View Single Post
 18th September 2014, 04:08 PM #27 wogoga Critical Thinker   Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 334 Originally Posted by Ziggurat in #26 First off, I'm not arguing that photons do not interact. … Secondly, in regards to aligning their propagation direction, we know that this cannot happen because it would violate momentum and/or energy conservation. The objection that propagation alignment of photons violates momentum and /or energy conservation is indeed serious. The bigger the changing angles, the more convincing the objection. Let us assume that two photons with each the same energy E are close to one another, and that the angle between their propagation directions is 120°. If they want to move in the same direction, then each photon has to change its direction by 60° into the new intermediate propagation direction. Because of symmetry, the two photons cannot exchange energy, and propagation speed is always c. Before propagation alignment, combined momentum in the new direction: 2 * E/c^2 * 0.5 c = E/cThe factor 0.5 is the result of cos 60°. After alignment, momentum in this new direction: 2 * E/c^2 * c = 2 E/cTherefore, combined momentum in the new direction would double during propagation alignment. This problem can be solved by a simple ad-hoc-hypothesis. During alignment, radiation (in the form of one or more photons) with energy 0.5 E is emitted in the direction opposite to the new propagation direction, and each of the original two photons loses 25% of its energy E. Then total momentum in the new direction will be again: 2 * 0.75 E/c – 0.5 E/c = E/cAs seen from two such photons: The attempt not to drift apart leads by momentum conservation to an attempt to reduce propagation speed. There are only two solutions: either to give up the attempt to align propagation direction, or to gain forward momentum by emitting radiation backwards.In any case, the momentum-compensation hypothesis for aligning photons implies: Overall redshift for the interacting photons Release of low-frequency radiation (lost in background) Cheers, Wolfgang Simple statistical behavior can be the result of complex individual behavior