🚀 go-pugleaf

On Apr 27, 12:46 pm, "Sue..." <suzysewns...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> On Apr 27, 1:36 pm, "G. L. Bradford" <glbra...@insightbb.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "Sue..." <suzysewns...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>
> >news:7b80e74b-3994-4c95-a080-7f1b92163ba7@v14g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> > On Apr 27, 12:28 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > [...]
>
> > << where epsilon_0 and mu_0 are physical constants which
> > can be evaluated by performing two simple experiments
> > which involve measuring the force of attraction between
> > two fixed charges and two fixed parallel current carrying
> > wires. According to the relativity principle, these experiments
> > must yield the same values for epsilon_0 and mu_0 in all
> > inertial frames. Thus, the speed of light must be the
> > same in all inertial frames. >>http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node108.html
>
> > [...]
>
> > > moment of emission).
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emission_theory
>
> > Sue...
>
> > > Pentcho Valev
>
> ========================
>
>
>
> >   Aside from the known speed and wavelength qualities of light, the 'photo
> > effect' must still be a part of light, having counter or negative dimension
>
> <<Modern view
>
> It has been shown that it is not necessary for light
> to be "quantized" to explain the photoelectric effect[8].
> The most common method employed by physicists to
> calculate the probability of an atom ejecting an
> electron relies on "Fermi's golden rule". Although based
> upon quantum mechanics, the method treats the incident
> light as an electromagnetic wave that causes an atom
> and its constituent electrons to transition from one
> energy state ("eigenstate") to another.
>
> While one can use the classical electromagnetic
> theory of light to describe the effect, one may also
> use the modern quantum theory of light to describe
> the photoelectric effect. However, the modern quantum
> theory of light is not a "particle model", as it does
> not always predict results which one would expect from
> a naïve "particle" interpretation. An example would be
> in the dependence on polarization with regard to the
> direction electrons are emitted, a phenomenon that has
> been considered useful in gathering polarization data
> from black holes and neutron stars.[9]. >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoelectric_effect#Modern_view
>
> <<The Nobel Committee avoids committing itself to
> the particle concept. Light-quanta or with modern
> terminology, photons, were explicitly mentioned in
> the reports on which the prize decision rested only
> in connection with emission and absorption processes.
> The Committee says that the most important application
> of Einstein's photoelectric law and also its most
> convincing confirmation has come from the use Bohr
> made of it in his theory of atoms, which explains a
> vast amount of spectroscopic data.>>http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/articles/ekspong/
>
> > (therefore, apparently, frozen dimension). Rounded off, c = (+/-)300,000
>
> Frozen What!
>
> Frozen sherbet is better.
>
>
>
>
>
> > where rest = 0....and there is no such thing as absolute rest (all rest is
> > therefore absolute (0)). Thus the Moon is observed to be approximately 1.3
> > light seconds from Earth ((-)1.3 seconds -there-then- from here-now (0)),
> > Alpha Centauri to be approximately 4.3 light years from Earth ((-)4.3 light
> > years -there-then- from here-now (0)), Andromeda approximately 2.3 million
> > years from Earth ((-)2.3 million years -there-then- from here-now (0)), and
> > so on.
>
> >   An oncoming traveler doing an actual relative velocity of 1c, relative to
> > the destination (0), transmits light at speed c, or (+)300,000kps absolute
> > to its own local rest (0). The transmission is received by the forward
> > observer (0) at the destination (0) doing transmission speed c.
>
> > 1) Where does the observer [position] the OBSERVED traveler in space? A
> > [constant] of half the distance the real-time traveler is from the observer.
>
> > 2) What [velocity] does the observer have for the OBSERVED traveler? 1/2c.
>
> > 3) What [time] does the observer have for the OBSERVED traveler? An OBSERVED
> > time (-) before the UNOBSERVED real-time (0) of the traveler (a.k.a. a
> > "retarded time" observed).
>
> > 4) If the traveler (doing 1c, relatively speaking) does not slow, at what
> > speed will it meet up with the observer? The OBSERVED 1/2c.
>
> The light propagation is independent of emitter and
> absorber's motion.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impedance_of_free_spacehttp://espg.sr.unh.edu/ism/what1.html
>
>
>
> > 5) How many dimensions?
>
> None frozen.
>
> << where epsilon_0 and mu_0 are physical constants which
> can be evaluated by performing two simple experiments
> which involve measuring the force of attraction between
> two fixed charges and two fixed parallel current carrying
> wires. According to the relativity principle, these experiments
> must yield the same values for epsilon_0 and mu_0 in all
> inertial frames. Thus, the speed of light must be the
> same in all inertial frames. >>http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node108.html
>
> Sue...
>
> See also:
> Classical Electromagnetism:
> An intermediate level coursehttp://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/lectures.html
>
> Visualizing Electricity and Magnetism at MIT "Light"http://web.mit.edu/8.02t/www/802TEAL3D/visualizations/light/index.htm
>
>
>
>
>
> > GLB
>
> > ===========================

Thanks, Sue. Great references.