-----------------
so???!!
is it individual single photons ??
not at all !!!
ATB
Y.Porat
---------------------------
>OK, but did each individual photon vibration actually move through
>space rather than being a stationary chain or link of quantum string
>reactions?
If a photon is emitted and then absorbed, from the POV of the photon
it is a force carrier transferring energy from the source system
to the destination system as an instantaneous event. (Regardless
of distance traveled or time elapsed as viewed by an observer.)
From the photon's perspective is has not moved through space,
nor did it exist for more than exactly one moment in time.
If a photon is emitted and not absorbed, some side effects can still be
observed. For example, when the Sun emits photos, even if they are
not absorbed, the Sun loses mass and this is observable gravitationally.
Steve
Then you must have an objective tangent or parallel side-view of an
individual photon for us?
Remember, this inquest is not about any stream or flow of photons.
Can we transmit or otherwise release one individual photon and
subsequently record it from a tangent or side view?
According to what we currently know how to measure, they do.
> This seems like another good 5th grade science project, because
> obviously most of us adults don't seem to have a clue what any
> individual photon that's sort of speak on the fly looks like.
We (verificationists) know what we can measure. That's pretty much
completely predictable (for EM) thanks to Maxwell et. al. starting us
on the road to Quantum Electrodynamics.
We can't model what an individual photon in flight "looks like" in
any sense other than predicting what we will detect if we stick some
hardware at a specific point in its path.
I'm not claiming QED is the Final Word. It isn't "reality"; it's a
*map* of reality. It's an amazingly accurate map, but it's still just
a map.
I see in another post you hypothesize about photons being handed off
between some "more fundamental" constituents of what sounds like an
Aether. What we call photons would then be mere emergent phenomena
associated with something on a level of detail our current map doesn't
represent.
But if all we can measure is the rate at which photons are handed
off, which corresponds one-to-one with the old-fangled speed of light,
what's the point? It's a "difference that makes no difference". You
don't want to watch a photon pass by, you want to watch individual
aetherons (whatever, just a name of convenience) change state as they
acquire and dispose of photons.
To detect the activity of aetherons requires qualifying and
quantifying *all* their properties, then figuring out how changes in
those properties might affect matter (instrumentation) at some
distance. This "actually" calls for a field theory like QED, only on a
finer scale. There are many so-called Quantum Aether Dynamics theories
out there but they aren't sufficiently predictive to be testable
(those that aren't outright crackpottery).
Can you suggest any specific properties of aetherons that would be
detectable at a distance, other than those involved in mediating
photons? If so, there ought to be a way to monitor them.
For starters, they shouldn't be able to decay. They can't have
"native" charge of any kind, as opposed to say electrons or quarks
which must hold certain kinds of charge. Spin maybe? Can aetherons
have spin, and how does it commute between them? Can aetherons be
entangled? Can we determine if aetheron A is handling a photon by
observing its entangled twin aetheron B at some distance?
Can they mutually interfere? Can they interfere with say neutrino
beams? Can we build a neutrino interferometer?
Mark L. Fergerson