The Infinite! In Search of The Ultimate Truth.

[Matthew Ellard]

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

This concept also, makes more sense than photons/"packets" of electromagnetic energy traveling the vast distances of space on their own.

You have now reviewed the double slit photon experiment and discovered photons are indeed electromagnetic waves causing interference patterns.

That means

1) Your alternative claim that photons are little bouncing balls has been falsified by science.
2) You inability to replicate your claimed mathematics using the formula you provided yourself, also falsifies your claim,
3) That photon travel through gaps in ice molecule lattice structures falsifies your claim there is no such thing as gaps.

Your claim has now been falsified, three times, using science and mathematics and can now be thrown away as debunked.

[Cosmic Yak]

I stumbled on this video on YouTube, which seems quite relevant to this topic.
Short (20 minutes) talk on 'Possibilianism'- the idea that all we really know is how much we don't know about the universe, and that saying "I don't know" is actually an enormously valuable thing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AP_Q6JqFMf0

[Matthew Ellard]

Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak

....saying "I don't know" is actually an enormously valuable thing.

I used to watch Time Team, the UK archaeology show. When they found an object, that they didn't know what it was, they used to say "It's probably ritualistic". Then they stopped that nonsense and said "I don't know what it is" which meant other people kept researching the object.

[Craig4]

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

I'll start with this statement, since it was clearer to me:







..........

If I was to allocate 100 points to the above choices, I would go about like this:

I scratch of choice "C) I don't know", because that choice automatically nullifies completely my chances to get the correct answer.

I scratched off choice D) initially because it was nullified by Hawking, and because in essence it is the same with choice A), depending how you see it; the Universe was always there as part of the infinite in one form or another; such as a singularity, or was formed by particles and it exists within the Infinite); Since choice D) is in essence the same with choice A), it is nullified in itself since it reads: "D) None of the above, something else happened."

I could allocate an equal amount of 50% to the other two answers, that's why I said at least 30-40%. Now based simply on the fact that from nothing, nothing happens, but we do have a Universe after all, I would take all the points from choice B), and allocate them to choice A), giving it at least 70 - 80%; but I personally would give that choice 100% based on all the considerations I have referred to so far in this thread.

No seriously, explain how the correct answer isn't "I don't know" when you are applying probabilities as what the correct multiple choice answer is when on of the possibilities is "I don't know".

[arthwollipot]

In science, "I don't know" is a starting point for an investigation, not a finishing one.

[tazanastazio]

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

You have now reviewed the double slit photon experiment and discovered photons are indeed electromagnetic waves causing interference patterns.

That means

1) Your alternative claim that photons are little bouncing balls has been falsified by science.
2) You inability to replicate your claimed mathematics using the formula you provided yourself, also falsifies your claim,
3) That photon travel through gaps in ice molecule lattice structures falsifies your claim there is no such thing as gaps.

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

[color="Navy"] Name one of these magic particles and your evidence for these magic unknown particles.

You can give them any name you like, in similar fashion to scientists naming unknown, invisible, unobservant,undetectable particles such as:

Quarks; up, down, charm,strange,top,bottom. Leptons; Electron, Electron Neutrino, Muon, Muon Neutrino, Tau, Tau neutrino. Bosons; Photon, W boson, Z boson, Gluon, Higgs boson. Hypothetical particles; Graviton, Neutralino, Chargino, Photino, Higgsino, Gluino, Gravitino, Sleptons, Sneutrino, Squarks, Dual graviton, Graviscalar, Graviphoton, Axion, Axino, Saxion, Branon, Dilaton, Dilatino, X and Y bosons, W' and Z' bosons, Inflaton, Magnetic photon, Majoron, Mjorana fermion, Chameleon. Mirror particles; Magnetic monopole, Tachyon, Preons, Kaluza–Klein towers of particles. Composite particles; Hadrons, Baryons, Mesons. Atomic Nuclei. Quasiparticles; Phonons (vibrational modes in a crystal lattice),Excitons (bound states of an electron and a hole), Plasmons, Polaritons, Polarons, Magnons. Other; Accelerons, Anyons, Plektons, WIMPs, GIMPs, Pomerons, Skyrmions, Genons, Goldstone bosons, Goldstinos, Instantons, Dyons, Geons, Inflatons, Spurions, True muoniums, Dislons, Tardyons or Bradyons, Luxons, Tachyons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_particles

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

[color="Navy"] You seem totally unaware photons have travelled 5 billion years, from suns, through the vacuum of space to be seen on earth? You did at least know that right?

If anything, the double slit experiment agrees with my claim! How do you explain that light, behaves BOTH as a wave and particles during the double slit experiment? How do you explain that photons "travel" in a wavy fashion and not in a straight line, after they were emitted from the suns?

