Waves vs Particles
 

An airplane (particle) traveling at the speed of sound
causes shock waves in the air which, if passed through
double slits, would no doubt cause interference.

How about: A photon (particle) traveling at the speed
of light causes shock waves in the aether which, when
passed through double slits, causes interference?

Impossible for empty space - but we now know that space
is not empty. :-) Quoting "Alpha and Omega", by Seife,
"Empty space is an incredibly complex substance, and
scientists are just beginning to understand its properties."
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Waves vs Particles
 

On Feb 1, 11:43 am, Cecil Moore wrote:
An airplane (particle) traveling at the speed of sound
causes shock waves in the air which, if passed through
double slits, would no doubt cause interference.

How about: A photon (particle) traveling at the speed
of light causes shock waves in the aether which, when
passed through double slits, causes interference?

Impossible for empty space - but we now know that space
is not empty. :-) Quoting "Alpha and Omega", by Seife,
"Empty space is an incredibly complex substance, and
scientists are just beginning to understand its properties."
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Perhaps you should read up a little on fluid dynamics. Any movement in
a fluid causes "shock waves" or disturbances caused by energy transfer
to the fluid. The so called speed of sound is when the cause of the
disturbance moves at the same speed as the propagation of the energy
transfer.

Are you saying space is a fluid?

Paul, KD7HB

Waves vs Particles
 

" wrote in message
...
On Feb 1, 11:43 am, Cecil Moore wrote:
An airplane (particle) traveling at the speed of sound
causes shock waves in the air which, if passed through
double slits, would no doubt cause interference.

How about: A photon (particle) traveling at the speed
of light causes shock waves in the aether which, when
passed through double slits, causes interference?

Impossible for empty space - but we now know that space
is not empty. :-) Quoting "Alpha and Omega", by Seife,
"Empty space is an incredibly complex substance, and
scientists are just beginning to understand its
properties."
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Perhaps you should read up a little on fluid dynamics. Any
movement in
a fluid causes "shock waves" or disturbances caused by
energy transfer
to the fluid. The so called speed of sound is when the
cause of the
disturbance moves at the same speed as the propagation of
the energy
transfer.

Are you saying space is a fluid?

Paul, KD7HB


-----------


Yes, but a compressible fluid - with temporal implications.
G

Ed, NM2K

Waves vs Particles
 

wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Quoting "Alpha and Omega", by Seife,
"Empty space is an incredibly complex substance, ...

Are you saying space is a fluid?

Maybe "an incredibly complex substance"
exhibits some characteristics of a fluid?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Waves vs Particles
 

AI4QJ wrote:
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Quoting "Alpha and Omega", by Seife,
"Empty space is an incredibly complex substance, ...
Are you saying space is a fluid?
Maybe "an incredibly complex substance"
exhibits some characteristics of a fluid?

I should say "characteristic" impedance is 377 Ohms. It also has a
permitivity and permeability of 1 ;-)

I'm sure you mean relative permittivity and relative permeability.

The characteristic impedance is the square root of permeability divided
by permittivity, so if both are one, the characteristic impedance would
have to be one.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Waves vs Particles
 

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Quoting "Alpha and Omega", by Seife,
"Empty space is an incredibly complex substance, ...

Are you saying space is a fluid?

Maybe "an incredibly complex substance"
exhibits some characteristics of a fluid?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com


If the photon creates a shock wave in the aether then it must be imparting
some energy into the aether and the photon should slow down over time.

Peter

http://members.optushome.com.au/vk6ysf/vk6ysf/main.htm

Waves vs Particles
 

Peter wrote:
If the photon creates a shock wave in the aether then it must be imparting
some energy into the aether and the photon should slow down over time.

Photons cannot slow down but you could be right about
them losing energy over time. Lengthening the wavelength
of a photon is certainly a loss of energy. That could
explain the red-shift of light from distant galaxies.

"Optics", by Hecht, 4th edition, Page 52:
"Photons are stable, chargeless, massless elementary
particles that *exist only at the speed of light*."
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Waves vs Particles
 

Cecil Moore wrote:
Peter wrote:
If the photon creates a shock wave in the aether then it must be
imparting some energy into the aether and the photon should slow down
over time.

Photons cannot slow down but you could be right about
them losing energy over time. Lengthening the wavelength
of a photon is certainly a loss of energy. That could
explain the red-shift of light from distant galaxies.

"Optics", by Hecht, 4th edition, Page 52:
"Photons are stable, chargeless, massless elementary
particles that *exist only at the speed of light*."

While I cannot dismiss the existence of the photons, I am not aware of
any experiments which have been able to measure them.

However, to me, the fact that there is some type of interaction with our
antennas and the ether is undeniable ... and, indeed, I do not believe
that transmission of radio signals would be possible, on most
frequencies--at least, if not for the ether.

Regards,
JS

Waves vs Particles
 

John Smith wrote:
While I cannot dismiss the existence of the photons, I am not aware of
any experiments which have been able to measure them.

Hecht says: "... researchers ... have conducted experiments
in which they literally counted individual photons".
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Waves vs Particles
 

Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith wrote:
While I cannot dismiss the existence of the photons, I am not aware of
any experiments which have been able to measure them.

Hecht says: "... researchers ... have conducted experiments
in which they literally counted individual photons".

I was aware of light, not RF. And, of course, at the extreme
"frequencies" (others would state "Higher Energy Particles" for all
RF--I guess), photons (particles) become undeniable--x-rays, gamma rays,
etc. However, "light transmitters" have always been of a differing
design/construction (example: light bulb) than RF transmitters.

My readings and studies have been of a "circular nature", just when I
have, in the past, decided that rf are/is waves, I have read something
which convinced me particles are responsible--then the opposite occurs
and I am back standing on square one. Hopefully, and in a "BLATANT"
manner, some experiment will make the truth of this whole subject
ABSOLUTELY apparent.

Until then, I think it is OK to remain undecided and firmly set in ones
beliefs ... but cautious of poking too much fun at anothers'.

Warm regards,
JS