Thread Tools
Old January 9, 2003, 15:19   #31
Zero
PtWDG Glory of WarInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamACDG The Human HiveC3C IDG: Apolyton TeamACDG3 SpartansPtWDG2 Monkey
King
 
Zero's Avatar
 
Local Time: 09:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Halloween town
Posts: 2,969
Quote:
Originally posted by Azazel

With my humble knowledge I see a problem to describe the wavelike features of a graviton according to the de-broglie equation, because the wave's frequency is a function of the particle's mass. But do gravitons have mass? I don't think so.
Alva you're not alone. I am clearly not the one with most knowledge...

Anyway I'd like to humbly refute this with my humble knowledge as well. What about light?
__________________
:-p
Zero is offline  
Old January 9, 2003, 15:24   #32
Zero
PtWDG Glory of WarInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamACDG The Human HiveC3C IDG: Apolyton TeamACDG3 SpartansPtWDG2 Monkey
King
 
Zero's Avatar
 
Local Time: 09:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Halloween town
Posts: 2,969
Quote:
Originally posted by Azazel
I find it cool. I would have done physics if I had a chance to work in cosmology or as a nuclear physicist. sadly I didn't. I wanted to go to biochemistry to cure cancer, and stop aging. The army didn't let me. Now I am in Chemistry, to make better Shampoos. I envy you, Richard. ( OMG, I don't believe I've just said it.... j/k )
So thats where all chem majors go. Working for herbal essence.... Nooooooo!~~~~~

__________________
:-p
Zero is offline  
Old January 9, 2003, 15:28   #33
Az
Emperor
 
Local Time: 17:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: A pub.
Posts: 3,161
good question, one second.
__________________
urgh.NSFW
Az is offline  
Old January 9, 2003, 15:36   #34
Az
Emperor
 
Local Time: 17:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: A pub.
Posts: 3,161
ok, Guess what? It appears that photons have mass after all.
a quick googlesearch has came up with the following link:

http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/as...rs/961102.html

Quote:
Now, being scientists, we do not just accept theories like general relativity or conclusions like photons have no mass. We constantly test them, trying to definitively prove or disprove. So far, general relativity has withstood every test. And try as we might, we can measure no mass for the photon. We can just put upper limits on what mass it can have. These upper limits are determined by the sensitivity of the experiment we are using to try to "weigh the photon". The last number I saw was that a photon, if it has any mass at all, must be less than 4 x 10-48 grams. For comparison, the electron has a mass of 9 x 10-28 grams.
well, what do you know....
__________________
urgh.NSFW
Az is offline  
Old January 9, 2003, 15:40   #35
Zero
PtWDG Glory of WarInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamACDG The Human HiveC3C IDG: Apolyton TeamACDG3 SpartansPtWDG2 Monkey
King
 
Zero's Avatar
 
Local Time: 09:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Halloween town
Posts: 2,969
you learn something new everyday.

Btw. Thats awfully small~ wow...
__________________
:-p
Zero is offline  
Old January 9, 2003, 15:44   #36
Az
Emperor
 
Local Time: 17:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: A pub.
Posts: 3,161
I just have to take quantum physics.

IIRC, btw, they've actually managed to freeze a light beam a couple of days ago. I really want to read about that.

back on topic.....
__________________
urgh.NSFW
Az is offline  
Old January 9, 2003, 15:47   #37
reds4ever
Prince
 
reds4ever's Avatar
 
Local Time: 15:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: of the Spion Kop
Posts: 861
Quote:
Originally posted by Lars-E
The stuff I read (sorry no link) talks about huge differences in the speed of light. Much faster before. It might have declined gradually.
i saw a docu on this about three years ago, it was some young scandanavian (i think) physicist who was working in the UK. Sorry can't remember much more, i'll try and be a bit more vague next time
reds4ever is offline  
Old January 9, 2003, 15:56   #38
Az
Emperor
 
