Richard Clark wrote:
On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 00:04:23 -0000, Jim Kelley
wrote:


Richard Clark wrote:


The description you offer requires a porous plate which is absent in
every radiometer that has come down the pike

On the other hand, the absence of porous plates in operating
radiometers tends to cast some doubt on your claim that the plates
must be porous.


Not "my claim," my report.

So be it. The absence of porous plates in operating radiometers tends
to cast doubt on your report that the plates must be porous.

The claim they must be porous arrives
through the math necessary to balance the kinetic forces.

But a balance of forces would result in the absence of an observable
effect. An imbalance in forces is required in order to produce
movement.

Now, if we simply move to another radiometer (Nichols, Tear, Hull, and
Webb already recited) without that partial vacuum, the vanes still
move, and expressely by Radiation Pressure.

By a different mechanism and in the opposite direction, yes.

In essence, these instruments indicate,
not measure.

A description which applies beautifully to power meters as well, don't
you agree? ;-)

The coy context of the thread was measuring the mass of a Photon.
Absolutely no SI Units have been named or any quantitative values
offered (the rather standard omission from claims made here).
However, feel free to introduce your own side thread's goal or even offer a
guess (your own quatitative value for the mass).

I'd like to offer m = E/c^2 as a guess.

73, ac6xg