Active Photon Is Against Special Relativity.

[exchemist]

I read it but this will not solve problem raised by above & many similar experiments. For example, if we consider electron as some particle  & consider its spin then velocity of surface of electron increases beyond C for rest observer. This is reason to consider spin of elementary particle as its intrinsic property.

 

but consider that if 1st experiment is true then photon is a revolving cloud of charges moving with linear velocity c then what will be velocity of charge cloud. It will be definitely more than c as revolving velocity get added to c.

In 2nd experiment, there are no one but two photons moving back to back & interacting with each other to form molecule. Is there some distance between both or  they are overlapping because distance between them get contract to zero for all observer at rest.

 

Just consider any system moving with velocity C then it must be dead horse as time stops in that system for rest observer.

Active photon is not possible in SR.

Let's deal with one issue at a time, shall we? I will number the points in my response, to make it easier to follow any ensuing discussion.

 

1) Regarding the "length" of the photon, which was your first original point, and was the one I was trying to address, the explanation I linked to shows why it is incorrect to try to use the concept of Lorentz contraction for something which has no rest length. OK? So that's one issue dealt with.

 

2) Now the electron: the first thing we need to agree on is that what we loosely call "spin" of the electron is not like a little ball spinning. If you read any text on quantum mechanics you will find, I think, that this is made very clear indeed. The electron is found to have intrinsic angular momentum, resulting in a magnetic moment: this is an observed fact, of course. I think this is what you also are saying, but would like make sure we are on the same page. Is that OK?

 

3) Next, your idea that the photon is a "revolving cloud of charges moving with linear velocity c". It is no such thing. Again, you can easily research in standard texts what a photon is. To summarise, it is an oscillating (not revolving)  disturbance in the electric and magnetic fields, in which the oscillations are transverse to the direction of propagation. Since the oscillations are at right angles to the propagation, nothing is required exceed c, at any point. It seems to me that once this is understood, your problem disappears.  

 

4) Lastly, I do not understand at all your reference to the 2nd experiment. Photons do not form molecules. Molecules are made of atoms, not photons.  

[A-wal]

Also angular velocity has nothing to do with special relativity. Turn 360 degrees on the spot, the vast majority of the universe just spun round you at many times the speed of light (that's actually a door to a whole other topic and a very deep rabbit hole but it's not relevant to this).

 

Special relativity only deals with linear velocity. Why, because velocity isn't really really the best way to look at it. A better way is that the distance between objects can't change at a faster rate than the speed of light. Everything stays the same distance away from you when you spin.

[333]

Thanks for let me back, I miss you guys a lot.

 

Light is not wave, put double slits in vacuum. there would be NO light wave interference. Why?

 

All waves are produced by matter in motion. Light wave is vibrating EM force moving in transparent matter/medium. All lights we see are EM force passing through air or water or glass. Matters are waving under force, therefore act as wave.

 

Put double slits in vacuum, light/vibrating EM force from light source is acting directly on the area behind the slits, there is no medium on the way to make wave, therefore no wave pattern can be found but 2 bright lines behind the slit.

 

Sun light on earth is vibrating EM force passing through air, it acts like wave. Light wave meets metal, transfer the vibrating force to free electrons to produce electron flow/current, that's the real mechanism of photoelectric effect. Not as Einstein thought photons transfer momentum to knock out electrons to produce current.

 

There is no photon, no transverse wave passing through space between light source and target, but those surface atoms share their vibrating EM force.  

 

All light double slits experiment are done in air. 

  

[OceanBreeze]

 

 

 

Light is not wave, put double slits in vacuum. there would be NO light wave interference.

 

 

 

All light double slits experiment are done in air. 

 

 

Do you have a source to support these assertions?

 

What effect do you suppose air has on light to cause the double slit experiment to fail?

[333]

Do you have a source to support these assertions?

 

What effect do you suppose air has on light to cause the double slit experiment to fail?

Did you watch the videos?

