SciContest! Why can't matter be made of photons?

I'm not sure which explanation you mean; much of what you say is right on track; I can't quite follow some of your reasoning though.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Have somebody already said spin? Photon has spin 1, and you cannot make particles with spin 1/2 with this.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

But I thought you implied that waves can be made into surfboards? This would imply that photon waves can be made into something with mass too, surely?

There is a connection; it is a valid argument - waves are waves, right?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Sure you can; just trap a photon into a stable pattern. Each half cycle is observed as an amplitude peak as the pattern completes. Two half cycles equal spin 1/2.

And how do we measure the spin 1 of the photon. We don't. It is theory.

 

Electrons can absorb and emit photons as they jump orbitals. So either photons do not have size as we know it or electrons can strech.

 

How do you do that? What's a stable pattern and why would it "trap" a photon?

 

How do you trap them, you need a lot of energy to do that.

What do you mean it is a theory; light has polarisations.

 

Yes, i mentioned spin a while back and gave an example, which mirrored Verns answer.

 

You're very persistent; but it is not a valid logical argument; I almost wish it was since you're so hooked on it

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

This Vern

 

You can keep saying it isn't a valid logical argument; I can keep saying it is both valid and logical.

What can you provide to back up your contention though? Seeing as how I've backed mine up with the odd example - like how you can't make anything with momentum, or even waves of momentum (which is all a wave is, travelling momentum because of surface tension).

 

See seminal papers by Pauli, and the following body of work.

 

You need just as much energy as it takes; as is observed all the time in particle accelerators. And I have never seen an experiment that can measure the spin properties of light. We know it is spin 1 because it needs to be that to satisfy theory.

 

Almost, but waves don't make sand - sand is the result of wave action on rocks and stuff.

Waves don't "make" anything - the sand exists already, in rocks that wave momentum converts; no new matter is created, right?

 

Entry #8, by temur. Good answer!

 

The trapping can be seen intuitively. Take this as an example.

A strange situation can arise if light is trapped inside a container. If light is trapped inside of a box with mirrors inside of it, so that it cannot escape, (now the mirrors would need to be cold enough so that the mirrors do not absorb the light-energy), the total momentum is said to be zero, but the energy is not - thus, the light can contribute a very small amount of mass to the box! Now, one can say that the light in the box must have mass to even add any mass to begin with - but actually, it is more accurate to say it contributes to the mass - but do not use this as some kind of justification that light indeed has mass. That is simply not true. A photon can decrease the invariant mass value of E/c^2 each time a system emits a photon... likewise, a system can increase its invariant mass by a value of E/c^2, if it absorbs a photon particle.

Now replace this box with rest mass, with a particle with rest mass, and you have the perfect example.

 

Well I don't know. One speculation is as good as another I guess. But there just needs to be some good solid way to make a neutrino out of a photon. I can't find one.

 

Let's recap:

Entry #1: from ashura

CptBork pointed out that ashura REALLY means rest mass.

Entry #2: from Diode - Man

Entry #3: from Steve100

Entry #4: from QuarkHead (in limerick form)

Entry #5: from melodicbard

Entry #6: from Vkothii. I think I missed this one before.

Entry #7: from Cyperium

Entry #8: from Janus

Entry #9: from...Vern?

Entry #10: from temur

 

There might be. We could argue that the photon energy is carried on from one state to another, like a quantum DNA. It could be answerable, by saying that neutrino's are created from tritium, and that the trituim itself comes from particles that are directly made from photon energy. I like it, because it does not beg the question you are asking.

 

Back in the days of Emanual Kent, Karl Popper, David Hume, and the like, we made rules of logic that when applied, could determine whether an argument could be valid. All I am saying is that your reasoning does not pass their tests of validity.

You can't extend ocean waves and surfboards to photons and electrons. It don't work. There's no logical connection.