Local Time: 17:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: A pub.
Posts: 3,161
Calc II: I keep looking for sources, and all they say is 'no it doesn't have mass, probably'.
__________________
urgh.NSFW
Az is offline  
Old January 9, 2003, 17:44   #39
TCO
Apolytoners Hall of Fame
Emperor
 
TCO's Avatar
 
Local Time: 04:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 8,057
Re: It is proven. Gravity expands at speed of light
Quote:
Originally posted by Tripledoc
Gravity expands at speed of light

It was proven today that gravity expands at the speed of light. This proves Einsteains theory. newton was convinced that the speed of gravity was infinite. The speed of gravity has until now been an unknown constant.

It was discovered that the planet Jupiter would pass by (as seen from earth) the quasar JO842+1835 on september 8 2002. This meant that radiowaves from the quasar would be slightly bent as they passed the gravitational pull of Jupiter on their way to earth. the signal was picked up by the Very Long Baseline Array, a collection of large radio recievers on Earth placed in Hawaii, United States and Germany.
The accuracy of the experiment compares to measuring the thickness of a human hair as seen from a distance of 400 kilometres.

Until know gravity has been the great unknown and it is thus a step forwards towards a total and collective understanding of laws of the universe.
Are you sure that this experiment proves the speed of propogation of gravity. Or does it just prove that light is bent by gravity. (something shown in other experiments).

If it does prove what you are saying, could you explain a little more how? Thanks.
TCO is offline  
Old January 9, 2003, 17:49   #40
Provost Harrison
Apolytoners Hall of FameCivilization IV PBEMPolyCast Team
Deity
 
Provost Harrison's Avatar
 
Local Time: 15:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Germans own my soul.
Posts: 14,861
Yes, I was not sure how this was supposed to relate to the speed of propagation of gravity...
__________________
Speaking of Erith:

"It's not twinned with anywhere, but it does have a suicide pact with Dagenham" - Linda Smith
Provost Harrison is offline  
Old January 9, 2003, 17:51   #41
TCO
Apolytoners Hall of Fame
Emperor
 
TCO's Avatar
 
Local Time: 04:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 8,057
Quote:
Originally posted by Azazel
the de-broglie equation says that all things have wavelike properties. The smaller the particle is, the more it is relevant. For example, contrary to what many people think, you can't see the electrons mooving around the nucleus in nice circular patterns. The electron is actually a cloud around the nucleus. That cloud takes different forms, for different atoms ( long story to explain ). for hydrogen for example, there single electron forms a cloud of probability, with the highest probability to find him being near the nucleus. That cloud never ends, though, so there is an infinetly small chance that electrons from your body are now actually in the alpha centauri system (!)

With my humble knowledge I see a problem to describe the wavelike features of a graviton according to the de-broglie equation, because the wave's frequency is a function of the particle's mass. But do gravitons have mass? I don't think so.
There is a certain place where these things get metaphysical, but I think you can think of the electron not as a cloud but as a particle with indeterminate location. The "cloud" that you draw is a representation of the probability function across space. But not necessarily a smear of electron. (but this mayjust be a descriptional difference...)
TCO is offline  
Old January 9, 2003, 18:01   #42
TCO
Apolytoners Hall of Fame
Emperor
 
TCO's Avatar
 
Local Time: 04:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 8,057
Quote:
Originally posted by Azazel
ok, Guess what? It appears that photons have mass after all.
a quick googlesearch has came up with the following link:

http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/as...rs/961102.html



well, what do you know....
Shouldn't it have a mass by relativity? e=mc^2

E =hnu


m = hnu/c^2
TCO is offline  
Old January 9, 2003, 18:08   #43
Dauphin
Civilization IV PBEMPolyCast Team
Deity
 
Dauphin's Avatar
 
Local Time: 15:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Seouenaca, Cantium
Posts: 12,426
I very much doubt that gravitons exist.
__________________
"Everybody knows you never go full retard. You went full retard man. Never go full retard"
Dauphin is offline  
Old January 9, 2003, 18:09   #44
Dauphin
Civilization IV PBEMPolyCast Team
Deity
 
