The discussion revolves around the nature of light propagation, specifically whether light can be understood as a wave of particles (bullets) or purely as a wave. Participants explore concepts related to wave-particle duality, the behavior of light in different contexts, and the implications of these models on understanding light's interaction with matter and its propagation in space.
Participants express a mix of agreement and disagreement regarding the nature of light. While some acknowledge the wave-particle duality, others contest the appropriateness of visualizing light as particles. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing views on how best to conceptualize light's behavior.
Participants highlight limitations in understanding light propagation, including the dependence on definitions of particles and waves, and the challenges in reconciling classical and quantum perspectives. The discussion also touches on the implications of an expanding universe on light's behavior.
If you can even slightly believe it's possible; there just might exist a variable unaccounted for. Now how to measure it is the next question.jbriggs444 said:It takes an expert experimentalist to detect the increased reach of unobserved radiation.
How to measure radiation without measuring it? That is, indeed, a question.bdrobin519 said:If you can even slightly believe it's possible; there just might exist a variable unaccounted for. Now how to measure it is the next question.
A late comment about this but we need to be careful in the use of the word "wrong". Ray Optics assumes that those narrow beams have zero width and do not converge or diverge on themselves. If high school teachers covered themselves by qualifying everything they try to tell kids then they'd never get to the end of any Physics course. Just see how wide this thread has become, just because PF is trying to tie ups all the loose ends of this 'straightforward' tropic.lordoftheselands said:There is a high chance of you being right, but in High School teachers tell us to make exercices showing lines of little bullets reflecting on mirrors, is this wrong?
...within limits, of which you sometimes need to be aware. But yes - Asimov's The Relativity of Wrong should be required reading the first time any student encounters a science instructor introducing a better model.sophiecentaur said:Ray Optics works
OK then. Ray Optics works for Ray Optics problems.??Ibix said:...within limits, of which you sometimes need to be aware. But yes - Asimov's The Relativity of Wrong should be required reading the first time any student encounters a science instructor introducing a better model.