Israel, Greetings. Kindly clarify me on the following issues. 1. Does a light quantum travel perpetually in the vacuum? 2. Does a light quantum tire out at some point in the vacuum? 3. How are responses to questions 1 and 2 related to Eienstien's observation that the path of light quantum gets curved at a point? Mike Atovigba
On 8/7/11, epistemology+nore...@googlegroups.com <epistemology+nore...@googlegroups.com> wrote: > ============================================================================= > Today's Topic Summary > ============================================================================= > > Group: epistemology@googlegroups.com > Url: http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/topics > > - [epistemology 12281] Quantum of Light and my Parrot. [4 Updates] > http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/t/5bb78bf2df2b5f86 > > > ============================================================================= > Topic: [epistemology 12281] Quantum of Light and my Parrot. > Url: http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/t/5bb78bf2df2b5f86 > ============================================================================= > > ---------- 1 of 4 ---------- > From: awori achoka <awori.ach...@gmail.com> > Date: Aug 07 03:33AM +0300 > Url: http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/msg/21007041c0b1db68 > > Nature's laws react, interact..and morph into a constant to create form and > order..and that's what we call nature. Why it has to be so i don't know. Ask > God. > > On Aug 6, 2011 11:25 AM, "socra...@bezeqint.net" <socra...@bezeqint.net> > wrote: > >> ===, > >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Epistemology" group. >> To post to this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en. > > > ---------- 2 of 4 ---------- > From: "socra...@bezeqint.net" <socra...@bezeqint.net> > Date: Aug 06 08:42PM -0700 > Url: http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/msg/7e951b054da423f2 > > Quantum of Light and my Parrot. > =. > The fact number -1. > 1729.The astronomical aberration effect of light showed > the finite constant speed of quantum of light. > # > The fact number - 2. > In 1887 the Michelson-Morley experiment > showed that the speed of quantum of light is constant > in all directions regardless of the motion of the source. > (c = 299,792,458 m/sec = 1) > # > The fact number - 3. > 1905. Paper: “ On the Electrodynamics of moving Bodies.” > Einstein’s second postulate says that > the speed of quantum of light in the vacuum > is absolute constant c=1. > ============.. > # > Gentlemen > I have only two questions: > First - > Didn’t my parrot fly to you? > Second - > Why does everyone say that all movements are relative > if the speed of quantum of light isn’t relative but > it is an absolute constant in absolute Vacuum ? > P.S. > You can easily find out my parrot. It studied only > two sentences: ‘ there is no absolute movement ’, > ‘ there is no absolute reference system ‘ > # > Israel Sadovnik Socratus > ==== . > P.S. > ‘ All these fifty years of conscious brooding have brought me > no nearer to the answer to the question, 'What are light quanta?' > Nowadays every Tom, Dick and Harry thinks he knows it, > but he is mistaken. ‘ > / Einstein / > ===============.. > > > ---------- 3 of 4 ---------- > From: sadovnik socratus <is.socra...@gmail.com> > Date: Aug 06 10:13PM -0700 > Url: http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/msg/8cf4c9dbb70afbf0 > > Comment by Kris: > Indeed... it is in total contradiction to say that there is no > absolute frame of reference, and then to say that the speed > of light is constant... in which you can use for you calculations > and experiments... > . . . i.e. the speed of light IS an absolute frame of reference. > > However... they can fix their contradiction by making another > statement – > - there is no such thing as an absolute vacuum. > With that statement, they make the speed of light relative, yet, > hold the theoretical absolute frame of reference of c. > What's worse is, all "more accurate" measurements of the speed > of light change the measure of a meter rather than the theorized > speed of light in a vacuum. > > The important thing to understand is that this is all completely > arbitrary and even is admittedly so ( yet, not in these words ) > in the standard model. But, it is close enough for practical use. > / Kris / > =========… > > > ---------- 4 of 4 ---------- > From: sadovnik socratus <is.socra...@gmail.com> > Date: Aug 06 11:18PM -0700 > Url: http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/msg/33b30e1f772b6e13 > > Indeed... it is in total contradiction to say that there is no > absolute frame of reference, and then to say that the speed > of light is constant.. > / Kris / > How is it possible to say that there is absolute speed of light > and there is no absolute frame of reference ? > Huh? > In the Alice's Wonderland everything is possible. > Socratus > ======… > > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Epistemology" group. > To post to this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
