Light - solid, liquid or gas?
- Thread starter PsychoticEpisode
- Start date
how brave?
Light; solid, liquid or gas
Light appears to act like a gas.
Gases can exert pressure, but gases can't be placed under tension, because the attractive forces between gases molecules are smaller than their entropy. This allows pressure, but not tension. Photons have momentum and can exert pressure but you can't place light under tension.
Changes in space-time, can cause the wavelength to lengthen; red shift, but this is not photons under tension. This is more about lowering the pressure of its space-time containment; lowering gravitational pressure or GR. If we float a ballon high in the atmosphere, the lower external pressure causes an expansion.
Liquids are unique and not often used by physics in it's modeling. Liquids and solids can both be placed under tension or pressure. Liquids are unique in that they can be placed under pressure and tension, at the same time, and maintain steady state.
For example, atmospheric pressure pushing down on a glass of water, places liquid water under pressure impacting it boiling point. At the same time, the surface of the water in the glass forms surface tension, due to the incompatibility of the two phases in contact. Solids don't work that way, with only the pressure being felt. If the glass was full of ice, only pressure will be felt, since the gas-solid interface feels the pressure of the gas.
The liquid state has some unique properties since tension and pressure vectors can sort of cancel, in part, or in whole, thereby causing what would appear to be anomalies if a liquid phenomena was modeled as a gas or solid.
If we assumed photons where in the liquid state, one could get places in a space-time well where the red or blue shift is not adding properly; tension and pressure or red and blue shift. It would appear to be a type of reference in a reference effect. This might have practical use; liquified light.
Light appears to act like a gas.
Gases can exert pressure, but gases can't be placed under tension, because the attractive forces between gases molecules are smaller than their entropy. This allows pressure, but not tension. Photons have momentum and can exert pressure but you can't place light under tension.
Changes in space-time, can cause the wavelength to lengthen; red shift, but this is not photons under tension. This is more about lowering the pressure of its space-time containment; lowering gravitational pressure or GR. If we float a ballon high in the atmosphere, the lower external pressure causes an expansion.
Liquids are unique and not often used by physics in it's modeling. Liquids and solids can both be placed under tension or pressure. Liquids are unique in that they can be placed under pressure and tension, at the same time, and maintain steady state.
For example, atmospheric pressure pushing down on a glass of water, places liquid water under pressure impacting it boiling point. At the same time, the surface of the water in the glass forms surface tension, due to the incompatibility of the two phases in contact. Solids don't work that way, with only the pressure being felt. If the glass was full of ice, only pressure will be felt, since the gas-solid interface feels the pressure of the gas.
The liquid state has some unique properties since tension and pressure vectors can sort of cancel, in part, or in whole, thereby causing what would appear to be anomalies if a liquid phenomena was modeled as a gas or solid.
If we assumed photons where in the liquid state, one could get places in a space-time well where the red or blue shift is not adding properly; tension and pressure or red and blue shift. It would appear to be a type of reference in a reference effect. This might have practical use; liquified light.
Oh for the love of ... is there no moderating done on here anymore at all!! Solid, liquid and gas are states of matter, light is not matter it is energy. I mean WTF is going on with Sciforums????
Wellwishers philosophical claptrap, is what prompted me to start the science and philosophy thread and expressing the view "science is what we know: philosophy is what we dont know"
No earth was never flat, although before the advent of the scientific discipline, it was thought to be flat, in the minds of a community run by the church, and believing that us as God's supposed creations, were the center of the Universe.
Aeroplanes may have been thought of as impossible by a few, but out weighing that few, was imagination and inititiave working to make that impossibility real.
The photon model of light was envisaged to explain the results of experimental observations, and is still held today, despite your nonsense that it is gravity, and which now once again I see you have been banned for. Good, you actually deserve permanent banning as you appear to want to drag all back to the dark ages.
Hope you do better next time around.
He got banned? Finally.
People of Sciforums, rejoice. For as long as it lasts.
People of Sciforums, rejoice. For as long as it lasts.
I'm pushing for a permaban for the troll.
Every new post by him after a temporary ban enforces my opinion that I've seen him before, and his only quest in life is to piss people off anonymously, then snicker like some trogolodytic acneous oaf that survives on the mold and condensation in his mother's basement.
Or something like that.
Every new post by him after a temporary ban enforces my opinion that I've seen him before, and his only quest in life is to piss people off anonymously, then snicker like some trogolodytic acneous oaf that survives on the mold and condensation in his mother's basement.
Or something like that.
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
I'm pushing for a permaban for the troll.
Every new post by him after a temporary ban enforces my opinion that I've seen him before, and his only quest in life is to piss people off anonymously, then snicker like some trogolodytic acneous oaf that survives on the mold and condensation in his mother's basement.
Or something like that.
Agree 100% and I am doing the same.
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
I really really think it is better not to respond to jcc at all. It only encourages him. Just report him and talk to the rest to rest of us.
Agreed, but since he has been banned, he is unable to come back with the predicted nonsense.
I do though support that stand fully, once he gets back into the fold again.
My betting is nothing will have changed with regards to him though.
His return will be something like "why is gravity like soup in electric pasture of photons"?
Just report his ass.
Just report his ass.
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
Or why erectlon not fall into nucreus?
The last time this explained his reply was "QM is poop". Velly plofound.
I read that in my best Kim Jong-Il voice (from Team America) and I lol'ed.