Does what explain? What does a model of a photon, which is the transfer of energy, explain? It's an informational model (as a channel of some kind). Information doesn't have dimensions. Models explain things. Observed natural phenomena are observed because of these things. So having a model is a handy "mental reference"; for me, anyway. What's the noise all about? It isn't some earth-shattering concept. IT has been around for a while, you know.
Frud11, No more so than a bullet fired from a rifle in vacuum 'knows about' how far it has traveled, or how much farther it has to go. Do you think photons are a kind of sentient entity, something akin to Aristotle's state of entelechy? In reference to 'time' passing in the photons frame of reference: What evidence can you post that 'time' does not pass in the photon's frame of reference? I can some evidence that it does. First, consider the Shapiro delay. The Shapiro delay has been observed, measured and documented. Different photons travelling between the same two objects can take different amounts of time to complete their respective journeys. Photons can have their paths curved in vacuum by gravitational fields, which requires both a 'time' and a distance in their frame of reference. Photons will change their wavelength when falling into, or exiting, a gravitational field. How can a photon 'change' if it experiences no time in which to do so?
Not much. Except that light travels independently of wavelength -the thing we understand in terms of time. It has angular momentum or spin, which is conserved, like c is conserved, or invariant (light slowing down in a condensed medium is to do with vibrational modes and absorbance). Amplitude is invariant, or meaningless. Time passing, is not something photons ever see. They "see" an electron leave, and they "see" an equivalent electron arrive. Time doesn't come into it, and time doesn't not come into it (it's meaningless, or disjoint from the way it commutes, but frequency is meaningful). A bullet sees time, because it cools down, and loses some heat to the environment.
That's what I'm wondering. Your claim, that observatoin and experiment are inextricably linked (the purpose of this entire thred?) is based on your claim that by the act of observing a thing, that observation affects the thing. The example we've been using is that by observing a photon that is "reflected" from a tree, that observation affects the tree in some way. 1) What makes you think this actually happens? 2) What evidence do you have that this happens? 3) Why do you feel the need to create some model of a photon that is a "channel" or "connection" that allows this as-yet unobserved behavior? No noise there. Some really simple questions.
Because I like repeating myself: Information isn't information if it isn't "seen". Sight involves the excitation of neural cells; in humans, the cells respond to colour. Excitation is due to pigment molecules that are stereochemically altered (entropy), by the electrons that "receive" light, and change state. Change is the transfer of energy. Energy is conserved, or transitive. It "goes" from A to B. From A, implies that it is subtracted from A, A loses the energy. To B implies that it gets added to B, B gains the energy. The loss or gain of energy (even a little, tiny bit, like a yellow photon, e.g.), is an effect. P.S. A comment about objections to the way I've reflected earlier objections about the meaning of "connected", and the difficulty of describing transfer without invoking some notion of time, of "connected until", and "not disconnected until" which implies: "such time as". It's our time-dependent POV that's the actual "problem". Reality is the problem. It's full of duality: observers and observed. P.P.S. With double slit, no-slit, or single slit barriers: what happens to a "single" photon if it arrives at the barrier (the barrier is moved like a shutter, so it arrives, not the photon), before; an interval "close to" the expected arrival; and after, the point (of time) in its travel path? (hint: think about entangled photons and time-delaying one of them--entanglement doesn't not come into it either)
"Information isn't information if it isn't seen ". I'll remember that next time someone tells me it's going to rain; I'll ask for a picture.
I bet you don't. You won't remember until it rains, that someone said something about it. This is because, when someone said: "it's raining, or going to", you didn't see a mental image (of rain falling from grey clouds), right? You need a photo, or a diagram to refer to. 'Words aren't supposed to make you "see" anything. Hearing isn't "seeing", and blind people don't "see" a thing, either.' Well, not with their eyes, anyway...Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! P.S. A note about the use of quote marks (""): some of you may know that placing these things around a word in a sentence, means either that the word is being spoken (represents speech), or that its meaning is being implied. Implication means involvement. The meaning of a quoted word is involved, but not in a direct way--the quotes imply that meaning is indirect. Some people appear to have difficulty with this. I posted: 'Information isn't information if it isn't "seen" '; here "seen" implies the meaning of the visual sense, but of course, we see things all the time with our eyes closed, so most of us understand that this word has more than the "simple", direct sensory one. Ho hum.:m:
Yes it is. So is feeling something (especially if you're sightless). Smell and taste are at the lower end: you wouldn't be able to see much if smell and taste were all you could use to see with. P.S. note I didn't use quotes. P.P.S. Saying something like: "hearing isn't seeing", implies that sound doesn't result in any sort of image in a brain, which is rubbish. Or that whoever thinks it's not, obviously doesn't think beyond the literal meaning of "words".