Dauphin's Avatar
 
Local Time: 15:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Seouenaca, Cantium
Posts: 12,426
Quote:
Originally posted by GP


Shouldn't it have a mass by relativity? e=mc^2

E =hnu


m = hnu/c^2

E^2 = p^2c^2 + m^2c^4
__________________
"Everybody knows you never go full retard. You went full retard man. Never go full retard"
Dauphin is offline  
Old January 9, 2003, 18:53   #45
Graag
Civilization II Multiplayer
King
 
Graag's Avatar
 
Local Time: 14:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: London
Posts: 1,494
*head explodes*
Graag is offline  
Old January 9, 2003, 19:39   #46
Seeker
Emperor
 
Seeker's Avatar
 
Local Time: 09:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Yongsan-Gu, Seoul
Posts: 3,647
Lars E:

Your scientific paper is actually Tom van Flandern's site, where he offers a fancy looking Creationist arguement of the SoL changing over time, ultimately to justify how God could've created the universe 10 000 years ago.
__________________
"Wait a minute..this isn''t FAUX dive, it's just a DIVE!"
"...Mangy dog staggering about, looking vainly for a place to die."
"sauna stories? There are no 'sauna stories'.. I mean.. sauna is sauna. You do by the laws of sauna." -P.
Seeker is offline  
Old January 9, 2003, 20:25   #47
TCO
Apolytoners Hall of Fame
Emperor
 
TCO's Avatar
 
Local Time: 04:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 8,057
Quote:
Originally posted by Sagacious Dolphin



E^2 = p^2c^2 + m^2c^4
You're just trying to show off.

Finance weenie.
TCO is offline  
Old January 9, 2003, 20:31   #48
Craig P.
Warlord
 
Local Time: 08:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 147
The experiment shows the speed of gravity based on the onset of the deflection of the light from the distant source. If gravity were instantaneous, it would deflect sooner than it did (by, I presume, a -very- small margin).
Craig P. is offline  
Old January 9, 2003, 21:12   #49
TCO
Apolytoners Hall of Fame
Emperor
 
TCO's Avatar
 
Local Time: 04:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 8,057
Is it like a doppler shift? What exactly do they measure?
angle? times?
TCO is offline  
Old January 9, 2003, 22:02   #50
Ramo
Apolytoners Hall of Fame
Emperor
 
Ramo's Avatar
 
Local Time: 09:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: of Fear and Oil
Posts: 5,892
Hmm.. interesting. Good to know GR isn't total bollocks.

Quote:
Is gravity a wave or a particle or both?
Well, the force-carrier for gravity would be both, if it exists. If it doesn't exist, gravity is just the geometry of space-time.

Quote:
With my humble knowledge I see a problem to describe the wavelike features of a graviton according to the de-broglie equation, because the wave's frequency is a function of the particle's mass. But do gravitons have mass? I don't think so.
Think for a minute about what the de Broglie relationship means. It tries to assign wave-like properties (traditionally thought of in the realm of massless particles like a photon) to massive particles. So it must be definition work for massless particles.

The de Broglie relationship describes frequency as a function of momentum, not necessarily mass. The relationship is sometimes expressed as a function of mass only to deal with everyday examples (baseballs and whatnot). For the proposed graviton and other massless particles p = E/c (as implied by the Lorentzian invariant SD posted).

