...Do they? Are they too small or fast? If they are LIGHT particles, still, could they?
...That is all...
...That is all...
You must ask what is a shadow? It is the absence of light simply. So when a body casts a shadow, this means it is something interacting on a very small level with light particles. For a light particle to interact with another light particle, is not really going to cast a shadow for two reasons: a broad light where distinguishing the shadow part from another part would not exist. both sides of a photon is made of light, so no matter what side you hit light off another particle of light, the other side is still made of light. (That was a little hard to explain, if no one understands it, just say). Also, light does not cast a shadow from a single quanta of light. You cannot hit one photon off another particle and expect it to cast a shadow, one quanta of light does not make up a broad enough ray.
I don't believe that light interacts with other light.
It does, but only very weakly. I was going to originally say light does not interact with light but rather fall into the same quantum states because the equations describing them are symmetric... however, photons can interact, but only very weakly, so you need a lot of energy to do so. I can recite papers if you want. Sometimes you need a mediator, like an electron.
They are about 1 billionth the size of an atom, so they are VERY small, and dont always block light.
They aren't small... nor large. Photons are particles in the QFT sense (elementary
excitations of the EM field). They aren't 'particles' in the sense you seem to be
Even so, all particles are considered pointlike with no dimensions.
It's not very elluminating mind you. Just makes equations all the more simpler...
I apologize, I didn't realize you said photons, I thought you said Protons. Wow, actually this entire thread i thought was saying Protons...i must need new glasses...scratch my other stuff i said above.
Errr... no, that's not correct. They can be considered pointlike in MOMENTUM space,
meaning you can consider states arbitrarily close to an eigenstate of the momentum
operator. Most particles, in addition, have a position operator, so you can consider
states almost arbitrarily close to a position eigenstate (but never perfectly localised,
the particle's Compton wavelength giving you an lower limit). However, particles
with zero mass and spin higher than 1/2, like the photon, don't have a position
operator. Thus photons seem to be fundamentally nonlocalisable (though they
can be *aproximately* localisable).
I think he was referring to Photons in his posts. I think I have accidently derailed this post into a confusing mess lol. Everyone blame this guy!
Shouldn't crisscrossing 2 laser beams answer this question?
No, I am right.
Are you saying an electron has a structure of some sort? If you argue they don't then they must be pointlike. All particles are pointlike. They are not extended objects in spacetime according to theory, unlike the strings of string theory.
Agreeing with Oudeis. Particles are not singularities.
They have energy and energy in a point is a black hole.
Disagreeing with Oudeis. Light is a particle.
What gives light particle properties is that you will never measure half a photon's energy. The true definition of particle, which is just a word anyways.
An accelerator is even better. And we have made two photons interact, as I said before. Physicists in 1997 managed to hit light off each other in a high energy interaction using electrons as mediators.