The magical creation of the photon.

[Little Bang]

If the laser wave contains both positive and negative going components (which it does) wouldn't the only effect be to rotate the wave or polarize it?

[Erasmus00]

If the laser wave contains both positive and negative going components (which it does) wouldn't the only effect be to rotate the wave or polarize it?

 

If a magnetic field could deflect the laser, it would never hit the moon, so there would never be photons returning. Is that the question you are asking? I'm not sure I understand what is being asked.

-Will

[Little Bang]

If we look at a graph of an electromagnetic wave it depicts the wave as a sine wave with a wave length and an amplitude, the electric component. At ninety degrees to that they show the magnetic component in the same way. That implies that the electric component and the magnetic component each have a positive going and a negative going portion of the wave. So the question is what would a magnetic field do to the wave and if it does anything to the wave would we even be able detect what change had occurred?

 

Within the next seven days I will post a summation of all the proposals that I have made in this thread and will include my version of mass and charge.

[Little Bang]

One more assumption I make. That there was a beginning to the universe and that redshift is due to three factors, the motion of the source with respect to the observer, the gravity well the source is coming from and the distance from the observer.

[Erasmus00]

If we look at a graph of an electromagnetic wave it depicts the wave as a sine wave with a wave length and an amplitude, the electric component. At ninety degrees to that they show the magnetic component in the same way. That implies that the electric component and the magnetic component each have a positive going and a negative going portion of the wave. So the question is what would a magnetic field do to the wave and if it does anything to the wave would we even be able detect what change had occurred?

 

The electric wave is made up of both its electric and magnetic components. To determine which way a wave is traveling, put your pointer finger along the electric and your middle finger along the magnetic field. Your thumb points along the direction of travel. An outgoing wave packet shouldn't have any negative going portions.

-Will

[Little Bang]

Can someone help me understand this from wiki under electric field? " In quantum mechanics, disturbances in the electromagnetic fields are called photons "

[Little Bang]

I guess this question is to tough to answer?

[Erasmus00]

Can someone help me understand this from wiki under electric field? " In quantum mechanics, disturbances in the electromagnetic fields are called photons "

 

In quantum mechanics, nothing can be continuous, everything is quantized and comes in packets. The packets you get when you quantize the electromagnetic field are photons.

-Will

[Little Bang]

Wow, and all this time I thought I had a pretty good grasp of the English language. I didn't read all that in the statement. I could have sworn it meant that disturbances in electromagnetic fields are called photons. Funny, I wonder why they chose to leave all that extra stuff out.

[Erasmus00]

Wow, and all this time I thought I had a pretty good grasp of the English language. I didn't read all that in the statement. I could have sworn it meant that disturbances in electromagnetic fields are called photons. Funny, I wonder why they chose to leave all that extra stuff out.

 

Note the beginning of the sentence "in quantum mechanics", this is the rug under which all the dirty details are swept. Also, you could consider moving away from wikipedia and getting an actual textbook which would certainly clear up a lot of the confusion that creeps into popular accounts.

-Will

[DiscovererOfNewKnowledge]

I have a 6 dimensional theory as to how photons get created.

 

Take a sine wavelength.... Rip it in half until you get to the x axis then tear along the x axis in both directions then fold it up into a little packet----- that packet is a dS of space and is the way in which photons have both particle and wave duality.

 

When the photon is in wave form, it is traveling. When it is in packet form, it has folded up in order to knock a certain electron out of orbit.

 

WHAT DO YOU THINK??????!!!!! Am I right, Am I right?

[maddog]

BTW virtual particles have never been detected directly because the moment you detect them they are not virtual. :naughty:

 

I completely agree -- by definition.

 

maddog

[maddog]

The way an electron produces a photon when it changes energy levels makes logical sense. Does the standard model explain how this change in level creates a wave form that has both electric and magnetic components?

You referring to Standard Model which is Not relevant here. As Qfwfq said

earlier it is the Schoedinger equation that is in explaining when a photon is

either absorbed or emitted by an electron, in particular when orbiting an

an atom. For the moment, I will consider a nonrelativistic case.

 

For absorption the before energy of the electron is added with the energy of

the photon. The after energy being higher or even excited to become a free

electron. For emission the opposite is so with the higher energy level or free

and ending with the lost energy (electron goes to a lower energy level). This

amount of energy lost in the electron becomes the energy of the photon

which determines the wavelength = frequency of the photon.

 

Second by definition and demonstrated by Maxwells equations the photon

is the expression of EM waves which includes both Electric and Magnetic

potentials. A photon IS Electromagnetic Radiation in a dualistic sense.

Duality includes both particles and waves simultaneously. Both methods

work. See as a waveform is both Electric and Magnetic. A photon is just

a quantized packet of the waveform to behave globally as a particle and is

considered as such.

 

maddog

[maddog]

In the event that I describe please name all stable particles(at least 24 hours) that remain after the collision.

For your 2p- + p interaction (specifically upto 24 hr later) would require

knowing "Exactly" boundary condition at the initial (before interaction).

In particular what are the their p (momentum) and r (position) vectors for all

particles (before). You mention an arrangement as below (equidistant)

 

p- p p-

 

In general QCD (Quantum Chromodynamics) would be needed to work the

resultant products as you are dealing with the strong force which is

determined by the group SU(2) x SU(3).

