![]() |
Dual-Z0 Stubs
"Art Unwin" wrote ... On May 6, 7:05 pm, Cecil Moore wrote: Art Unwin wrote: I don't know about waves but my understanding is that all colors come from the mixing of the three basic colors, or is it four? That's the RGB standard designed for fooling human eyes into seeing more than just red, green, and blue. Photons in nature come in *all* EM frequencies. -- 73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com Cecil Seems like this thing called photon is the magic article that created the big bang. You attribute everything to the photon but I don't think physics as got a proper handle on it! Heck, only a few years ago they said a particle could exist without mass.If a particle emitted from the Sun's boundary( lepton?) deaccellerated in a particular medium and broke apart into many electrons, then would not heat or light be emitted as kinetic energy contained in the particles of different sizes representing the spectrum of a particular color with respect to potential energy contained in the various sized particles? Does your photon come in different sizes, color and potential energy? My understanding is that there are about seven leptons that break away from the Sun's boundary, three of which contains color attributes along with other flavours which is indicative of temperature and change in momentum. I think it is to early to argue about such a subject. May be it is time to return to the beginning. To the Hertz experiment. See: (http://people.seas.harvard.edu/~jone...Hertz_exp.html What and from radiated? 1. Maxwell's waves from the big sparks (the big sparks are in full analogy to lightning which also radiate radio waves), 2. Electric waves from the two plates (there appear and disappear a huge charges - electrons are compressible and have mass), 3. Photons S* |
Dual-Z0 Stubs
Szczepan Białek wrote:
Heck, only a few years ago they said a particle could exist without mass. Photons have zero *rest* mass. If they had mass at rest, they could not travel at the speed of light. The mass of a photon is due to its velocity, c in free space. When a photon slows to less than the speed of light in a medium, it gives up its energy to another particle, e.g. an electron, and disappears. 3. Photons EM radiation from amateur radio antennas is photonic. RF energy is supplied to the antenna system by our transmitters. Free electrons are accelerated and decelerated. Photons are emitted and absorbed by those free electrons. Some of the photons escape into space as coherent radiation. One can learn a lot about EM waves by understanding the nature of photons. For instance, standing waves consist of photons that cannot stand still. The illusion of a "standing" wave is just two waves of photons moving in opposite directions at the speed of light. Photons are not like mashed potatoes. -- 73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com |
Dual-Z0 Stubs
In article , Szczepan Białek wrote: Sometimes the screen on TV or cinema is perfectly white. This in cinema reflect. This reflected light splitted with the prism has only three frequences? They're likely to be three bands of frequencies rather than three narrow single-frequency lines, because the technologies used to create the frequencies aren't narrow-band. But, yes, what you are seeing as "perfectly white" under these circumstances is often *not* a smooth, continuous spectrum. In the case of a TV screen, you're seeing either: - The mixed emissions of a set of red, green, and blue phosphors, individually excited by electron beams [for CRT displays], or - The emission from the phosphors of a cold-cathode fluorescent backlighting lamp (a complex spectrum with multiple peaks) filtered through red, green, and blue pixel-sized filters (for most LCD tubes). In traditional film cinema, you're seeing the emissions of an incandescent or halogen bulb (fairly continuous spectrum) filtered through three colors of dye in the film print. The fact that these complex mixtures of overlapping color spectra can look "pure white" to our eyes, is due in large part to our complex nervous systems. Our eye/brain systems adapt to the mix of colors present under differnet lighting conditions, and interpret different combinations as "pure white" depending on what's available at the time. This is why, for example, indoor fluorescent lighting can actually look half-decent to our eyes once we get used to it (we "see" a fairly complete range of colors there) but what looks "white" to use under fluorescents will actually have a distinctly greenish cast to a film or digital camera. It's also why a rather curious phenomenon can be demonstrated. The *exact* same mix of color emissions may look very different to us, under different ambient lighting conditions... what might look greenish outdoors will look pure white or even slightly pinkish under indoor fluorescent lighting, because our brains *interpret* that input differently due to the different surroundings. -- Dave Platt AE6EO Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads! |
Dual-Z0 Stubs
"Cecil Moore" wrote ... Szczepan Białek wrote: Heck, only a few years ago they said a particle could exist without mass. It wrote Art. Photons have zero *rest* mass. If they had mass at rest, they could not travel at the speed of light. The mass of a photon is due to its velocity, c in free space. When a photon slows to less than the speed of light in a medium, it gives up its energy to another particle, e.g. an electron, and disappears. 3. Photons EM radiation from amateur radio antennas is photonic. RF energy is supplied to the antenna system by our transmitters. Free electrons are accelerated and decelerated. Photons are emitted and absorbed by those free electrons. Some of the photons escape into space as coherent radiation. One can learn a lot about EM waves by understanding the nature of photons. For instance, standing waves consist of photons that cannot stand still. The illusion of a "standing" wave is just two waves of photons moving in opposite directions at the speed of light. Photons are not like mashed potatoes. Are photons like transverse wave or like longitudinal? S* |
Dual-Z0 Stubs
On Sat, 16 May 2009 20:11:34 +0200, Szczepan Bia?ek
wrote: One can learn a lot about EM waves by understanding the nature of photons. For instance, standing waves consist of photons that cannot stand still. The illusion of a "standing" wave is just two waves of photons moving in opposite directions at the speed of light. Photons are not like mashed potatoes. Are photons like transverse wave or like longitudinal? Do two trolls' imaginary contributions resonate at the interface? 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Dual-Z0 Stubs