Here is my understanding of it:

As the photons are passed / being generated from particle to particle, the whole chain of motion appears as a wave; depending on the size of the particles involved in the passing of the photons the corresponding frequency and amplitude of the radiation. Depending on the type of energy package/photon being passed along, the energy level or color of the radiation.

When the photons pass through the slits, they occupy areas without a certain level of energy already accumulated. Now check this out; energy accumulated is visible as light to an observer, which means the effect of the energy is returned from particle to particle within the area of view of the observer. Within the central area in which photons had occupied, the most energy is generated, forming bumps of energy; that is why photons skip those areas, and by landing on areas without energy on them, they create the intermittent light phenomenon (strips of light). Remember; due to particles around the area of the bumps, the bumps being formed by the photons occupying that area, there is a range affected by the energy of the photons (which have formed the bumps); causing the photons to skip that range and create the shadow part of the interference phenomenon.

So light is not actually a wave, it behaves as such because the movement of particles passing along/generating a photon, causes light to appear as such. Whereas sound is a phenomenon of an action of particles pushing other particles; there is no third object passed along/generated, as is the case with light. Therefore the particles are pushed on to the double slit wall in a domino/wavy manner; when some particles are pushed through the double slits, they in turn push further particles regenerating the wave and creating the interference effect on the second surface. You can call sound an "actual" wave, and light a "relativistic" wave (as in the claim by scientists that photons have no mass and yet they do have "relativistic" mass - pun intended).

How "hilarious" do you find the actual claim by "bona fide" scientist that the photons seem to be aware that they are observed and that is why when they place detectors to see which slit the photons went through the interference pattern does not appear?

The detectors themselves interact with the photons through waves (interacting particles); and such interaction, absorption of the energy package perhaps by rays from the detectors/particles interacting with energy emitted from the detectors; nullifies the effect since the photons never actually land on the second surface while they are affected by the action of the detectors.

What is more, my particle interaction theory explains also magnetic fields; a polarized object also polarizes particles within a range which in turn polarize particles of visible objects within the range, causing what we understand as the phenomenon of magnetism. Perhaps smaller particles are easier to polarize and that is why magnets are slightly stronger in vacuum and in cold temperatures.

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

Your claim has now been falsified, three times, using science and mathematics and can now be thrown away as debunked.

You keep on claiming that, and I keep on proving you wrong.

[tazanastazio]

Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak

You say that no-one knows what happens at a sub-atomic level.....

...and then go on to say that you actually do know what happens between the gaps, which is that they get filled by 'smaller particles and energy'.

How do you know this? Some might point to this as another obvious contradiction in your thinking.

Then, you go on to say that, not only do you know what happens to something no-one can see, you also know how it happens:



You do the same thing again here:



How do you know this?

This what I do know Cosmic Yak:

What to us appears as a distance of a foot, a yard or a meter, can be divided infinitely into units. I know for sure that I am observing the observable reality and based on my observations I form patterns and attempt to imagine what is beyond the observable reality. I attempt to comprehend and further conceive the objective reality, realising that the whole "actual" reality will never be fully understood by a finite intelligence.

I realize that what I view as reality is in fact comprised of particles forming and deforming. Now I reach a point which leaves me with a single choice: Either "Nothing", or "Something" comprised the building blocks/ the forming particles of everything. I choose "something" because based on the patterns I formed from observing my observable reality, and realizing the particles that have actually formed it; I conclude that something cannot derive from nothing and if I have something, which we do, it can only derive from an infinite chain of formation-deformation and action-reaction. I also conclude that there cannot be any such thing as actual "nothing", because then we would not have the infinite formation - deformation, action-reaction phenomenon; because such a phenomenon would have to apply in all cases and aspects of formation-deformation. If there were gaps within the Infinite; there would need to be points/areas of beginning and areas of ending. Everything has to be formed from something else and be deformed/dissolved into something else; be disposed of somewhere. Which leads me to the conclusion, that nothing and the zero that symbolizes it, are the point/stage as far into the microcosm, as we can actually observe or imagine; the negative can also denote the point within the microcosm beyond what we cannot yet observe or imagine (depending on the range of observation set; we can say either that we are approaching a zero infinitely or negative infinity beyond that zero, since zero as I said before does not actually exist). At the end I reach the only conclusion that is available; there are no gaps, but Matter, Energy and yes Intelligence interchange forms extending infinitely within the microcosm and the macrocosm from every perspective. How do I know that? The other alternative of the existence of a "nothing" out of which something came to be, does not make sense because it is contradicted, defied and therefore debunked by any observable pattern within both our objective and subjective reality.