If I were to simplify the result as much as possible by setting all BC to 0, I

can then just think of what the proton (p) and antiproton (p-) are composed

of ->

 

p = 2/3 + 2/3 + ( - 1/3)

p- = (- 2/3) + (- 2/3) + 1/3

 

{I am ignoring the gluons for the moment}

 

You would get a p(ea) soup --- [excuse the pun].

 

Even with the same input running this repeated would yield statistically

somewhat different results. Though you would at least get

two Gamma rays (photons) and various forms of energetic mesons.

Mesons are just combinations of two quarks (quark, antiquark) pair.

So to be more specific would need what I stated above more input

parameters.

 

... do you think the universe had a beginning?

As CraigD said -- depends what you mean by "universe". The Standard

Model starts to break somewhere before 10 e-20 seconds after. So before

is mostly conjecture. If what CraigD had said that an underlying fundementality

representation being the same before and after would be one thing.

Another point of view might be that since space and time were also created near the beginning then before becomes meaningless in the same

sense. This would preclude the thinking that Wheeler has speculated upon

of a Multiverse where all the "universe" come and go just like his notion of

Quantum Foam.

 

maddog

[Little Bang]

No one that I know of has ever attempted to give a three dimensional picture of an electromagnetic wave. If anyone is aware of one or more please tell me about it. I'm extremely interested in any such attempts.

[Little Bang]

Will, how does the standard model turn an up quark into a down quark like when fusion turns a proton into a neutron? The explosion that was the BB, what was it composed of?

[Essay]

No one that I know of has ever attempted to give a three dimensional picture of an electromagnetic wave. If anyone is aware of one or more please tell me about it. I'm extremely interested in any such attempts.

I'm fairly out of my depth after page 14, although I sure am intrigued by the 6D idea above (post #181); but this quoted post is close to the original question of this thread, so....

 

 

Thanks for a wonderful read, all of you posters....

===

 

 

"What we don't understand is certain aspects of quantum reality itself." -Qfwfq

...worthy of a bumper sticker, I think!

 

"The electron is sitting in space, surrounded by a cloud of virtual particles, constantly absorbing and emitting them in accordance with the uncertainty principle (...). When the electron is accelerated away, it will leave behind (one or more) virtual particles, which become real, and travel away as photons. Descriptions for hydrogen atoms work similarly- only is a bit more complicated due to the fact that there are more particles involved." -Erasmus

 

"However, given that our intellects evolved to deal with a certain scale (not too fast, not too small), I don't think it should be a deal breaker that our intuition fails at the quantum level." -Erasmus

 

... and posts #16-19 on virtual photons. Thanks

... and posts #24-25 on mass. Thanks maddog & CraigD

 

"A photon is a travelling warp in space." -Farsight!! (post#27)

Wow, now we're getting somewhere....

 

Little Bang posits:

"The photon (carrier of the electromagnetic force) interacts ( in some unknown way) with the electron and knocks it into a higher energy level, it then falls back to it’s original energy level and emits a photon with the same energy."

 

..."in some unknown way".... that's the question, isn't it!

 

& "I'm no sure what a comparison of the spectrum of hydrogen and deuterium would show but it's possible that it could prove or disprove my idea. The extra mass baggage of the neutron should cause a drastic change."

 

Yep, I think spectroscopy confirms this... ...or atomic models were contrived to explain the spectroscopic observations....===

 

...and up thru post #50 (-LB)!! Neat ideas! ...and the follow-ups on page 6.

 

Pyrotex, in #80, does a good job describing the magical gnat farts....

...but farted photons do have a color, eh?

 

...thanks "ask." I'll look at that link from post #83 later.

 

... and the mystery of charge....

 

...and even HydrogenBond (post# 97)weighs in with his usual unique and surprisingly insightful perspectives....

...and again, I'm not dissappointed; but I'll have to read that over and over!

...and Chad too (post #111)....

and thanks CraigD for keeping up with this.

 

*thru page 13. ;)

...what is the deal with charge, eh?

*page 14....

Stern-Gerlack!

Yikes!!!

... page 19.

 

.

.

.

I had hoped to offer my description of the magical creation of the photon, but after reading through the thread, it's been fairly well handled. Several posts came up with an image similar(?) to mine:

 

I see spacetime as an artifact, multiply overlayed on itself, as it is created by matter/energy fluxes [changes in the conformation of those other 8(?) dimensions].

Well, that's a meaningless piece of background, eh?

 

Ummm.

Spacetime needs to reorganize itself after a fluctuation in matter/energy. If an electron drops to a lower level, spacetime reorganizes to compensate for the change.

 

That reorganization of spacetime, or really the propagation of that change in spacetime, is what we perceive as a photon.

 

Thus "c" is the speed at which spacetime (or a change in spacetime) propagates.

 

That reorganization of spacetime carries (or is) the information about the original change (i.e., the electron dropping to a lower level).

 

Metaphorically, I think of a photon as a crack propagating thru spacetime (& with colorful fractal horizons radiating out from the 'crack'); but really it's more as if the photon is generating the spacetime [usually overlaying itself over (or intercalating itself within) other spacetime] as it propagates, so the image is kinda backwards.

 

Thanks Little Bang, for asking the question, ...hope this 'gnat fart' adds to the rainbow.

 

~ :eek:

 

p.s.

~~~~~

...and just what are these little gnats that I occasionally see, as I'm looking at the screen, flying around my head?

I sometimes think they're just "floaters," but I've acutally squashed one; ...so maybe "floaters" are just virtual gnats?

 

...or are the gnats just virtual ideas? Anyone else have these?

Thanks again....

~ ;)