Speed of light is exceeded

[miko2d]

 

Originally posted by Boroda:
Looks like education is a great problem in the US...

 Been reading "Pravda" lately?  

[funked]

ROFL SOB!!!

[bloom25]

A photon has features that must be explained by treating it as a wave and as a particle.  As mentioned above, so called Blackbody radiation is explained due to the particle nature of the photon.  Electrons are the same way, Quantum theory (I.E. Thompson, Bohr models) tends to treat an electron as a particle.  (It's rest mass is on the order of 10^-31 kg or .511MeV.)  The more advanced Schrodinger model works with a wave function, which basically coresponds to a probability function that allows you do know the probability of where an electron is.  There are, however, certain phenomena that can only be expained currently by treating the electron like a wave.  (Tunneling is one example.)  The zener and tunnel diodes are examples of devices that wouldn't exist if electrons didn't act like waves and particles.

The truth is that Physicists don't really know all that much about the atom.  Every year they find new particles (and give them ever stranger names   ).  There are, for example, strangeness, truth, and beauty.  

The Schrodinger equation is also extremely difficult to solve for elements above Hydrogen.

Photons, electrons, etc are really no more than names we give to things that aren't yet fully understood.



------------------
bloom25
THUNDERBIRDS

[Dowding]

Bloom25 - it depends what you mean by 'fully understood'. I don't think scientists in general, and physicists specifically, have an all-knowing understanding of anything. What they do have are models that are able to predict what will happen in a certain situations. It follows then, that some models are more accurate at fitting an effect to a cause, based on experimental observations.

 

The Schrodinger equation is also extremely difficult to solve for elements above Hydrogen.

No kidding! I spent four years battling with quantum mechanics. It wasn't pretty  .

[-lynx-]

 

Sorry to piss on yur bonfire lynx, but that article is more accurate than you are.

*holding breath for a sec until  Dowding's squirt evaporated*
 

Caesium can exist in several states.

Read the article again - it does not refer to a state anything can exist in (depends on the temperature mostly  ) It just calls Caesium a gas which, being a metal, it isn't.

 

Light possesses a duality in its nature

Where did I say it doesn't? Where did you read that "dual nature" means "the particles of which light is made"?

 

Hope that helps.  (Image removed from quote.)

Sure does   Just helps to prove the point what studying "Science" does to people  .

Miko - stop being such a "new born Christian"  


------------------
lynx
13 Sqn RAF

[This message has been edited by -lynx- (edited 11-20-2000).]

[Dowding]

I hate physicists.   It's the reason why I couldn't wait to get away from the department with all its geeky, socially inept professional physicists. It's why most of my friends at uni didn't do physics and the great majority were 'arts' students (eww!).

And I hate the labels people apply to someone who has a physics degree.   Ooops... hypocrisy alert.

It just calls Caesium a gas which, being a metal, it isn't.

Just because something is a metal doesn't mean it is solid. You might say 'normally its a metal', but that's a little vague and not very useful. The actual term 'metal' isn't a description of its structural properties (unlike 'gas', which is), it's a description of its electronic properties. The phrase 'Caesium gas' is valid.

BTW, using the word 'state' is a little obsolete, 'phase' is the technical convention.   Also temperature is not always the most important variable when considering the phase of a substance - in some cases magnitude changes in temperature might have little or no effect, if other variables are dominant.

 

Where did I say it doesn't? Where did you read that "dual nature" means "the particles of which light is made"?

The point I was trying to make is that saying "the particles of which light is made" is just as valid as saying "the waves of light of which light is made" - which one is more appropiate depends upon the context, and for the 'faster-than-light' article, the particular model of light is more useful.

[prz]

so guys, stop this scientific bragging. You're all right. The real question is : Can I apply it to AH somehow, think "ueber-light-speed hispanos chewing LW tails off before they even rolled in Afrika Frame 4" ??

[-lynx-]

 

Just because something is a metal doesn't mean it is solid.

Hehe, as a matter of fact, it isn't. Cs is a liquid under normal atmospheric conditions . And no, temperature is not the only parameter that defines the phase (oh please...) of a material. Another one is pressure. (you can solidify certain liquids with magnetic field but those are not "pure" materials).

But if you think about it for a sec you'll realise that temperature prevails - no changes in pressure will change the phase of a solid material (yes, you can solidify some gasses under pressure blah-blah...).

Anyhow the speed of light is by definition the speed at which light travels. Hence light "travelling FTL" is nonsense - it always travels at the speed of light . And no, it'll never "arrive before it left". You do know this, don't you?

p.s  

You might say 'normally its a metal', but that's a little vague and not very useful.

Hmmm... When I say "normally" it is rather descriptive. To me anyway. Most people would know what "normal" means . It's when water is wet, grass is green and Dowding is arguing for (what it looks like) the sake of an argument ...


------------------
lynx
13 Sqn RAF

[mrfish]

what do you freaky brits mean by 'caesium'? don't you know everything should be spelled good ol'  'merican style 'cesium' damnit! don't make me throw my phase diagrams at you  

[Dowding]

"Arguing for sake of argument..."

Who me?  

Ok - I admit, I was splitting hairs.  

As for the speed of light, you're right, it is an absolute (as proved by Albert Einstein). Observations that appear to overturn this can be put down to the frame of reference of the observer. Hence the phrase "everything is relative" or more accurately, "everything is relative to an observer".

Anyway, you've made me start to remember my physics course... and... I'm... turning... into... a... PHYSICIST!!

What has happened to me?! My hair has suddenly become shoulder length, and I have an inexplicable urge to spend the rest of the day watching the entire first series of Star Trek! And what's this?! I'm starting to get interested in 'live roleplay' of Dungeons and Dragons games!!!

Curse you god for making me this way!!!

 

[-lynx-]

 

don't make me throw my phase diagrams at you

Don't you mean "frase diagrams"?

------------------
lynx
13 Sqn RAF

[Boroda]

Miko, I already told you that Pravda now is nothing more then a marginal communist/"patriotic" leaflet, after being wasted by the Greeks that owned it for a few years.

But I have no doubt that journalists and editors there will never print a hallucination like that.

This is one of the reasons why most of the Russians believe that they are superior to Americans.

Miko, Pravda was a bad example. But you can see many similiar articles in other popular papers: "MK", "Komsomolka", "Trud", etc. But not in Pravda or Izvestia  

------------------
With respect,
    Pavel Pavlov,
    Commissar 25th IAP WB VVS