"Dave Platt" wrote ... In article , Szczepan Białek wrote: Sometimes the screen on TV or cinema is perfectly white. This in cinema reflect. This reflected light splitted with the prism has only three frequences? They're likely to be three bands of frequencies rather than three narrow single-frequency lines, because the technologies used to create the frequencies aren't narrow-band. But, yes, what you are seeing as "perfectly white" under these circumstances is often *not* a smooth, continuous spectrum. I was thinking that some transparent and semitransparent substances are phosphorescent (some time in dark) but ALL are less or more fluorescent (rework frequency). Rube in laser rewoork into one. But in laser are many passes. But what happens in one pass? May be that it rework also but only a little. Raman discovered that some substances can rework one frequency into many (also in higher). May be that a cotton screan also rework. In the case of a TV screen, you're seeing either: - The mixed emissions of a set of red, green, and blue phosphors, individually excited by electron beams [for CRT displays], or - The emission from the phosphors of a cold-cathode fluorescent backlighting lamp (a complex spectrum with multiple peaks) filtered through red, green, and blue pixel-sized filters (for most LCD tubes). In traditional film cinema, you're seeing the emissions of an incandescent or halogen bulb (fairly continuous spectrum) filtered through three colors of dye in the film print. The fact that these complex mixtures of overlapping color spectra can look "pure white" to our eyes, is due in large part to our complex nervous systems. Our eye/brain systems adapt to the mix of colors present under differnet lighting conditions, and interpret different combinations as "pure white" depending on what's available at the time. Yes. But for me is interesting the phenomenon at reflecting, scatering and refraction. May be that "polarisation" is an effect of that. This is why, for example, indoor fluorescent lighting can actually look half-decent to our eyes once we get used to it (we "see" a fairly complete range of colors there) but what looks "white" to use under fluorescents will actually have a distinctly greenish cast to a film or digital camera. It's also why a rather curious phenomenon can be demonstrated. The *exact* same mix of color emissions may look very different to us, under different ambient lighting conditions... what might look greenish outdoors will look pure white or even slightly pinkish under indoor fluorescent lighting, because our brains *interpret* that input differently due to the different surroundings. Is the light polarisation the hard prove that light vaves are transversal? S* -- Dave Platt AE6EO Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads! |
Dual-Z0 Stubs
Szczepan Białek wrote:
Are photons like transverse wave or like longitudinal? The EM fields embodied by photons are transverse. -- 73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com |
Dual-Z0 Stubs
Cecil Moore wrote:
EM radiation from amateur radio antennas is photonic. EM radiation from anything is both particles and waves. For instance, standing waves consist of photons that cannot stand still. As opposed to consisting of photons that _can_ stand still? :-) Interference is an example of the wavelike nature of light. ac6xg |
Dual-Z0 Stubs
"Szczepan Bialek" wrote in message
... Raman discovered that some substances can rework one frequency into many (also in higher). May be that a cotton screan also rework. This is a subject I have considerable experience in. My group at Eastman developed a process Raman spectrometer that used communications grade fibers to transmit both the excitation wavelength and the anti-Stokes Raman scattered light. Chalcogenide fibers, at around $1K per foot, would be needed to transmit the IR wavelengths needed for the analysis we were doing. The communication grade fibers cost less than one foot of the expensive fibers for the entire several hundred feet needed to separate the analyzer from the chemical process. Our patents were eventually licensed to the Rosemount division of Emerson Electric. Raman spectroscopy is based on the _non-linear_ (inelastic) scattering of photons. It is quite weak; more than 100 million photons are reflected by the linear (elastic) Rayleigh scattering for every photon reflected by Raman scattering. I am convinced now that Szczepan Bialek is nothing more than an offensive troll. It is best to ignore him as the physics newsgroups seem to have done. May he bask in his own stupidity! Or perhaps he and Art and the gays and the gay bashers could form their own "alt.troll" newsgroup. -- 73, Dr. Barry L. Ornitz WA4VZQ -- 73, Dr. Barry L. Ornitz WA4VZQ |
Dual-Z0 Stubs
Jim Kelley wrote:
For instance, standing waves consist of photons that cannot stand still. As opposed to consisting of photons that _can_ stand still? :-) Some people will argue that EM standing waves are actually standing still which implies that photons can stand still which they cannot. This is easy to see if one visualizes standing waves of light in free space as Hecht does in "Optics". There's no voltage or current to muddy the issue. One is forced to deal with photonic E-fields and H-fields in free space. It's the same old misconception. If net energy transfer is zero, some believe that means the energy carriers are not moving. But as Hecht says, it is the *profile* of the standing wave that doesn't move. The standing wave profile is a human abstraction and according to Hecht, standing waves do not deserve to be called waves at all: "They might better not be called waves at all, since they do not transport energy and momentum." "Standing waves" is a misnomer, i.e. they don't stand still and they do not meet the definition of "wave". On another newsgroup, I pointed out the above concept of EM waves just standing there is similar to the idea that since the number of northbound vehicles on the Golden Gate Bridge equal the number of southbound vehicles, there is no net traffic flow and therefore no maintenance of the bridge is required. -- 73, Cecil, IEEE, OOTC, http://www.w5dxp.com |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:58 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com