Quote:
ok, Guess what? It appears that photons have mass after all.
a quick googlesearch has came up with the following link:
Err.. that's not what the link says.
__________________
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-Bokonon
Ramo is offline  
Old January 10, 2003, 03:37   #51
Urban Ranger
NationStatesApolyton Storywriters' GuildNever Ending Stories
Deity
 
Urban Ranger's Avatar
 
Local Time: 22:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: May 1999
Location: The City State of Noosphere, CPA special envoy
Posts: 14,606
Quote:
Originally posted by Azazel
ok, Guess what? It appears that photons have mass after all.
I have always thought that photons are assumed to have no rest mass, because of SR.
__________________
(\__/) 07/07/1937 - Never forget
(='.'=) "Claims demand evidence; extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence." -- Carl Sagan
(")_(") "Starting the fire from within."
Urban Ranger is offline  
Old January 10, 2003, 06:15   #52
Lars-E
Warlord
 
Local Time: 15:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N/A
Posts: 237
Quote:
Originally posted by reds4ever
i saw a docu on this about three years ago, it was some young scandanavian (i think) physicist who was working in the UK. Sorry can't remember much more, i'll try and be a bit more vague next time
The guy I read about was a Russian scientist - early 20th century. There were several papers and more scientists.

Quote:
Your scientific paper is actually Tom van Flandern's site, where he offers a fancy looking Creationist arguement of the SoL changing over time, ultimately to justify how God could've created the universe 10 000 years ago.
You know where I got it? You know my height too? BS.

It was not there (never been to that site btw).

It's funny how you know more about me than I do myself. I have seen this irrational thinking in many ppl. Due to a lack of education?

I hate it when ppl jump to conclusions and only think every problem has one answer. Or that there is only one thing causing a reaction. There can be millions of motives/causes/answers/reasons to ONE problem. But you think there's a 1-1 relationship.

Simple-minded ness. I am sick of it.
Lars-E is offline  
Old January 10, 2003, 06:58   #53
Rogan Josh
Prince
 
Local Time: 15:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Posts: 366
Photons most certainly don't have mass, but it is impossible to comepletely prove this experimentally. All one can do is put an upper bound on the photon mass by experiment, and as the link says, that bound is really tiny.

Trust me - photons are massless.

Also, there is no problem decribing a massless particle quantum mechanically. The problem with describing the graviton quantum mechanically is not because it is massless, but because it has more angular momentum. It is spin 2, compared to the photon with spin 1.

This causes the quantum theory of gravity to be nonrenormalizable - when we calculate physical quantities with the theory we find that the results are dependent on the physics at really really high energies, which we don't know yet.

For the other theories like Quantum-Electro-Dynamics, the answers you get don't depend on the very high energy physics, so you can make predictions fine. (This property is why, for example, you don't need to do quantum mechanics to work out the dynamics of a bouncing ball....)
Rogan Josh is offline  
Old January 10, 2003, 07:03   #54
shade
Civilization II Democracy Game
King
 
shade's Avatar
 
Local Time: 15:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: May 2001
Location: of bribery.
Posts: 2,196
Quote:
Originally posted by Azazel
ok, Guess what? It appears that photons have mass after all.
a quick googlesearch has came up with the following link:

http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/as...rs/961102.html
Quote:
Now, being scientists, we do not just accept theories like general relativity or conclusions like photons have no mass. We constantly test them, trying to definitively prove or disprove. So far, general relativity has withstood every test. And try as we might, we can measure no mass for the photon. We can just put upper limits on what mass it can have. These upper limits are determined by the sensitivity of the experiment we are using to try to "weigh the photon". The last number I saw was that a photon, if it has any mass at all, must be less than 4 x 10-48 grams. For comparison, the electron has a mass of 9 x 10-28 grams.

well, what do you know....
we now know you don't really read what it says
This article doesn't say Photon's have a mass, It says "IF" photon's would have a mass it would have to be less then 4x10-48grams...but it can be 0...

Shade
__________________
ex-president of Apolytonia former King of the Apolytonian Imperium
"I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work." --Thomas Alva Edison (1847-1931)
shameless plug to my site:home of Civ:Imperia(WIP)
shade is offline  
Old January 10, 2003, 10:46   #55
Sava
PolyCast Team
Emperor
 
Sava's Avatar
 
Local Time: 09:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: mmmm sweet
Posts: 3,041
Quote:
Originally posted by Azazel
don't be an ignoramus, Sava. almost all theoretical science leads better technology.

