Time can't exist without matter (mass) and motion

[sLeeping_bEauti]

No, I would say that photon' behaviour strictly depends by the space geometry and properties, and C is a limit given by the space (our space) as well.
So C=0 means there is no space for a photon to travel, but this is a nosense in our dimensions.

I believe that you can slow photons down using electromagnetic waves?
x

 

[Lakshya]

I believe that you can slow photons down using electromagnetic waves?
x

Hey photons are the force carriers of electromagnetic waves. They are one and the same thing. So, they can't stop each other.
BTW light can be stopped as relative to earth:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../17/waa117.xml

 

[sLeeping_bEauti]

Hey photons are the force carriers of electromagnetic waves. They are one and the same thing. So, they can't stop each other.
BTW light can be stopped as relative to earth:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../17/waa117.xml

Well i wasnt completely sure so I've asked all the teachers lol and they say that it can be done with some kind of magnetic but its so complicated to explain that they didnt, just that in some intances it actually can be done
xx

 

[cristo]

BTW light can be stopped as relative to earth:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../17/waa117.xml

Your link doesn't work, but a google search pulls up this (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/02/17/waa117.xml) which is what I think you meant to link to. Note that this does not mention a photon being at rest (which is impossible by definition) but instead talks about a beam of light instead-- the two things are subtly different. I know nothing about Bose-Einstein condensates, however, so hopefully someone else will be able to come along and answer questions on that (Zz perhaps?)

 

[Pippo]

I believe that you can slow photons down using electromagnetic waves?
x

Any distortion of the space/time may affect speed of light, but it's better to say that an electromagnetic, or gravitational, field can do it, even if you still measure "C" as a result of the space/time distortion.

 

[sLeeping_bEauti]

Ok thanks.
And we can say that photons don't exist without light and light doesn't exist without photons?

 

[krom]

"Ok thanks.
And we can say that photons don't exist without light and light doesn't exist without photons?"

We could say that, as they are both the same thing.

When you see a load of photons hitting something like your hand, they bounce off and your eye receives the information carried by the the reflected photons, without the photons we see no mass (the hand), and without the mass we see no photons. We call these waves of photons light.

 

[krom]

"Ok thanks.
And we can say that photons don't exist without light and light doesn't exist without photons?"

We could say that, as they are both the same thing.

When you see a load of photons hitting something like your hand, they bounce off and your eye receives the information carried by the the reflected photons, without the photons we see no mass (the hand), and without the mass we see no photons. We call these waves of photons light.

Think of it this way, the photon does not exist until it is light and when it reaches some mass it interacts with it in different ways depending on different factors. so light is a photon and a photon is light. I hope that sheds some photons on it.

 

[sLeeping_bEauti]

Think of it this way, the photon does not exist until it is light and when it reaches some mass it interacts with it in different ways depending on different factors. so light is a photon and a photon is light. I hope that sheds some photons on it.

lol...so if a photon doesn't exist until it is light, but light is structured with photons (right?) which makes which?...because if they both make each other, how do they come about in the first place?
xx

 

[krom]

These energy packets are called photons and its interaction with mass is what we call light, so there is no such thing as light as is, just the interaction of the photons with mass. that effect is broken down into different forms of interaction, and the light we see is only a small part of that.

So my point is this... a photon is light and light is a photon, but its only light when it interacts with mass again, until that, its a packet of energy, not even a particle, not a carrier of light, just pure energy, and its effect becomes clear when it meets another electron, and is bounced/ reflected/ or absorbed etc and we see this energy as light.

So light could be called a energy interaction with mass, from its birth to its final arrival in your eye.

Hey I'm not too clever, this is prob totally incorrect lol.
What do you think?.

You see a photon contains all the energy needed , and its interaction with the mass it reaches shows us this energy in different ways, depending on the electrons it meets, so the so called light streaming from the sun is not light at all, but pure energy, and its collisions with mass is what we call light, photons hitting mass and carrying the info to our eyes, and some going right through and out the back of your head and some not making it to your eye etc.

So there's no light without mass, just energy with nothing to interact with, add mass and things start to light up a little, as the photons start to interact with it.

So light is a photon's interaction with mass, gravity is the displacement of space by mass, so also effects the energy as it passes through or close by this mass space interaction.

Your going to tell me I'm wrong lol, but at the end of the day, that's why I'm here.

 

[sudhirking]

hey guys..im Sudhir and i am new to this and HI lakshya.im 14 years old! i really love astronomy and beyond SCIENCE and i know That the plaussible theory of everythin is string theory. however, due to the condridations of the mathemathics t hasnte been proven. i don't know the math behind the string theory, but do believe that i have the general ansewr to the theory of everyhitng. in fact it is simpler than the theory of relativity..

 

[Cuetek]

I havnt covered this bit yet but can you ever in any instance stop a photon moving?

katii x

Well, there is the question of what happens to a photon when it is re-absorbed. Is the photon still independently extant in the electron post-absorption? You can bring an electron to relative rest, so maybe the photon is resting too. (more probably pacing in it's cell.)

-Mikey

 

[Shankzzz]

Photons r never at rest and maybe tats y thet dnt have mass

 

[tasp77]

{If this needs it's own thread, no problemo}

It occurred to me while reading this thread to ask about 'when' a photon is generated.

Let's say we have a radio station, and it's frequency is one cycle per second. They have been on the air for 2 seconds. How far away has the radio signal propagated in that time?

 

[genius01]

Well right now I am not going to use the standard based model of space/time. By your statement you would say that every particle in the universe is vibrating at a certain frequency in order for time to exist it would need mass hence space/time. space/time's basis is on the ability of an object to be at motion, Newtonian mechanics state "Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it." But if this law is true it would then revoke the fact that motion is the basis of space/time. But einstein's theories were mainly based on a photon's speed being the cosmic limit. But i propose hypothetically, what if the cosmic limit is proportionate to the expansion of the universe and that it is just the constant so it would be Cosmic limit = k x rate of expansion (which k is the constant and is light in this case c ) . Our perception of time may not be accurate as we only experience time in a forwards motion. I also assume that there are tachyonic particles (When making light relative to the cosmic limit) as we live in a megaverse not a universe so i would assume they are particles faster than our universe's cosmic limit. If any flaw is noticed please make me aware as I am only 14 and i am just hypothesising.

 

[genius01]

Well your statement and references to E=mc^2 may be true but it doesn't mean or prove in any way that everything will vanish the object may just come to rest the speed of light may also not be the comic limit we assume einstein is correct but I am sure he may not be. if any particle is able to use a multidimensional shortcut it would still be considered faster than the speed of light and to a 4 dimensional space /time they may be creatures who are able to manipulate time as time is linear. I would assume that antimatter can oppose gravity or that anti matter may be able to move in reverse motion . If there are any flaws in my thoughts please show me as i am a novice only 14 :)