The Infinite is not a set. The Infinite has no size. There is no distance, no time, no movement, no dimensions and no gaps for the Infinite. The Infinite does not "exist" and it does "exist"; since existence is a set within the Infinite, and since the Infinite is not a set or a unit - it had no beginning and will never have any end, gaps or ending points. The Infinite is the "1" the (-), the (+), the (0) and the whole, the "everything" and the "nothing" all at any given, same, infinite minute instance. Energy, intelligence and matter are infinite; and the Infinite is all Energy, all Intelligence and all Matter.

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

Please directly answer Cosmic Yak's question.

This is the most direct answer I can give as a finite being, of a finite intelligence, on the subject of the Infinite.

I guess the choice is really whether it makes more sense to you, to believe that everything we can observe or imagine; came out of an absolute, total, dimensionless, utter nothing; or whether it extends from every perspective both inwards the Microcosm, and outwards the Macrocosm to Infinity.

[Craig4]

How does, "We don't know" not make sense to you in this context?

[tazanastazio]

Originally Posted by Craig4

How does, "We don't know" not make sense to you in this context?

Because we do know something Craig.

While I do not know what is within the infinite microcosm, beyond the smallest thing I can imagine, I do know that there cannot be gaps, pockets, dots or even infinite minute areas of nothing, because there is existence; and there could not be existence, if any such nothing actually did exist. Also while I cannot fathom the infinte macrocosm, I know that it could not be otherwise, there could not be an infinite nothing within which everything else lingered. Now I have to apply this concept to every form of existence, not only matter but also energy and intelligence.

Also while it is not accurate to say that "the Infinite exists" nor that the "Infinite does not exist", we know of existence because we live within it. The Infinite is simply that, the Infinite!

[Steve]

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

Because we do know something Craig.

While I do not know what is within the infinite microcosm, beyond the smallest thing I can imagine, I do know that there cannot be gaps, pockets, dots or even infinite minute areas of nothing, because there is existence; and there could not be existence, if any such nothing actually did exist. Also while I cannot fathom the infinte macrocosm, I know that it could not be otherwise, there could not be an infinite nothing within which everything else lingered. Now I have to apply this concept to every form of existence, not only matter but also energy and intelligence.

Also while it is not accurate to say that "the Infinite exists" nor that the "Infinite does not exist", we know of existence because we live within it. The Infinite is simply that, the Infinite!

That’s a lot of words to say “I don’t know”.

[Matthew Ellard]

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

You keep on claiming that, and I keep on proving you wrong.

No. You are delusional again. You directly stated that photons were not dual wave electromagnetic functions and claimed they were tiny particles bouncing off things.

I then told you to review the double slit photon experiment which proves photons are dual wave electromagnetic functions. That's why we can see the interference lines.

You ran away for three days. You are now pretending you forgot this.

[Matthew Ellard]

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

I do know that there cannot be gaps, pockets, dots or even infinite minute areas of nothing, because there is existence;

How do photons travels through water ice molecular latices unless there are gaps?

Did you forget again?

[Matthew Ellard]

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

If anything, the double slit experiment agrees with my claim!

No, it destroys your claim photons are little balls bouncing off particles. Explain the interference pattern in the experiment using you "God is infinity" claim

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

How do you explain that light, behaves BOTH as a wave and particles during the double slit experiment?

Quantum mechanics....which is what the whole experiment is about in the link I provided to you.

Did you know scientists in 2019 were able to obtain the same interference pattern with 2,000 atom molecules, further destroying your "God is Infinity" religious claim.

[Matthew Ellard]

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

So light is not actually a wave, it behaves as such because the movement of particles passing along a photon, causes light to appear as such.

You seem totally unaware that light (photon electromagnetic waves) have frequencies. Tell us how your "photons are little bouncing balls" claim allows the light waves to have frequencies?

Red light has a wavelength of ~700 nm, and a frequency of ~4.3*10¹⁴ Hz

Let me help you with this new and complex word.. "frequency"

Wave frequency is the number of waves that pass a fixed point in a given amount of time.
https://www.ck12.org/physics/wave-fr...equency-MS-PS/

[Matthew Ellard]

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

How "hilarious" do you find the actual claim by "bona fide" scientist that the photons seem to be aware that they are observed

No scientist says that. A electromagnetic wave collapses when it is measured. I have to interfere with the wave to test if it there. That's the whole point of quantum mechanics.

[Matthew Ellard]

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

What to us appears as a distance of a foot, a yard or a meter, can be divided infinitely into units.

No. You are pretending to forget Plank's constant again.

The Planck constant, or Planck's constant, is a physical constant that is the quantum of electromagnetic action, which relates the energy carried by a photon to its frequency. A photon's energy is equal to its frequency multiplied by the Planck constant..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_constant

This is because you deny photons (light waves) have frequency and religiously claim they are small little physical balls that bounce off things.

[tazanastazio]

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

You seem totally unaware that light (photon electromagnetic waves) have frequencies. Tell us how your "photons are little bouncing balls" claim allows the light waves to have frequencies?

