Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de>
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: What is a photon
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2025 10:13:59 +0200
Lines: 61
Message-ID: <mb24q3Fsa2uU12@mid.individual.net>
References: <9af3e95b721801ec23446e0d70f081b3@www.novabbs.org>
 <%5W_P.1199819$lZjd.237071@fx05.ams4> <101hdi1$2104j$1@dont-email.me>
 <3fe4ff53feee25131897dec6bed26616@www.novabbs.com>
 <101mlhj$3v6bs$1@dont-email.me>
 <b3c79148a2a73e05267102dc02069b51@www.novabbs.org>
 <101pe06$qdb4$1@dont-email.me>
 <bf5db4fb77db2aa5d2d1d9ec07759e2d@www.novabbs.org>
 <man762F2uddU1@mid.individual.net>
 <7684219ed9fcb7ee269061c10326c92d@www.novabbs.org>
 <masienFtss3U2@mid.individual.net>
 <1rdrgdh.1myz65p1yygjrzN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
 <mav29hFda1gU3@mid.individual.net> <102f8cr$2rudm$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net OJjsBiP+lhDK3sqtoX57fgB/U40fKG6ds++0Oln/gwlYNkRmfG
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ZZOnVyZG88Lq4wfRCOH8FXQEnlU= sha256:WWT1OonYjKRx5uSiDDMW60sUZmpOY6oyVefVf56apRE=
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: de-DE
In-Reply-To: <102f8cr$2rudm$1@dont-email.me>

Am Donnerstag000012, 12.06.2025 um 21:11 schrieb Paul.B.Andersen:
> Den 12.06.2025 06:12, skrev Thomas Heger:
>>
>> Velocity IS frame-dependent!
>>
>> This is inevitable and also the case for light.
> 
> No.
> It is experimentally confirmed that the speed of light in vacuum
> is invariant, which means that it is the same in all inertial
> frames of reference.
> 
> https://paulba.no/paper/Kennedy_Thorndike.pdf
> https://paulba.no/paper/Michelson_1913.pdf
> https://paulba.no/paper/Alvager_et_al.pdf
> https://paulba.no/paper/Babcock_Bergman.pdf
> https://paulba.no/paper/Brecher.pdf
> 
> This is what all the cranks in this forum fail to understand.
> Their problem is that because they find it counter intuitive
> they think it can't be like that.
> 
> But it is!
> 
>>
>> BUT: we can use this to define light:
>>
>> light (and other frequencies of the em-spectrum) are light, if they 
>> move with c.
> 
> So you think that the speed of light is frame dependent,
> but can be defined to be frame independent? :-D



I meant, that 'speed of light' is actually an angle.

This angle is measured locally as velocity c.

In geometric terms it would be 45° and means the equality of two complex 
intervals called 'timelike' and 'spacelike'.

For any 'influence' (all sorts of interactions in a certain space with 
complex valued 'points', called 'spacetime') which fulfills this 
condition, we could use the term 'light speed'.

Now light falls into this cathegory as other em-waves, too.

Now we need to attatch an axis of time to any location and place the 
observer in the center of its local frame of reference, we could see, 
that the past light-cone of the observer is using this angle c, while 
the opposite means 'standstill' (actually 'relative standstill' in 
respect to the observer).

Now I called the comoving patters 'matter' and the inverse 'axis of 
time', hence matter and time are 'relative', too.

....


TH