Hi,
Somebody called me anti-einsteinist. But, I'm better einsteinist, then you. I understand not photon only. Everybody knows possibility to demonstrate photon, by light-mill. I know way to demonstrate anti-photon; rotation mill against coming light. Wish you bet?
I didn't make this experiment, meantime. It is not over; your chance overplay me is very high.
Can I make it? Is it here any person, be willing accept my goodwill?
Emil

Give this man a Nobelprize for confidence!

Are you using babelfish? :D

Emil Smejkal,

I stand corrected. You are not an (anti-einstein)-ist. For 2 reasons.

1. It is not that you love Einstein less but you love to find fault with Lord Eddington more.

Otherwise you would not like to skip all observations during subsequent solar eclipses and go back to year 1919 and inspect how poorly the lord carried out his exp.

2. It is not that you love Einstein less but you love to somehow fit the Boltzmann distribution into the photoelectric effect more.

Hi,
Problem in communication is, maybe, here: you are not able to make experiment, and you are not willing to see it as important. Why dear everneo, Vortex, or Anders don't say: Your mill will not whirl, I see. Why they will not bet?
To understand something means, be more able to explain it. It means ability to see new terms. To make new experiments. But my problem is, I can process experiments. Experiments are, by me, important. The mistake is my, maybe. All the mistakes are only my?
Emil

There is definately a communication problem here!!!

If somebody sey "Give this man a Nobelprize for confidence!", it means knowledge of this man are short and limited. Such gay should to bet with me, and lose his money. He is dastard, meantime.
Emil

I are GREAT. photons, PHOTONS! Purple monkey underwear, enististerster wrong! Damn mill, you are an gay bet. Money to lose, exspermment coming! WORKING! BIZAM!

Give Emil the Nobel Prize in literature instead. ;-)

Everneo,
if you have set of values, measured really for bending of light, please, send me it!

I a'm sure, I will can to admitt it, and sey my pardon (as well as you, hereto you could'nt it send).
Emil

I could to tell abroad design and secrecy of "anti-mill". But: Can you me promise, you then apologize me for your castigation?

What kind of translator are you using? :bugeye: I want to try translating some stuff into your language and see if you get a kick out of it like I am from your posts! :D

Language may in fact be a problem here and I think that should be respected rather than used as a battering ram.

Does anyone know and understand what Emil..., is attempting to say and prove and in that regard do you have a technical response?

I wonder how we might fare trying to communicate in his language?

PS: What is your primary language - That might help.

I tray it again.
First case is "Light-mill". Circular motion is depending on the light. Reason: Pressure of light.
Second case: Question: is it possible, to design "mill" with reverse rotation? With "pull" of light, instead of pressure?
Emil

Originally posted by Emil Smejkal
I tray it again.
First case is "Light-mill". Circular motion is depending on the light. Reason: Pressure of light.
Second case: Question: is it possible, to design "mill" with reverse rotation? With "pull" of light, instead of pressure?
Emil

Short answer to number 2 (If i am understanding ANY of it correctly)...No.

This "mill" you speak of will only turn because of the momentum transfered from the photon to the matter in which the mill is made. There is no actual push, it is a transfer from electromagnetic energy to kinetic energy.

I have heard of using lasers to manipulate VERY small amounts of matter (nanoscale). I'm not quite sure how this is done, but all a photon can do is transfer energy.

-AntonK

Emil:

Please post your explanation for your "reverse light mill" here.

I assume you mean a Hookes' radiometer which spins the "wrong" way.

If no explanation is forthcoming, this thread will be moved to the "Pseudoscience" forum.

YEAH,

YOU GO GIRLFRIEND.

Pick on the little Czech bloke who can't speak English

Huh? I think I'm the only one here actually looking at his content rather than his expression.

James R writes about explanation for "reverse light mill".

We have omnidirectional emitter of electromagnetic field, power P (for ex. electric bulb lamp)
This field has some volume density of energy. This density ? depends by distance r.
Force in field, generally, is gradient of this density.
Glass with refraction index n, in elmg field, acts non-homogeneity.
Non-homogeneity means the force F.
Refraction index greater then refraction index of environment (for ex. 1) means "pull" force; its direction is reverse, compared by case of reflection of light.
For continual rotation light have to be interrupted, apparently.

I wish, my explanation will bring me a friendship of one of you, not irritability of all of you.

Friendship is big value, for me. I wish, my future friend will mail me one good word. Maybe with mail address of web, where is set of values, measured by "repeator" of Eddington 1919.
Emil
P.S. Can you write detailed used equations?

What language do you usually speak emil? Perhaps someone here understands it and then you could post in your own language and someone here could translate.
I think it would work better than this.

Emil,

I don't understand. Can you show me the mathematics which supports what you say? Or perhaps give me an explanation of how you would construct a light mill which spins in the opposite direction than what we would normally expect.

James R,
If you writes "Can you show me the mathematics which supports what you say? Or perhaps give me an explanation of how you would construct a light mill which spins in the opposite direction than what we would normally expect.",
I am afraid, it's no possible write it in open text. Shall I to write it in MS WOrd? Or Excel?
The second: light mill which spins in the opposite direction. What is enough to describe? To write two sentency? Or picture, also? What shall I do as the first, and what as the second? If I am not able, be ready during one second, it is my defect?
Email

James R,
I add attachment with MS Word. Zipped. There are equals and values for our mill.
About design:
Thin bulb-lamp, with diameter about 7-8 mm only, and nominal value cca 50W (real power cca 20 W). Used in car, for example.
Four cubes from glass, in the circle, PI/2 each. Fixing similar, as each light-mill is fixed. Weight have to be similar little.
Emil

I don't like to criticize other people's English since the way I speak the few languages I claim is not particularly good. However, you seem here to misunderstand the words "experiment" and "construct". You said you could devise a "reverse light mill" that would experimentally prove your point. When you were challenged to do so, or at least to accurately describe how to construct the mechanism, you post a "Word" document that was supposed to be that description. When I down loaded and read it I found that there are a few formulas and then a declaration that this will work the way you say.

There is, in fact, no mention of "constructing" a mechanism. You have done nothing but repeat the claims that were challenged before.