Red light has a wavelength of ~700 nm, and a frequency of ~4.3*10¹⁴ Hz

Let me help you with this new and complex word.. "frequency"

Wave frequency is the number of waves that pass a fixed point in a given amount of time.
https://www.ck12.org/physics/wave-fr...equency-MS-PS/

I have already explained it here:

"As the photons are passed / being generated from particle to particle, the whole chain of motion appears as a wave; depending on the size of the particles involved in the passing of the photons the corresponding frequency and amplitude of the radiation. Depending on the type of energy package/photon being passed along, the energy level or color of the radiation."

[tazanastazio]

[quote=Matthew Ellard;12871163][color="Navy"]No scientist says that. A electromagnetic wave collapses

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

No scientist says that. A electromagnetic wave collapses when it is measured. I have to interfere with the wave to test if it there. That's the whole point of quantum mechanics.

That's what I said here:

"The detectors themselves interact with the photons through waves (interacting particles); and such interaction, absorption of the energy package perhaps by rays from the detectors/particles interacting with energy emitted from the detectors; nullifies the effect since the photons never actually land on the second surface while they are affected by the action of the detectors."

[tazanastazio]

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

No, it destroys your claim photons are little balls bouncing off particles. Explain the interference pattern in the experiment using you "God is infinity" claim
ly
I've already did that in my previous post; extensively, directly and as clear as possibly.

Quantum mechanics....which is what the whole experiment is about in the link I provided to you.

That's not an explanation; and the experiment did not provide an answer but simply proved that light even though it is made of photons/packages of energy, it behaves as a wave; as it was shown by the experiment, since it produces an Interference pattern. Leaving us with the question, "why?" I believe I answered that adequately.

Did you know scientists in 2019 were able to obtain the same interference pattern with 2,000 atom molecules, further destroying your "God is Infinity" religious claim.

You have a funny way of linking every experiment in the world with the conclusion that it "debunks" Infinitism. I could prove actually the opposite, namely that they validate infinitism instead; but it is really time consuming. It would help, if you'd always provided a brief yet concise and consitent to your statement, explanation.

Electrons, atoms and small molecules have been shown to behave as waves, but that does not mean they are. They are particles, not waves. They simply seem to behave as waves due to their interaction with each other.

You still haven't answered why photons do not "travel" from the "suns" in a straight line but in waves. Not only that, even though they "travel" as waves/rays from the sun, those rays are visible from every angle of view.

[Matthew Ellard]

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

I have already explained it here:

"As the photons are passed / being generated from particle to particle, the whole chain of motion appears as a wave

According to your "God is infinity" religion...... how can a particle on its own, appear as a wave.

Your claim makes no sense at all.

[Matthew Ellard]

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

You have a funny way of linking every experiment in the world with the conclusion that it "debunks" Infinitism.

That's because the actual real world experiments actually do that.

Your hilarious claim that photons are little balls bouncing off particles, would not cause wave interference patterns in the two slit photon experiment. The photon packets are waves.

You also have the hilarious claim that one photon particle can be a wave. How?

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

Electrons, atoms and small molecules have been shown to behave as waves, but that does not mean they are.

No. Only waves cause wave interference patterns.

[Matthew Ellard]

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

You still haven't answered why photons do not "travel" from the "suns" in a straight line but in waves.

You really are very very ignorant. "Red Shift" exists as stars recede away from earth due to wave doppler effect on photon light waves.

In physics, redshift is a phenomenon where electromagnetic radiation (such as light) from an object undergoes an increase in wavelength. Whether or not the radiation is visible, "redshift" means an increase in wavelength, equivalent to a decrease in wave frequency and photon energy, in accordance with, respectively, the wave and quantum theories of light.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshift

Don't post anymore nonsense until you have read this webpage, the basic experiments and how photon electromagnetic waves from distant stars are red shifted.

[tazanastazio]

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

According to your "God is infinity" religion...... how can a particle on its own, appear as a wave.

Your claim makes no sense at all.

When the double slit experiment was conducted with electrons, they did not land on the same areas; when collected with single electron detectors it showed that they too had formed the interference effect. The areas occupied by the electrons, as with the photons, due to interfering other particles (the existence of which you deny), form bumps/fields of influnce, causing the electrons that come later towards those areas, to skip them and form intermittent areas of concentration and create the "interference" effect.

The only purpose of the two slits on the first surface, is to concentrate the photons/electrons on the specific areas in the vicinity immediately infront of them on the second surface. If there were no other particles, there would be no fields of energy generated upon and through them, there would be no obstacle preventing the even spread of photons/electrons; we would not have the interference phenomenon.

A single photon is not a wave in itself, its movement from particle to particle together with the movement of the other photons in the chain is what we view as a wave.

