Light, matter, sound, and gravity.

[Locke%erasmus]

E=mc2

 

From what I know, this means Energy is equal to mass times the speed of light squared, or Energy is equal to mass at the speed of light squared.

 

Hypothetically, what if Energy was light squared? Then light would be energy, and photons would be energy particles. However, light also acts as a wave, which generally poses a serious problem when talking about light. The problem being, should light be treated as a particle or a wave? I think it should be both.

 

To take just a moment to talk about matter, let us first temporarily forget everything we know about how matter interacts with other matter, and gravity. Matter obviously affects other matter within its presence. Let us assume that matter, even the smallest amount possible, exerts force in the form of gravity throughout the universe, never ending, just being reduced by the distance from the matter itself until it is so negligible nothing can detect it. So, matter will always exert gravity on all other matter in the universe, regardless of distance. Therefore, matter, which we will assume is made up of particles, can in a sense "bond" with all other matter, in the sense that the movement of matter affects all other mass, however negligibly. Therefore, matter, which we assume is made up of particles, can act as a wave set off by the movement of other matter. This can be proved by the phenomena known as sound. Air (particles that have mass) is forced from the lungs, through the throat, and out the mouth. Sound has been described as a wave before. Of course, air particles colliding with other air particles will cause movement, but particles not necessarily hit by the others will be affected by the gravity of the air moving past, and the air acts on itself in a chain reaction that causes the air to resonate, producing sound. Thus, gravity "bonds" can cause waves to form.

 

In the traditional E=mc2, energy and matter are interchangeable according to the constant of the speed of light squared. So, energy and matter should have similarities, no? It was previously shown that matter can act as both a wave and a particle, because the particle moved in the wave affecting other particles to join the wave. The particles made up the wave. If people can accept this about matter, why not light (which we assumed was energy)? In experiments, the specifics of which I cannot remember at the moment, it was shown that photons, when completely in the absence of other photons, act as particles, like matter would move if completely removed from all other matter and the gravity from that matter. But when photons are introduced to each other, they immediately begin acting as a wave. But energy cannot, and should not, be affected by gravity, which is a property of matter. Then what can the bond be that connects the two or more photons? I propose "light bonds" that act much in the same way as gravity does for matter. All photons give off enoble (my personal term for the light bonds) which decreases in influence on other photons as the distance from the photon increases, but never disappears and always affects other photons, however negligibly. Thus, the photons will begin to behave as a wave made up of particles!

 

Therefore, my theory is that, while light may not be energy, it is particles acting as a wave in a much more visible way than matter does. Of course, if light was energy, photons would have to be unaffected by gravity. Black holes, it appears, shoots this assumption full of holes because not even light escapes from a black hole, even though I have read that light has no mass. Unless black holes were not only incredibly dense, but also such a high concentration of light bonds, that light bonds were folded, perhaps, on themselves between photons, and the photons were, in a sense, strangled by their own light bonds and the proximity of other photons. Then the light bonds would travel outward from the black hole and suck in all passing light by it individual photons. But because the light particles acting as a wave are going 299,792,458 meters per second, it has such momentum that the light curves before entering the black hole. If that were true, then photons could indeed have the desired mass of 0, and my theory would remain intact.

 

In any case, light cannot be matter. And if it is not energy, then light would be a new thing altogether. However, if Energy=light squared, like I said earlier, then light would be the square root of energy, or minor pure energy. (Of course, because light has no mass, Energy=mass of light squared would not make sense.)

 

If anybody sees anything wrong with my theory, please respond so that I can change my theory accordingly. Thank you.

[Qfwfq]

Einstein's 1905 publications may seem to say that light has a very central role in reality but this isn't quite so. It would be less confusing if we didn't always call c "the speed of light" because c isn't just the speed of light, it's a property of space-time. The speed of light in vacuo is c because light is massless, other massles things are just as much confined to having their speed equal to c. Einstein in 1905 wrote very phenomenologically based arguments, he was trying to clean up the conflict between Maxwell's electromagnetism and the principle of relativity, also not many other relevant things were known back then, so he used the phrase because he was basing arguments on the ansatz that light travels at the highest possible speed at which any cause may propagate.

 

Although most people have seen the famous equation E = m c^2 it isn't really the fundamental one of Lorentz-invariant mechanics. It can be viewed as a special case of:

 

E^2 - p^2 c^2 = m^2 c^4

 

This equation doesn't consider potential energy, E is often called the total energy and m c^2 is the rest energy since p = 0 means a speed of zero.

 

Strictly, c = 1 and a measurement of c is just a measurement of the ratio between units of length and units of time. We are so accustomed to using huge units of time and tiny units of length; one second is equal to three hundred thousand kilometres! Why use different units when you are simply measuring different directions in space-time?

[Tormod]

Good post, Q.

 

It is also a good idea to keep in mind that c is not only the speed of light but of all electromagnetic waves traveling in vacuum. The photon is the carrier of electromagnetic force, and as such doesn't have to be in the visible spectrum.

 

The wave-particle duality is no longer a controversy (although it was for a long time).

 

Read more at Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon

[Qfwfq]

...that c is not only the speed of light but of all electromagnetic waves traveling in vacuum.

and of anything massles! :(