I’ve been doing some studying and thinking lately about relativity and our “common sense” view of the world. One of the concepts that I think many people have (myself included) is that photons leave a star,(for example) travel for thousands of years through space, and interact with the molecules in your eye, allowing you to see the star.
I believe that there is a more useful way to conceptualize this interaction between the mass in the star and the mass in your eye, and the following concept is more correct, though I realize it’s still naive. For example, I am using the term “perspective” to represent a more precise term.
Assume star X is 1000 light years away.
From a photons perspective, it leaves a molecule on star X and arrives at your eye simultaneouly, since time dilation reduces the elapsed time to 0 (I assume this is also tied in to the concept that from some perspective 2 events can be called simultaneous if light from the first event can reach the second event). From our perspective, it has taken 1000 years.
From the photons perspective, the distance it has traveled is 0, hence from its perspective it hasn’t travelled “faster than light”, since the lorentz transfomation for length in the direction of travel is l = l’ sqrt(1-u^2/C^2) which goes to 0 when u = c. Thus, from the photon’s perspective, energy was transferred between 2 adjoining particles. I find this intriquing, that there is a space-time framework in which it can be observed that a molecule in my eye is adjecent to a molecule on a distant star.
Has it been shown that photons always interact with “adjoining” matter? I.E., there is no such thing as a “lonely photon travelling through empty space which will never interact with matter”?
One of the benefits of this concept is that there is no concept of “action at a distance” or the propogation of energy through empty space, since, again from the photons perspective, there is no empty space between the emitting mass and the recieving mass.
So fire away, is this crap or is it a legitimate concept.
All I know is, you post something like this and before you know it, people are going to be trying to stuff Schroedinger’s cat back into his box.
As to your lonely photon going nowhere, obviously by definition you could never prove it exists, making it as much a religion question as one of science…
Ok Frolix8 here comes = right from the peanut gallery.
Seems right to me. I can say the words but don’t understand at all.
The site above is by John A. Gowan
From John’s home page I give you a testament of his ability in astrophysics:
{QUOTE]I have also worked as a general laborer in construction in Los Angeles, as a clerk in an electrical supply house in Santa Barbara, as a dishwasher and janitor for various institutions, as a car cleaner for a rental agency, as a pheasant farmer for the State of New York"
[/QUOTE]
Thanks Trouts1, that’s an interesting site. I’m glad I’m not the only one who is interested in this.
As for the blurb about previous jobs, remember that “the man” himself worked at the patent office. I find that I think as hard and deep when I’m doing a repetitive task as I do at any other time. Most of the “smart” people I know have held a variety of menial jobs.