Speed of light confusion

  • Thread starter GENIERE
  • Start date
  • #26
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Integral - the fact that Einstein did not agree with some interpretations of QM does not mean his views should be discarded - or that they were unfounded...Einstein, unlike you and a lot of the others who post on these boards, continually re-thought things from a conceptual perspective -
Hey, I am just repeating a tidbit I picked up from a good TV show. Don't take it personal.

This is all off topic of this thread Please get back on topic.
  • #27
Originally posted by S = k log w
Are we talking about a photon, or about wave theory?
Are the photons electron free?

Please define "light".
Light has a frequency, a wave length. More accurately photons 'oscillate'. Think of a sine wave inside of a pipe.
The path of that photon 'draws' the sine wave. Light has some of the properties of both energy and of matter. When the electron is not propogating the sine wave it is, obviously, not at 'notsine'.
The pipe, if you will, is 'light'. Light is photons, waves, sine and notsine. The speed of light does not change. What may change is, for the same frequency, at the same energy, the ratio of sine to notsine for a series of photons.
  • #28
What is the EPR paradox?

Originally posted by FZ+
I'm guessing we are using a useful version of pass through where we do not insist that we have an infinite thickness of medium where nothing can pass through.

Anyways, a finite amount of lead can not completely block off light. Fire enough photons at it and eventually one will be lucky enough to get through.

Indeed. The most powerful one was the so-called EPR paradox. It was conducted. Einstein was shown to be wrong.

Ah well. And that's the end of that.

Photons and wave theory are two sides of the same coin. Physics usually mean "em radiation" when they say light.
  • #29
Einstein, Podeski and Rosen devised a thought experiment they believed would invalid the non-local character of light - in the late part of the last century tests were conducted by Alain Aspect and others in France that showed (ostensibly) that photons would be entangled in such a way that one could instantaneous affect the other at great separation distances. The conclusion of the physics community was that Einstein was wrong and Bohr was right - but more recently some aspects of those tests have been called into question. The point I try to get across when I post on these boards is that maybe everthing is not quite as well understood as we would like to believe