[maheshkhati]

Mr Exchemist, Now, I give answer to your points as per my sequence,  I take your last point first

 

1) I copy statement from 2nd paper "That makes these two photons behave like a molecule, and when they exit the medium they're much more likely to do so together than as single photon"

This is the statement of researcher. He call this pair of interacting photons as molecule as they bound together. This is not my statement.

 

Now, I take your 2nd point. 

2) I know, Every elementary particle has intrinsic spin. In my paper, I explain it how this happen. I just explain why we can not consider electron as revolving -ve charge cloud. I am not against your thought of intrinsic spin.

 

Now, I take your 3rd point.

3) Photon as revolving charge fields moving with velocity c in axial direction is experimental result of 1st experiment. 

You say that it is not revolving but oscillating. In both cases packet of electromagnetic field is moving with C & oscillating perpendicular to C (or revolving.)

 

Means, in both cases field has two velocities, one C & other revolving or oscillating perpendicular to C, then what will be resultant velocity of field, it must be more that c moving in diagonal direction. (This is also wrong because active photon is impossible as time slow down.)

 

Now, 1st point

4)If photon is some system moving with some velocity in observer reference frame then it must occupy some space in that reference frame to fill its presence. One of friend give me suggestion say, " Consider that in this reference frame photon is just point particle with zero length."

but now we come with photon pair (experiment 2) moving back to back, then what will happen a)for observer distance between both will disappear. or :cool: separation will be maintain as per rest observer result has indicating.

& length contraction will not get applied to moving photon pair.

 

5) Every moving system represent reference frame because if that will not represent frame then we can not consider relative velocity.

Edited December 1, 2016 by maheshkhati

[OceanBreeze]

 

 

 

Now, I take your 3rd point.

3) Photon as revolving charge fields moving with velocity c in axial direction is experimental result of 1st experiment. 

You say that it is not revolving but oscillating. In both cases packet of electromagnetic field is moving with C & oscillating perpendicular to C (or revolving.)

 

Means, in both cases field has two velocities, one C & other revolving or oscillating perpendicular to C, then what will be resultant velocity of field, it must be more that c moving in diagonal direction. (This is also wrong because active photon is impossible as time slow down.)

 

 

 

As for this point "it must be more that c moving in diagonal direction" that does not imply a violation of c as the ultimate velocity.

 

Any wave-front that is moving at c will have a phase velocity greater then c, when looked at diagonally, as inside a waveguide.

[exchemist]

Mr Exchemist, Now, I give answer to your points as per my sequence,  I take your last point first

 

1) I copy statement from 2nd paper "That makes these two photons behave like a molecule, and when they exit the medium they're much more likely to do so together than as single photon"

This is the statement of researcher. He call this pair of interacting photons as molecule as they bound together. This is not my statement.

 

Now, I take your 2nd point. 

2) I know, Every elementary particle has intrinsic spin. In my paper, I explain it how this happen. I just explain why we can not consider electron as revolving -ve charge cloud. I am not against your thought of intrinsic spin.

 

Now, I take your 3rd point.

3) Photon as revolving charge fields moving with velocity c in axial direction is experimental result of 1st experiment. 

You say that it is not revolving but oscillating. In both cases packet of electromagnetic field is moving with C & oscillating perpendicular to C (or revolving.)

 

Means, in both cases field has two velocities, one C & other revolving or oscillating perpendicular to C, then what will be resultant velocity of field, it must be more that c moving in diagonal direction. (This is also wrong because active photon is impossible as time slow down.)

 

Now, 1st point

4)If photon is some system moving with some velocity in observer reference frame then it must occupy some space in that reference frame to fill its presence. One of friend give me suggestion say, " Consider that in this reference frame photon is just point particle with zero length."

but now we come with photon pair (experiment 2) moving back to back, then what will happen a)for observer distance between both will disappear. or :cool: separation will be maintain as per rest observer result has indicating.

& length contraction will not get applied to moving photon pair.

 

5) Every moving system represent reference frame because if that will not represent frame then we can not consider relative velocity.

