Richard Clark wrote:
You misspelled plonk, but baby makes three. That makes the last one
who can't do the math.

The photon mass math is trivial.

E= mc^2 = hf

m = hf/c^2 = h/(c)lamda

If I remember correctly, a photon cannot travel slower
than the speed of light.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:


m = hf/c^2 = h/(c)lamda


Uh, you over simplify there, a bit, don't you?

Where is motion? Where is time? etc. However, on "energy at rest",
that might come very close ...

Regards,
JS

John Smith wrote:
Where is motion?

Velocity = c

Where is time?

Time stands still for anything traveling at
velocity = c
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith wrote:
Where is motion?

Velocity = c

Where is time?

Time stands still for anything traveling at
velocity = c

Yeah, well, if you take a cubic centimeter of "energy" around yourself,
of even myself, for that matter, it better be at rest! Otherwise, the
motion/time thing, which your simplistic equation ignores, will, MOST
CERTAINLY, come into play ...

However, the equation you gave is good ... but just NOT that simple for
REAL world situations ... but then, I stated that, before you gave the
equation ...

You have argued this yourself, most vehemently, with photons ... think
about it ... an argument I actually agreed with, and echo here ...
motion DOES change things, a bit ... and, it is VERY DIFFICULT to keey
energized particles at rest, but then, not impossible ;-)

Regards,
JS

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 10:18:49 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote:

The photon mass math is trivial.

I still don't see a computation, so trivial must be beyond your
capacity.

E= mc^2 = hf

m = hf/c^2 = h/(c)lamda

If I remember correctly, a photon cannot travel slower
than the speed of light.

Well, we've established you can't compute it for an electron,
certainly. And this speculation about a photon.... Do it for 167,770
miles/s then.

Naw, let's simply say you've done it (there will never be any actual
evidence of your work as we can all agree), and move on. So much for
practicing Newtonian Philosopherz.

I don't "ploink" your postings, I just don't read them because they
are run off the xerox with no obvious intellectual value added - this
last round fairly confirmed that.

On Sep 17, 11:18*am, Cecil Moore wrote:
Richard Clark wrote:
You misspelled plonk, but baby makes three. *That makes the last one
who can't do the math.

The photon mass math is trivial.

E= mc^2 = hf

m = hf/c^2 = h/(c)lamda

If I remember correctly, a photon cannot travel slower
than the speed of light.
--
73, Cecil *http://www.w5dxp.com

Are you proposing that a photon cannot travel slower than the speed of
light in a vacuum, or it cannot travel slower than the speed of light
in water or the speed of light through glass or air? Please reference
which speed of light a photon cannot travel slower than. Assuming your
answer is the universal constrant "c", then my question is, knowing
that light travels faster through a vacuum than it does through water,
is the light travelling through water still "photons" or is that
impossible because they are travelling too slow? What are they then?
Please advise. Thanks.

wrote:
Are you proposing that a photon cannot travel slower than the speed of
light in a vacuum, or it cannot travel slower than the speed of light
in water or the speed of light through glass or air?

In any random medium, a photon cannot travel slower
than the speed of light through that medium. In
particular, photons associated with standing waves
do NOT stand still.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

On Sep 17, 5:52*pm, Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote:
Are you proposing that a photon cannot travel slower than the speed of
light in a vacuum, or it cannot travel slower than the speed of light
in water or the speed of light through glass or air?

In any random medium, a photon cannot travel slower
than the speed of light through that medium. In
particular, photons associated with standing waves
do NOT stand still.
--
73, Cecil *http://www.w5dxp.com

What about Cerenkov radiation? In this case, beta particles with mass
travel faster than light in a water medium. So much for 'nothing can
travel faster than a photon'. It depends on the medium. If the medium
is a vacuum, then yes, nothing can travel faster than the speed of
light in that medium. Need to be careful. I have to Credit R. Clark
for pointinmg this out some time ago. See http://nuclear.mst.edu/research/reactor.html

wrote:
What about Cerenkov radiation?

Up until now, I haven't said anything about particles
other than photons - but what about neutrinos which
cannot catch photons in free space but overtake and
pass photons when they hit the water? Or, unlike
most photons, usually pass through the entire earth
without hitting anything.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 16:52:40 -0500, Cecil Moore
wrote:

wrote:
Are you proposing that a photon cannot travel slower than the speed of
light in a vacuum, or it cannot travel slower than the speed of light
in water or the speed of light through glass or air?

In any random medium, a photon cannot travel slower
than the speed of light through that medium. In
particular, photons associated with standing waves
do NOT stand still.

Try again...would you believe light as 38 miles per hour?
http://www.hno.harvard.edu/gazette/1999/02.18/light.html
or at near absolute zero, coming to a complete stop?
http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/magazine/15-11/st_alphageek
or used in optoelectronics?
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-145405.html
or even faster then 3*10^8 meters/sec?
http://www.scienceblog.com/light.html


Quiz: How fast do the electrons flow in a copper conductor?
Hint: It's not the speed of light.
Cheat: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_current



--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558