some sort of decay?
Normally when I'm not sure I just cop a feel.

?

Dr Matrix

  • 4312
  • In Soviet Russia, Matrix enters you!
Re: Light
« Reply #14 on: February 10, 2009, 01:31:58 PM »
Relativity requires that it have no mass if it indeed does travel at c.

Ooh... ooh... careful!  Be sure you're talking about rest mass rather than relativistic mass.  Photons have no rest mass, but they still carry momentum, after all.

Every photon that leaves the Sun carries away a little bit of it's 'mass' if you like, since the photons are generated in nuclear fusion processes which release a small amount of nuclear binding energy as electromagnetic energy.  An interesting fact is that since the Sun is largely opaque, a photon created in the core takes, on average, about a million years to get out to the surface where it can escape.  The light you see from the Sun now was created by fusion a million years ago, and there's a million years' worth of fusion photons trapped inside it at all times.  Cool huh?
Quote from: Arthur Schopenhauer
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5179
Re: Light
« Reply #15 on: February 10, 2009, 03:16:56 PM »
Made of photons which come in packets but they still have mass.
Replace mass with energy.
Ahh, I see...but where does this energy come from, some sort of decay?
Motion.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17920
Re: Light
« Reply #16 on: February 10, 2009, 04:03:57 PM »
Quote
The light you see from the Sun now was created by fusion a million years ago, and there's a million years' worth of fusion photons trapped inside it at all times.  Cool huh?

So how old was the sun's light 50 years after its creation?
« Last Edit: February 10, 2009, 04:05:34 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Euclid

  • 943
Re: Light
« Reply #17 on: February 10, 2009, 04:14:09 PM »
Relativity requires that it have no mass if it indeed does travel at c.

Ooh... ooh... careful!  Be sure you're talking about rest mass rather than relativistic mass.  Photons have no rest mass, but they still carry momentum, after all.

Every photon that leaves the Sun carries away a little bit of it's 'mass' if you like, since the photons are generated in nuclear fusion processes which release a small amount of nuclear binding energy as electromagnetic energy.  An interesting fact is that since the Sun is largely opaque, a photon created in the core takes, on average, about a million years to get out to the surface where it can escape.  The light you see from the Sun now was created by fusion a million years ago, and there's a million years' worth of fusion photons trapped inside it at all times.  Cool huh?

Meh, relativistic mass is not a very good concept. When I say mass I always mean rest mass.

Quote
The light you see from the Sun now was created by fusion a million years ago, and there's a million years' worth of fusion photons trapped inside it at all times.  Cool huh?

So how old was the sun's light 50 years after its creation?

As if the ignition of the Sun was an instantaneous event.   ::)
Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist
Yes, thanks to the tireless efforts of Euclid and a few other mathematically-inclined members, electromagnetic acceleration is fast moving into the forefront of FE research.
8)

?

Dr Matrix

  • 4312
  • In Soviet Russia, Matrix enters you!
Re: Light
« Reply #18 on: February 11, 2009, 01:42:57 PM »
Quote
The light you see from the Sun now was created by fusion a million years ago, and there's a million years' worth of fusion photons trapped inside it at all times.  Cool huh?

So how old was the sun's light 50 years after its creation?

A reasonable question, although as I suspect you can guess the Sun was incredibly hot throughout it's volume at the time of fusion initiation at its core.  As the intensity of radiation increased over time, the less dense gas that had not formed the Sun in the inner solar system was blown away by radiation pressure and the solar wind, leaving only heavier elements to form the inner planets (which is why the Earth is full of heavy radioactive elements, as well as the oxygen, carbon, iron and silicon that isn't as abundant by percentage mass the further out you go).  Further out where the outward pressure was less intense, lighter elements could collect for longer to form the gas giant planets until their own magnetic fields protected their atmospheres from the worst of the solar wind.  This gradual equilibrium was reached over around a billion years before something resembling the modern solar system emerged from the mess.
Quote from: Arthur Schopenhauer
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

Re: Light
« Reply #19 on: February 16, 2009, 11:44:03 AM »
Waves and particles are never one or the other.

All particles have wave like properties and all waves sometimes have particle like properties. When objects get larger their wavelike properties become smaller whilst their particle properties become more dominant.

For example shine light through a slit and it defracts however detect light with a photomultiplier tube and you get individual pulses suggesting its a particle.

Peculiar it is but not that strange if you think how limited our perspective is of the world in everyday life we only see things usually in the range of 0.00001m to 1000000m a very large scale view. Its no wonder are intuition built by observing things at such a giant size is so off.

