Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-4.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2024 04:58:30 +0000 Subject: Re: Time Dilation Experiments Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity References: <9c7fc4bf-b323-4896-8c9a-67d8184af533n@googlegroups.com> <8e025352-a67a-42d6-9663-345e185faae3n@googlegroups.com> <39756204-6133-489b-b9f1-99b321a1cf1en@googlegroups.com> <248b77fa-174c-4a13-9945-d8efe39c2427n@googlegroups.com> <9d9f0559-147e-47ae-98c0-ba750567793dn@googlegroups.com> <1punzsz.6875ze1ealz01N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> <58abdf01-f99a-43e2-a813-4bae22ba0764n@googlegroups.com> <1pup009.yi30p313lei1aN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> <5ff10002-0f43-4abd-86e7-6f34b8227956n@googlegroups.com> <900473da-3f24-4a4e-a84a-f2f088f95684n@googlegroups.com> <8e2a45d5-5301-4fbb-8716-bf7f3988893bn@googlegroups.com> From: Ross Finlayson Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2024 20:58:32 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Lines: 225 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-yj46rfibxnfINifkd6QEACCM+6OLfWjRk+ZDEnkkInVC52o70FCJwpJ/CrNOgMg9xTdNvUyRDxKppXI!E1+j1QEuKUkZvGbMxX/wK+VA9IMnxYfFb4bA6muOzIfUEP7KaQUJ2wUr2K6ZzSJ5Xrc4cfSBzqvG X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 Bytes: 11568 On 07/07/2022 09:21 AM, Ross A. Finlayson wrote: > On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 8:33:29 AM UTC-7, Ross A. Finlayson wrote: >> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 11:31:53 PM UTC-7, Ross A. Finlayson wrote: >>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 10:50:47 PM UTC-7, Ross A. Finlayson wrote: >>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 1:47:38 PM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote: >>>>> Ross A. Finlayson wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 1:08:15 AM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote: >>>>>>> Ross A. Finlayson wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 5, 2022 at 2:21:28 PM UTC-7, Volney wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 7/5/2022 4:57 PM, Ed Lake wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> A photon is a moving electromagnetic charge. When you have lots of >>>>>>>>>> photons, you have a greater electromagnetic charge. >>>>>>>>> Idjit. Photons have NO charge! You didn't even understand what you >>>>>>>>> copied-and-pasted. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Photons are virtual moments in magnetic fields which have energy. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> These are electronic photons, though. >>>>>>> As opposed to quarkonic photons? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jan >>>>>> >>>>>> No, quarks are part of hadrons, these are leptops. >>>>> Some of your detectors need retuning, >>>>> >>>>> Jan >>>> When I bother to think about leptons, >>>> after hadrons, is that I am not abusing the language. >>>> >>>> If I could understand, say, a laboratory, >>>> and, electricity arrives in the form of a contact, >>>> then this "solid insulating ilght" and >>>> "vacuum insulating current" is power semiconductors. >>>> >>>> Then under the current detector, if you mention it, >>>> it is re-tuning the detector or antenna, no I really >>>> made the point of having the photon as both a hadron, >>>> and a lepton, and .... >>>> >>>> Then I expect in these terms that the photonic, cicrcuits, >>>> and electronic, circuits, in what results "build a board >>>> and apply contact", is that matter-of-fact I do expect that >>>> in those terms. >>>> >>>> "Photonic leptons", or "'lectrons", now why I have >>>> these are only "photo-leptons". >>>> >>>> So, to be sure, if I just automatiically ascribe all photon's >>>> properties in leptons, it should be about same. >>>> >>>> But, I won't, because without explaining that, again, >>>> now that I just discovered it according to grammar, >>>> then I would have to constantly retract why I said >>>> "photons should be called leptons instead of hadrons". >>>> >>>> Or that the radiant or infra-red is baryonic, >>>> but radio is leptonic or electro-weak, >>>> it's at least electro. >>>> >>>> "Or baryons." >>>> >>>> Here photon is "anything at about the wavefront with c, >>>> for example a significant percentage of c in a constant image, >>>> massless, chargeless, particles". >>>> >>>> That's though plasma, usual background ether, background plasma ether. >>>> >>>> Now I am staring at it all wrong. >>>> >>>> No, I meant leptons. >>>> >>>> Not sure what I thought I typed, ..., sure it was 'leptons". >>>> >>>> Alright then "photons are defined hadrons". >>>> >>>> The systolic at c or pump, here notice this is optical, thermo, radio front, >>>> that is a point in area terms and a contact. Hadronic and leptonic. >>>> >>>> "Photons" >>>> >>>> So, yeah, no, I meant leptons. >>> "The known force carrier bosons all have spin = 1 and are therefore vector bosons. >>> The hypothetical graviton has spin = 2 and is a tensor boson; >>> it is unknown whether it is a gauge boson as well." >>> -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elementary_particle#Overview >>> >>> >>> Oh, these are spinless, too, massless, chargeless, spinless, photons. >>> >>> "Photo-leptons: spinless photons" >>> >>> "The other three leptons are neutrinos, ...". >>> >>> Now I am getting into it. >>> >>> >>> "Quark hadronics" >>> >>> What the theory leaves out according to units is particles, in a >>> usual enough sense, that the values, in the particles, are >>> dynamical, in the particles. >>> >>> Or "according to the dimensional analysis these are still both >>> photons, in area or current terms, and leptons, neutrinos, ...". >>> >>> When dynamical, .... >>> >>> Reading the Wiki, that's just that for the current terms, sure >>> "the photon's erased inside the diagram, so it can be called >>> a photon according to the diagram that dynamics gives it, >>> it's current in electron-volts", is for because "photons are >>> massless, these leptons couldn't be massy or electrons, at all". >>> >>> I.e. they are definitely what you'd expect, when "photons" >>> are what are under the dynamics, the point here is that >>> "the photon is a very inclusive particle". As are neutrinos, >>> in a Dirac positronic sea. >>> >>> "These leptons couldn't be massy or charged, at all". >>> >>> >>> Yeah, as "particle" that constitutes, energy, the photon, >>> that travels only and exactly at the bradyonic/tachyonic >>> speed, results that traveling image besides hologram >>> includes a radiant component. >>> >>> I suppose then that's rays. >>> >>> Rays, here is this "radiant component" included, which are >>> waves, result particles in current in effect. >>> >>> Here this is basically that "photons like electrons are used to >>> define current in effect, which in space terms is space current", >>> also, "photons are frequency/wavelength numbers of a result >>> that according to electron gap, is the ratio of a quantum energy >>> level, that sums to a finite number". >>> >>> The photons in the various are as various, when it's as "according >>> to the theory these particles could only be photons not the >>> plasma or rays or power, that was called particles again that >>> massless and c could only be photons". >>> >>> Here I'm making the point whether area and current terms, >>> and particle terms, making sure they are defined, because >>> elementary theory really only has very few particles. >>> >>> "Photons" >> Ha, "photo-hadrons", "photo-leptons", "spinless, empty photons", just like >> the SI redefinition of units went I called all these what would be anti or >> partner or virtual particles, "photons". >> >> So, that's in STR, in a way. >> >> Then, the photon is the massless, chargless, spinless, ..., particle >> that moves at the speed of light, in electron-volts, and either in >> current, or, instead, under quantum mechanics, either electromagnetic ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========