Oops! That would be silly old me. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Thinking that "see" and "hear" and "smell" have different definitions. Pshaw.
Like I said, Mr. Semantic. People who overuse the quotation mark are always idiots, by the way. Overuse of said 'trick' is usually used by people trying to 'sell' you a load of 'horse shit'.
Yup. I think someone should arrange to get him a brain transplant - seriously! Wait - on second thought, all he really needs is a good education because his brain should be in excellent condition - since it hasn't ever been used yet.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
What does "overuse the quotation mark" mean? Is that some new linguistic terminology. Or did you make it up just now? Do you? Is that because they're different kinds of senses? So do you get to see at all "beyond the literal meaning" of the word "sense"? Or not. Do any of you understand what a word actually is?
With double slit, no-slit, or single slit barriers: what happens to a "single" photon if it arrives at the barrier (the barrier is moved like a shutter, so it arrives, not the photon), 1: before; 2: an interval "close to" the expected arrival; 3: after, the point (of time) in its travel path? A bit more stuff that might present the semantically challenged with a hurdle (that's a barrier of some kind, btw): Light becomes (real) information when it gets seen, or observed (measured, counted). Photons are observed by electrons. The environment, and every bit of matter in it, is an observer, like us. Conscious, or aware observers, have an ability to process observations and create a more stable form (a projection), as some kind of structure, which has or is information. Information has energy, and mass. Summary: Information has energy--information is energy. Photons don't travel along a channel, like a tube or a fiber--this is reflection and refraction, or interaction with condensed matter. Photons of light (energy), are a channel between two electrons. The individual message the channel carries is from the alphabet of frequency. Each channel (always) has a frequency message. The transfer is a change in momentum between two electrons: an interaction. The message arrives (and leaves) randomly in the natural world (but we can direct a single photon), and is independent of time/distance, and dependent on wavelength, or frequency. Photons "arrive" unitarily, independently of the number of oscillations they have made. The channel, or connection, appears to have a length (to us).
Your notion is predicated on the notion that he has a brain. I suggest you think again. """"""""""""""""""""
Modulation is what happens when a wave carries something (other than the traveling wave itself), or it carries another wave, or frequency, as a superposition. A boat or any object that floats will "feel" a wave. Nearer shore, where there is less medium (water), the waves get "bigger", and a boat will experience more vertical modulation; a surfer gets modulated (carried) by an ocean wave, due to surface tension and gravity. Ocean waves carry momentum, the medium is not modulated horizontally by the waves. In a channel, like a river or a stream that carries water, there is the formation (geological, or structural) that carries something: water, or momentum (and anything less dense, like an empty bottle, or a bit of wood). As well as the medium (the geological channel), there is information--water, and whatever it modulates. Water is also a medium that carries waves (of momentum). Modulation is entrainment; entrainment is also relaxation, or equilibrium (only possible in a closed "system"). Entanglement is entrainment or modulation, of quantised states of matter and energy.
Since you internet-caf types seem to have no "informative" comments here, I'll inform myself of the following catch-up with the OP: Just while you all go and get another cup of jive, that is. Channels, or connections, are a fairly fundamental kind of notion. We even say that heat, or electric current, flows, like a liquid of some kind. Liquids can have all kinds of properties, and different kinds of liquids can have different surface interactions. But channels are all over the place. If a water pipe isn't a channel, I don't know what channels is. We tend to think about water when we think about something flowing or moving, teleporting through time, as it were, from one end to another. A direction, like a current or tide. P.S. if you don't think photons (energy transfer or commutation) are a channel, try google with some combination of these: "channel photon time interaction observe measure state information physical"