Now check this out: when photons leave a star they are passed along from particle to particle; it is this movement which gives the appearance of a wave/ray beam. Now as this wave occurs it generates energy on particles in what would be a direct line o vision from every angle (by zone particle jump of a particle within a particle or what have you). Further other such waves (lesser energy of course) are generated, that is why that light ray would be visible in darkness (absence of any light source) from every angle of view. Some energy is lost and this is why the particular light ray would not have the same effect to an observer viewing the ray/wave of light from a position near the star or a position light years away.

Nove of the above would be the case if space was void of such smaller particles, the existence of which you deny.

Planck's constant isbased on shortest movement possible by photons as far as Planck could imagine/calculate, yet that distance can in turn be divided infinitely; after all, there are infinitely smaller particles, than the "energy package" we call a "photon."

[tazanastazio]

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

You really are very very ignorant. "Red Shift" exists as stars recede away from earth due to wave doppler effect on photon light waves.

In physics, redshift is a phenomenon where electromagnetic radiation (such as light) from an object undergoes an increase in wavelength. Whether or not the radiation is visible, "redshift" means an increase in wavelength, equivalent to a decrease in wave frequency and photon energy, in accordance with, respectively, the wave and quantum theories of light.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshift

Don't post anymore nonsense until you have read this webpage, the basic experiments and how photon electromagnetic waves from distant stars are red shifted.

Any difference in wavelength/frequency is precisely due to size/type of a interfering particles, if they did not exist as you claim, photons would be slingshot in a straight fashion, like a bullet or an arrow; no amplitude, no frequency no wavelength; none whatsoever, period.

[tazanastazio]

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

You really are very very ignorant. "Red Shift" exists as stars recede away from earth due to wave doppler effect on photon light waves.

In physics, redshift is a phenomenon where electromagnetic radiation (such as light) from an object undergoes an increase in wavelength. Whether or not the radiation is visible, "redshift" means an increase in wavelength, equivalent to a decrease in wave frequency and photon energy, in accordance with, respectively, the wave and quantum theories of light.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshift

Don't post anymore nonsense until you have read this webpage, the basic experiments and how photon electromagnetic waves from distant stars are red shifted.

Just because you disagree with me, does not mean you are correct. Here's the proof:

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

No. Only waves cause wave interference patterns.

"Other atomic-scale entities, such as electrons, are found to exhibit the same behavior when fired towards a double slit...The experiment can be done with entities much larger than electrons and photons, although it becomes more difficult as size increases."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doub...iment#Overview


"Wave-particle duality has been observed with electrons, atoms and small molecules."

https://physicsworld.com/a/wave-part...-60-molecules/

'Researchers have sent molecules containing either 58 or 114 atoms through the so-called "double-slit experiment," showing that they cause an interference pattern that can only be explained if the particles act like waves of water, rather than tiny marbles.'

https://www.livescience.com/19268-qu...molecules.html

[Matthew Ellard]

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

When the double slit experiment was conducted with electrons, they did not land on the same areas.

That's right because when the split electron waves hits the screen the wave is measured by hitting the screen. That's why you get wave interference patterns as the split wave forms interfere with each other.

Are you saying you didn't even understand that?

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

...due to interfering other particles.

No. The photon's electromagnetic wave frequency causes the interference patterns.

Your hilarious "God is infinity" religion only has individual particles. So how do the individual particles know what the other particle' frequency is?

How can one particle have a wave frequency.

You simply don't have a clue what any of these words mean.

[Matthew Ellard]

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

when photons leave a star they are passed along from particle to particle

There are no particles in the vacuum between stars.

According to your hilarious claim individual particles would slow down as they hit "magic space particles" and there would not be a consistent frequency across the entire light wave.

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

; it is this movement which gives the appearance of a wave/ray beam.

The cones in your eye evolved to particular sizes to pick up specific light wave frequencies.

Are you really saying you don't know how a colour TV works?

Go away and read about how cones in eyes receive electromagnetic light frequencies instead of embarrassing yourself in public.

[tazanastazio]

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

That's right because when the split electron waves hits the screen the wave is measured by hitting the screen. That's why you get wave interference patterns as the split wave forms interfere with each other.

Are you saying you didn't even understand that?

No. The photon's electromagnetic wave frequency causes the interference patterns.

Your hilarious "God is infinity" religion only has individual particles. So how do the individual particles know what the other particle' frequency is?

How can one particle have a wave frequency.

You simply don't have a clue what any of these words mean.

No what I said is the photon affects particles in a chain manner you call electromagnetic wave frequency.

[Matthew Ellard]

tazanastazio doesn't understand red shift

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

Any difference in wavelength/frequency is precisely due to size/type of a interfering particles

No, that is just stupid. the redshift is the same across the entire light wave.

