|
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 |
From: Georges Metanomski <zg...@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 06:15:01 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Thurs, Oct 22 2009 9:15 pm
Subject: Re: [epistemology 10894] What is the nature of Light Quanta ?
--- On Thu, 10/22/09, socra...@bezeqint.net <socra...@bezeqint.net> wrote: > From: socra...@bezeqint.net <socra...@bezeqint.net> ============= > Subject: [epistemology 10894] What is the nature of Light Quanta ? > To: "Epistemology" <epistemology@googlegroups.com> > Date: Thursday, October 22, 2009, 1:24 PM > What is the nature of Light Quanta ? G: By thinking. If one does, it's childish to see that it's the simplest possible deduction from the empiric invariance of C. ============== S: > More than 100 years have passed when SRT was created ============== > but the discussions about it are still going on . G: Where? SR is classic old hat. Even GR is not discussed. Most discussions pertain to quantum physics, to QFT, Standard Model and unification. ============== S: > I suggest my own opinion about SRT (Light Quanta & =============== > Vacuum) > === . > One of the SRT laws says: G: SR does not deal with photons. They pertain to - and initialized - the quantum physics. Photons are observed by emission and absorbtion. What propagates is the other aspect of light - the wave. Electron waves and field aspects of all particles propagate at C. In that light I skip the rest. Georges. You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| |||||||||||||