Re: Light
« Reply #20 on: February 17, 2009, 06:00:23 PM »
Its the opposite of heavy.
Unfunny troll is unfunny.

Wave of particles I guess.  Made of photons which come in packets but they still have mass.  Not clear but...ya.

If they have mass, where does it come from? Conservation of mass and all that.
They don't have mass they have momentum. And no you don't have to have mass to have momentum.
You can't outrun death forever
But you can sure make the old bastard work for it.

*

General Douchebag

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 10957
  • King of charred bones and cooked meat
Re: Light
« Reply #21 on: February 17, 2009, 06:12:08 PM »
Wakka Wakka said they do, so I based my reply on that. And can you provide any proof for your outlandish claims?
No but I'm guess your what? 90? Cause you just so darn mature </sarcasm>

Re: Light
« Reply #22 on: February 17, 2009, 06:14:15 PM »
Wakka Wakka said they do, so I based my reply on that. And can you provide any proof for your outlandish claims?
Read a physics text book.
You can't outrun death forever
But you can sure make the old bastard work for it.

*

General Douchebag

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 10957
  • King of charred bones and cooked meat
Re: Light
« Reply #23 on: February 17, 2009, 06:16:37 PM »
So REers accept shooped pictures and even appeals to authority as proof? ::)

Seriously, that's like a Christian just referring people to the Bible when they ask for proof. Which they do. Are you no better than a Christian?
No but I'm guess your what? 90? Cause you just so darn mature </sarcasm>

Re: Light
« Reply #24 on: February 17, 2009, 06:23:57 PM »
They don't trust me with the lab equipment in the physics lab after an incident so I can't get you the proof.
On another topic why does inflammable and flammable mean the same thing.
However I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt that a theory that the vast majority say is true. And no the vast majority of the world has ever agreed on a religion.
You can't outrun death forever
But you can sure make the old bastard work for it.

?

Dr Matrix

  • 4312
  • In Soviet Russia, Matrix enters you!
Re: Light
« Reply #25 on: February 18, 2009, 11:30:50 AM »
You can build yourself a photoelectric effect apparatus to determine some interesting properties of light, if you really want!  Otherwise some fun days of field theory should help to convince you of light's zero rest mass and finite momentum.
Quote from: Arthur Schopenhauer
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

?

Wakka Wakka

  • 1525
  • Beat The Hell Outta Spheres!
Re: Light
« Reply #26 on: February 21, 2009, 08:19:56 AM »
Wakka Wakka said they do, so I based my reply on that. And can you provide any proof for your outlandish claims?

I'm sorry I missed read it, according to a theory (yes I read it on the internet) photons have no mass, but then how do they momentum?  p=mv...so m != 0...
Normally when I'm not sure I just cop a feel.

?

Ravenwood240

  • 2070
  • I disagree. What was the Question?
Re: Light
« Reply #27 on: February 21, 2009, 08:23:32 AM »
They don't trust me with the lab equipment in the physics lab after an incident so I can't get you the proof.
On another topic why does inflammable and flammable mean the same thing.
However I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt that a theory that the vast majority say is true. And no the vast majority of the world has ever agreed on a religion.

Because:

Historically, flammable and inflammable mean the same thing. However, the presence of the prefix in- has misled many people into assuming that inflammable means "not flammable" or "noncombustible." The prefix -in in inflammable is not, however, the Latin negative prefix -in, which is related to the English -un and appears in such words as indecent and inglorious. Rather, this -in is an intensive prefix derived from the Latin preposition in. This prefix also appears in the word enflame. But many people are not aware of this derivation, and for clarity's sake it is advisable to use only flammable to give warnings.

There's the answer.  That will be 3.99 plus tax, please drop the check in the mail.
Belief gets in the way of learning.  If you believe something, you've closed your mind to any further thought.  I know some things, little things, not the nine million names of God.

(Paraphased from R.A. Heinlein's "Time Enough For Love.")

?

Dr Matrix

  • 4312
  • In Soviet Russia, Matrix enters you!
Re: Light
« Reply #28 on: February 21, 2009, 08:44:37 AM »
I'm sorry I missed read it, according to a theory (yes I read it on the internet) photons have no mass, but then how do they momentum?  p=mv...so m != 0...

p = hf/c , p = momentum of a photon, h = Planck's constant, f = frequency, c = speed of light

Photon rest mass = 0

These two are not mutually exclusive.
Quote from: Arthur Schopenhauer
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.