OK thanks I've read the Phys Org article. But it's not a molecule. It is just two photons, moving together through a medium that they are strongly coupled to. What keeps them together is the properties of the medium they are passing through, not the photons themselves. Calling it a "molecule" is just an attempt to grab the readers attention by saying something apparently outrageous. So I would not worry about that if I were you. It's media hype. In a somewhat similar way you get "Cooper pairs" of electron in superconducting solids. Again, this is due to the medium - the solid lattice - interacting with one electron and thus causing a second one to pair up with it. Somebody might call these "electronic molecules" in a magazine article, for dramatic effect, but they aren't really.

 

Re yr (2) I think we are in agreement. Intrinsic "spin" is just that and cannot be rationalised by mechanical analogies.

 

Re yr (3) Ocean Breeze has pointed out the need to be careful about what "speed" is being talked of, where waves are concerned. If you look up the terms "phase velocity" and "group velocity", you can find some interesting discussion of the two, how they apply in the case of light and what one needs to bear in mind when applying the concept of "c" being an absolute speed limit. The Wiki articles on the subject include some rather helpful animations to illustrate the various velocities at work. 

 

Re yr(4) I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. Can you rephrase it, perhaps?

 

Re yr (5), yes sure, but I don't think anyone is disagreeing. The only thing is that something moving at light speed has no defined reference frame. See link for further discussion: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/photons-frame-of-reference.207488/    

[maheshkhati]

Sorry due to busy year end work, I have just visited to this discussion (in new year, I will be available regularly)

 

1)Mr Oceanbreeze, I may be wrong but I am not talking about Phase velocity.

 

because in vacuum both velocity are not more  than C but equivalent to C because

       Vp=wavelength/T   or   Vp = w/k & in vacuum w=c.k

    So, in vacuum, light velocity, phase velocity & group velocity are same i.e. C 

I am talking about actual velocity of vibrating electromagnetic field.

This field has two velocities, one in direction of C & other in vibrating perpendicular to C.

Means, actual velocity will be more than C in diagonal direction in vacuum. 

Correct me, if I am wrong about phase velocity.

 

2) Mr Exchemist, I will read your hyperlink in night & then put my thoughts. Thanks.

[OceanBreeze]

Sorry due to busy year end work, I have just visited to this discussion (in new year, I will be available regularly)

 

1)Mr Oceanbreeze, I may be wrong but I am not talking about Phase velocity.

 

because in vacuum both velocity are not more  than C but equivalent to C because

       Vp=wavelength/T   or   Vp = w/k & in vacuum w=c.k

    So, in vacuum, light velocity, phase velocity & group velocity are same i.e. C 

I am talking about actual velocity of vibrating electromagnetic field.

This field has two velocities, one in direction of C & other in vibrating perpendicular to C.

Means, actual velocity will be more than C in diagonal direction in vacuum. 

Correct me, if I am wrong about phase velocity.

 

2) Mr Exchemist, I will read your hyperlink in night & then put my thoughts. Thanks.

 

 

 

Yes, you are right in a vacuum where the wave front has travelled a sufficient distance outward from the source, so that it is essentially a straight line, the phase velocity Vp and Group velocity Vg are the same and both are c.

 

But your statement was: “Means, in both cases field has two velocities, one C & other revolving or oscillating perpendicular to C, then what will be resultant velocity of field, it must be more that c moving in diagonal direction. (This is also wrong because active photon is impossible as time slow down.)”

 

Perhaps I am misunderstanding you but, when you say “diagonal direction” this implies you have caused the wave front to be propagated diagonally through some medium such as a waveguide. Diagonal direction doesn’t make any sense in free space.

 

I can go through calculations to show how phase velocity can be greater than the group velocity, in a waveguide or other medium where the wave is moving diagonally, but maybe a simple demonstration will get the point across even better?

Consider a rotating drill bit as a photon with oscillating electromagnetic fields. Those fields are varying in phase according to the photon’s frequency of oscillation, (drill's frequency of rotation) as the photon translates through space at c. The group velocity through free space is the translational velocity and it is c.