According to your hilarious "God is infinity" religion, individual "photon particles" would be slowed at different rates as they hit other "magic particles" and thus there would be a random frequency. There isn't.

[Matthew Ellard]

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

"Other atomic-scale entities, such as electrons, are found to exhibit the same behavior when fired towards a double slit...The experiment can be done with entities much larger than electrons and photons, although it becomes more difficult as size increases."

That's right and the largest molecule wave form contained 2,000 atoms in 2019. This same experiment is being discussed in the other thread.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...338655&page=39

That is exactly proof of quantum mechanics and eliminates your ridiculous claim that photons, electrons and atoms are "little balls that bounce off each other."

[Matthew Ellard]

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

No what I said is the photon affects particles in a chain manner you call electromagnetic wave frequency.

How can one particle maintain a set frequency bouncing off other particles.

Can you see how hilarious your religious claim is?

[tazanastazio]

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

How can one particle maintain a set frequency bouncing off other particles.

Can you see how hilarious your religious claim is?

I didn't say they "bounced", I said they were passed along (they are spherical particles afterall, not solid mirrors), if they had bounced they would have changed course; I also said as they were passed along, they also generated other chain action to particles, causing further particle jumps within them, or lossing energy which was also passed along fron particle to particle; that is why ever photon has its own "electromagnetic" effect and causes its own wave (chain movement from particle to particle); and that is why a beam of light/wave (chain movement of photons), in a sense every photon, can be observed simultaneously from every angle of view, in utter darkness.

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

tazanastazio doesn't understand red shift
No, that is just stupid. the redshift is the same across the entire light wave.

According to your hilarious "God is infinity" religion, individual "photon particles" would be slowed at different rates as they hit other "magic particles" and thus there would be a random frequency. There isn't.

Where exactly within the vast distances of space did you measure, to compare the variety of particles in between and therefore the change in frequency and amplitude?

When are you going to answer why the photons travel in a wavy fashion and not in a straight line, after they had been slingshot from the suns, with energy enormous enough to transverse billions of light years of distances through an "empty" space; why do the travel like eels and not instead like bullets, arrows or even slingshot pebbles?

[Matthew Ellard]

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

Where exactly within the vast distances of space did you measure, to compare the variety of particles in between and therefore the change in frequency and amplitude?

You really aren't getting basic physics.

1) There are no particles in a vacuum in space.
2) The entire light wave is red-shifted across the entire wave.
3) If there were bouncing "photon balls" for photons, as your religion claims, different balls would have paths, hit different particles and there would be no consistent frequency.
4) Our eyes have evolved cones that have a particular size to match the light wave frequency.

Try reading this really really basic summary

Eye Cone cells
Cone cells, or cones, are photoreceptor cells in the retinas of vertebrate eyes (e.g. the human eye). They respond differently to light of different wavelengths,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cone_cell

Are you now denying eyes have cone cells?

[Matthew Ellard]

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

I didn't say they "bounced", I said they were passed along, if they had bounced they would have changed course

How does an electron "pass along" a photon if all electrons are spinning at different orbits?

You also seem to deny the existence of polarised light (Yep....sunglasses) where the light wave is filtered into discrete angles.

Try reading this really really basic explanation.

How Stuff Works / Polarization
A polarized filter passes only the light that does not match its orientation.
Only the part of the light wave that is not aligned with the slots in the filter can pass through. Everything else is absorbed. The light coming through the filter is considered polarized.
https://science.howstuffworks.com/in.../sunglass6.htm

[tazanastazio]

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

How does an electron "pass along" a photon if all electrons are spinning at different orbits?

You also seem to deny the existence of polarised light (Yep....sunglasses) where the light wave is filtered into discrete angles.

Try reading this really really basic explanation.

How Stuff Works / Polarization
A polarized filter passes only the light that does not match its orientation.
Only the part of the light wave that is not aligned with the slots in the filter can pass through. Everything else is absorbed. The light coming through the filter is considered polarized.
https://science.howstuffworks.com/in.../sunglass6.htm

They are spherical fluid particles, not solid mirror-like surfaces. As photons are shot from the light sources (suns) with enormous energy the pass through them in a wave motion (slide basically through them); particles help along the way or slightly interfere (friction/energy lost as heat/a newly generated electomagnetic light wave); light slides (not bounces) through in a wavy motion regardless.

Your turn to explain:

Why the photons travel in a wavy fashion and not in a straight line, after they had been slingshot from the suns, with energy enormous enough to transverse billions of light years of distances through an "empty" space; why do the travel like eels and not instead like bullets, arrows or even slingshot pebbles?

And what in the world have "polarized surfaces" that redirect the course of lightwaves, have anything to do with the above; or mirrors, or lenses in binoculars, or contact lenses for that matter.