'electricity- and this helps human civilization how?'
No need to insult you little ****... I simply asked how this helps out. If I wanted a stupid 4ss answer, I would have asked my 7 year old cousin
__________________
(\__/) "Sava is teh man" -Ecthy
(='.'=)
(")_(") bring me everyone
Sava is offline  
Old January 10, 2003, 10:49   #56
Urban Ranger
NationStatesApolyton Storywriters' GuildNever Ending Stories
Deity
 
Urban Ranger's Avatar
 
Local Time: 22:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: May 1999
Location: The City State of Noosphere, CPA special envoy
Posts: 14,606
Quote:
Originally posted by Sava
No need to insult you little ****... I simply asked how this helps out. If I wanted a stupid 4ss answer, I would have asked my 7 year old cousin
Who knows? We don't have a crystal ball you know.
__________________
(\__/) 07/07/1937 - Never forget
(='.'=) "Claims demand evidence; extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence." -- Carl Sagan
(")_(") "Starting the fire from within."
Urban Ranger is offline  
Old January 10, 2003, 10:50   #57
Sava
PolyCast Team
Emperor
 
Sava's Avatar
 
Local Time: 09:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: mmmm sweet
Posts: 3,041
thanks UR... its nice to see that some people can give a straight answer instead of a dumb 4ss insulting response.
__________________
(\__/) "Sava is teh man" -Ecthy
(='.'=)
(")_(") bring me everyone
Sava is offline  
Old January 10, 2003, 10:54   #58
Az
Emperor
 
Local Time: 17:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: A pub.
Posts: 3,161
Quote:
we now know you don't really read what it says
read my following post.

Quote:
No need to insult you little ****...
__________________
urgh.NSFW
Az is offline  
Old January 10, 2003, 11:13   #59
Eli
Civ4 SP Democracy GamePtWDG Vox ControliC4DG VoxCiv4 InterSite DG: Apolyton Team
Emperor
 
Eli's Avatar
 
Local Time: 17:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Israel
Posts: 6,480
I actually understand most of what people wrote here. Where's my shrink?

Seriously though. Dont you think it's all too complicated? Reading all the physics mumbo-jumbo mentioned in this thread I get this gut feeling that there is something very fundamental and very simple that we miss. Some equation, law, theory, perspective, that can be explained not only to PHDs and will make these issue much simpler.

It's like we spend all our efforts on adding numbers again and again and again, and cant think of multiplication.
__________________
"Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master" - Commissioner Pravin Lal.
Eli is offline  
Old January 10, 2003, 12:22   #60
TCO
Apolytoners Hall of Fame
Emperor
 
TCO's Avatar
 
Local Time: 04:02
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 8,057
Quote:
Originally posted by Rogan Josh
Photons most certainly don't have mass, but it is impossible to comepletely prove this experimentally. All one can do is put an upper bound on the photon mass by experiment, and as the link says, that bound is really tiny.

Trust me - photons are massless.

Also, there is no problem decribing a massless particle quantum mechanically. The problem with describing the graviton quantum mechanically is not because it is massless, but because it has more angular momentum. It is spin 2, compared to the photon with spin 1.

This causes the quantum theory of gravity to be nonrenormalizable - when we calculate physical quantities with the theory we find that the results are dependent on the physics at really really high energies, which we don't know yet.

For the other theories like Quantum-Electro-Dynamics, the answers you get don't depend on the very high energy physics, so you can make predictions fine. (This property is why, for example, you don't need to do quantum mechanics to work out the dynamics of a bouncing ball....)
They don't have mass? Or don't have rest mass?

Shouldn't they have a mass based on their energy?
TCO is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:02.


Design by Vjacheslav Trushkin, color scheme by ColorizeIt!.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Apolyton Civilization Site | Copyright © The Apolyton Team