 

The drill bit analogy works because the diameter of the bit corresponds to the larger side of the waveguide dimension. If the size was not constrained, you would not see any difference between phase velocity and group velocity as at the very center of the bit.

 

At the diagonal extent you can see the phase velocity must be greater than c, because the phase is changing at the outer ends of the drill bit even when the drill bit has zero translational velocity. (Of course, the photon never has zero translational velocity, but the point is, the phase velocity must be greater than the group velocity)

 

Normally, the phase velocity is of no importance as it does not carry any information. The drill bit moving forward does the work, just as the group velocity of the photons moving forward at c delivers the information.

 

Sorry, if the analogy is a poor one; analogies can only be taken so far but I hope you get the point (no pun intended)

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7Cz-gx5FuU

[maheshkhati]

To,  Mr Oceanbreeze, ( I can not called this as phase velocity because phase velocity is related to wave nature of light only. Phase velocity may be more than photon velocity in some event in the medium.)

 

I am specifically talking about moving particle nature of light which is consider to be vibrating electromagnetic field's bundle moving with velocity C.

---

 

I try to explain my thought by considering small event. 

 

Let, consider Mr X is on the platform & his friend is in the train. Friend is shaking her hand in the train cabin then what will Mr X observe.

 

Observation of Mr X :-  Mr X will observe that as velocity of train increases event of shaking hand will  slow down & as velocity of train will be closed to velocity of light, her hand movement will be to slow. Just consider if velocity of train will be C then hand shake of her friend will seize to exist.

 

                       Means, if S.R. is true then after considering velocity C of photon you can not consider vibrating field velocity of photon.  Photon cannot be active.

 

  Or  in any case, you can not consider any perpendicular motion to velocity C.

You have given good example of drill bit but if you move bit linearly with velocity C then you can not consider bit circular motion as require in experiment 1 result.

 

Thanks

 

To, Mr Exchemist, I will discuss your problem separately.

 

[maheshkhati]

Mr Exchemist,

 

1) I still copy the same statement from paper 2, 

 

"That makes these two photons behave like a molecule, and when they exit the medium they're much more likely to do so together than as single photon."

 

Mean's in this experiment after coming out from medium photons are still interacting with each other.

 

This is problem. Means, even both photons are moving with velocity C outside medium & moving back to back both are interacting.

 

Then what will be happen to space separated by both for rest observer. Will they get overlapped for rest observer?

 

 

2) When we talk about relative velocity. We talk about velocity between two frames. When we say that photon velocity with rest observer is C then it is velocity between frame associated with rest observer & frame associated with photon.

 

 

3) Now, you say that frame associated with photon is not defined. This is the problem always associated with quantum mechanics, as per uncertainty principle. You can not define the frame with any moving elementary particle but relativity gets applied to all elementary particles. So, it must be getting applied to photon also.

 

 

4) I have seen your link. It talks about observer moving with photon frame. I expect that observer moving with photon frame is impossible & can not be consider.

[maheshkhati]

China try to use quantum entangle for communication

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/china-shatters-ldquo-spooky-action-at-a-distance-rdquo-record-preps-for-quantum-internet/

This will prove Faster Than Light communication between two photon is possible.

This will prove Einstein's wrong. 

(when entangle breaks, one photon tells other photon that they are no longer in entangle state. This is also one type of FTL communication.)

[OceanBreeze]

China try to use quantum entangle for communication

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/china-shatters-ldquo-spooky-action-at-a-distance-rdquo-record-preps-for-quantum-internet/

This will prove Faster Than Light communication between two photon is possible.

This will prove Einstein's wrong. 

(when entangle breaks, one photon tells other photon that they are no longer in entangle state. This is also one type of FTL communication.)

 

I don't entirely understand what has been accomplished here. From what I gather, they are using quantum entanglement to instantaneously send an encryption key which will prevent a third party from hacking the communication, but the communication itself does not travel faster than light. But, if they are able to do this, why can't they just send the communication ftl?