[Matthew Ellard]

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

They (photons) are spherical fluid particles, not solid mirror-like surfaces. As photons are shot from the light sources (suns) with enormous energy the pass through them in a wave motion (slide basically through them); particles help along the way or slightly interfere (friction/energy lost as heat/a newly generated electomagnetic light wave); light slides (not bounces) through in a wavy motion regardless.

No. That is complete rubbish from start to finish.

1) Eyes evolved cones that are the exact size to absorb specific light wave frequencies, NOT little balls of photons as your religion claims. That is why you can't explain the different sizes of Red Blue Green cones in the eye.

2) Polarised glasses filter out light waves at angles by having angular filters. Your silly religion cannot explain how the angled slat filters in polaroid glasses filter out individual "photon balls"

3) Red shift is equal across the entire light waves being slowed by Doppler effect, Whereas your religion claims individual "photon balls" would all be slowed at different rates and thus not have a shared frequency, which isn't what happens in the real world.

4) Your religion claims the distance between stars is filled with an infinite number of particles, with no gaps meaning, no "photon balls" could get through anyway.

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

And what in the world have "polarized surfaces" that redirect the course of lightwaves,

They don't. The slat filters in polarised glass blocks out light waves at certain angles.

You have just informed everyone on the forum that you don't believe in Polaroid glasses.

[Matthew Ellard]

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

Why the photons travel in a wavy fashion and not in a straight line, after they had been slingshot from the suns, with energy enormous enough to transverse billions of light years of distances through an "empty" space; why do the travel like eels and not instead like bullets, arrows or even slingshot pebbles?

Because hydrogen fusion ( A sun) emits electromagnetic photon wave forms at a particular frequency. If the sun is moving away from the observer the light waves are red shifted.

You don't seem to know anything about how photons are emitted by changes in electron orbit as energy is added. Ever wonder why copper burns green?

"When you set Copper on fire, at the atomic level you're adding energy to the electrons, causing them to become excited. ... That energy is released in the form of a photon of a specific wavelength - in the case of copper, a wavelength that corresponds to the blue-green color that you see"

There are thousands of experiments proving all this and you simply refuse to accept all this evidence as it conflicts with your religious belief.

Explain this one minute video using your "photons are little balls claim"
A simple way of observing polarised glass
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AusZyCexBeI

[tazanastazio]

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

Because hydrogen fusion ( A sun) emits electromagnetic photon wave forms at a particular frequency. If the sun is moving away from the observer the light waves are red shifted.

That does not explain why light continues throughout the vastness of space to move in a wavy (eel like) motion; as opposed to a straight (bullet, arrow, slingshot pebble even) after it was actually slingshot with an astronomically enormous energy and force. You ask for direct answers, but this bullflaky one brings to mind the example of playing with a water hose (or a whip or a rope). You can set the water/whip/rope set to move in a wavy motion (since molecules of water/whip/rope are strung together), but photons are not strung/bound together; are they? Sure you can say as the sun moves away the whip is stretched affecting the amplitude/ frequency and wavelength, and shrunk as the sun moves closer; but we are not talking about one ray (on whip); but infinite going in all directions; how is it then that the Doppler effect is the same in all directions? It would make more sense to go with the slingshot photons theory, which are unattached to each other, and as they are passed on from particle to particle they appear as a wave of the corresponding frequency (Doppler effect still the same since the sun moved after the photons were shot out); as opposed to infinite vibrating sources on the surface of the sun causing photons to whip-wave their way through the vastness of space in all directions (the sun moves, what happens to those infinite hair like tentacles - move backwards with the universal winds/movement of the sun? Sure they are still not connected to the source throughout the length of their vast travel, but at least they are beamed in intervals while the source moves at high speeds through the Universe - which would cause inconsistency in the light emitted, and concentration of the rays to one side, like in the movement of a comet or a fire ball).

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

You don't seem to know anything about how photons are emitted by changes in electron orbit as energy is added. Ever wonder why copper burns green?

I have referred to electrons jumping energy levels before.

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard;12872098[I

"When you set Copper on fire, at the atomic level you're adding energy to the electrons, causing them to become excited. ... That energy is released in the form of a photon of a specific wavelength - in the case of copper, a wavelength that corresponds to the blue-green color that you see"[/i]

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

There are thousands of experiments proving all this and you simply refuse to accept all this evidence as it conflicts with your religious belief.

Nothing, of everything you have stated so far; correct, partially correct, or otherwise; conflicts or "debunks" Infinitism (which again is a philosophy not a religion).

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

1) Eyes evolved cones that are the exact size to absorb specific light wave frequencies, NOT little balls of photons as your religion claims. That is why you can't explain the different sizes of Red Blue Green cones in the eye.

We can get to evolution later; for now I wonder why the cells of our ancestors did not put on the drawing board, wings; since it seems we found them to be quite useful; and took us quite the effort and sacrifice to finally be able to fly.

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

Explain this one minute video using your "photons are little balls claim"
A simple way of observing polarised glass
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AusZyCexBeI

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

2) Polarised glasses filter out light waves at angles by having angular filters. Your silly religion cannot explain how the angled slat filters in polaroid glasses filter out individual "photon balls"

Molecular surfaces filtering the light-wave based on direction; but it has nothing to do with anything I have stated, because as I have already said, the type of wave depends on type of particles on the surface of the source forming it (energy level remaining after the original same photon, from the same source/sun, interacted with a surface (was absorbed by the surface) of particular particles; emitting energy left, which corresponds to particular energy level/frequency/amplitude/color. Also the particles involved in photons passing through/or being passed along by them) affect the changes in frequency/amplitude/ wave-length. Some photons will be set in a particular wavy motion, others in another. The molecular polarized surfaces along with the surface of water, absorb light-waves based on direction (some sunglasses absorb certain frequencies too, that is why color of vision is altered).

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

Because hydrogen fusion ( A sun) emits electromagnetic photon wave forms at a particular frequency. If the sun is moving away from the observer the light waves are red shifted.

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

3) Red shift is equal across the entire light waves being slowed by Doppler effect, Whereas your religion claims individual "photon balls" would all be slowed at different rates and thus not have a shared frequency, which isn't what happens in the real world.

If all the stars in the Universe move away from me at similar and astronomically vast distances, what ability would I have to discern any difference in frequency by any means; naked eye or otherwise?

Also as I have already mentioned, we see a particular color, because that particular energy level is emitted from the particular particles of the particular surface (loss of energy level leaving the remaining to be emitted, which corresponds to a particular color); that energy level is perhaps further passed on (rolls/slides through/is reflected/bounces) by particles corresponding to the given frequency/amplitude/energy level.

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

4) Your religion claims the distance between stars is filled with an infinite number of particles, with no gaps meaning, no "photon balls" could get through anyway.

The reason light makes it through despite particles being in the way is simply because those particles are not part of a solid wall, they are infinitely minute, and they comprise the fluid fabric of space, and what is called the void. The rest is energy. How do I know that? Again because simply there cannot be any absolute gaps (I've already explained why).

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

You have just informed everyone on the forum that you don't believe in Polaroid glasses.

No, I have a couple of pairs. They work great! I recommend them.

[Matthew Ellard]

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

That does not explain why light continues throughout the vastness of space to move in a wavy (eel like) motion

Light waves do not move like an "electric eel". They are electromagnetic waves emitted by an electron changing orbit. They can and do move in a straight line. So you have never heard of a laser, which is a light wave travelling in a straight line. ?

Do you know anything about science or the real world at all?

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

None of everything you have stated so far; correct, partially correct, or otherwise conflicts or "debunks" Infinitism (which again is a philosophy not a religion).

Every experiment I have shown you debunks your "God is infinities" religious nonsense. That's why you can find any holes in these well known experiments that prove visible light is an electromagnetic wave.

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

We can get to evolution later; for now I wonder why the cells of our ancestors did not put on the drawing board, wings; since it seems we found them to be quite useful; and took us quite the effort and sacrifice to finally be able to fly.

We didn't evolve from birds. We evolved from mammals. Birds evolved from dinosaurs.

You don't actually have a clue what evolution is, either, do you?

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

Molecular surfaces filtering the light-wave based on direction; but it has nothing to do with anything I have stated

Yes it does. If photons were little balls, as your religion claims, then Polaroid glasses would not filter out horizontal light waves. All the "little balls" would go through the slats regardless of what angle the slats were.

Are you saying you are still struggling with how Polaroid glasses work?

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

If all the stars in the Universe move away from me at similarly large distances, what ability would I have to discern any difference in frequency by any means; naked eye or otherwise.

Changing frequency in red shift due to Doppler effect. That how we know what stars are further away in our expanding universe .

Didn't you even know that?

Originally Posted by tazanastazio

The reason light makes it through despite particles being in the way is simply because those particles are not part of a solid wall, they are infinitely minute,

Two days ago you said there were no gaps. Now you are saying there are gaps. Your zany "God is infinities" religion is just a mess of conflicting religious claims.


Give up. A hamster knows more about basic science than you do.

[tazanastazio]

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

[color="Navy"] Light waves do not move like an "electric eel". They are electromagnetic waves emitted by an electron changing orbit. They can and do move in a straight line. So you have never heard of a laser, which is a light wave travelling in a straight line. ?

Nice picture; now perhaps you can explain why it is that you can see that green laser beam from all angles of view.

Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard

Give up. A hamster knows more about basic science than you do.

What benefit is scientific knowledge if one doesn't put good common sense to use?