Why the photon is massless

Blog 20150827

With regard to Blog 20150819, Bill Westmiller writes:

BW: A good response and explanation of the speed variance, but I'll take exception to one of your statements:

GB: "Sound, like light, does not have mass ..."

BW: While it is true that sound is a characteristic of the medium, so has no inherent mass, the kinetic energy is passed from one molecule of air to another. It is the mass of that molecule that determines the speed of the sound, so there is always kinetic energy (and therefore, mass) engaged in the process.

Light, IF it is considered a wave, must also be passing kinetic energy from one "molecule" of the "aether medium" to another. Therefore, that medium must have mass and motion. Unlike air, no massive aether "molecule" has ever been detected in any light experiment.

[GB: I beg to differ. All the particles that we consider “molecules” are enormous complexes of aether particles, which, when they are not complexed, produce gravitation as well as the medium for light.[1] The MM87[2] experiment was looking for a “fixed aether,” which is philosophically impossible per the Fourth Assumption of Science, inseparability (Just as there is no motion without matter, so there is no matter without motion). There are plenty of experiments supporting the existence of aether, with the Sagnac experiment being perhaps the most famous.[3] Measurement of the mass of individual aether particles has an inherent difficulty because we generally use aether particles (in the form of gravitation) to measure mass. With all things in the universe being infinitely subdividable, this problem will always be with us. To measure the mass of aether_-1 particles directly, we would need to use aether_-2 particles. I doubt if that will ever happen. Elsewhere, I speculate that calculations that use Planck’s constant can be used indirectly to obtain the mass of the aether particle (10^-47 g).]

BW: It was that experimental failure that required the invocation of arbitrary Lorentz Transformations to explain how light could still be a wave, but aether mass could never be detected. That, in turn, led to the "bedeviling petard" of Special Relativity.

However, there are a multitude of experiments which demonstrate that light is some kind of massive particle with motion, including the home novelty radiometer with four vanes that rotate when exposed to light:
http://www.ebay.com/bhp/radiometer

[GB: This gadget gets its motion from the impacts of aether particles in the same way that the impacts of water molecules can knock you down at the beach.]

BW: Einstein's only saving grace was his mathematical formulation describing Hertz's "photoelectric effect" (which got Albert his only Nobel Prize). That doesn't work unless light is a massive particle (photon) in motion, independent of any medium.

[GB: The photo electric effect that you mentioned is another proof that the light is simply the motion of particles in the medium we call aether. The PE effect results when one of these particles collides with baryonic matter in such a way that we can detect it. This is analogous to the collision that occurs when nitrogen and oxygen molecules in the atmosphere hit your ear drum, allowing you to sense the effect as the motion we call sound.

Light is not “some kind of massive particle with motion,” in the same way that sound is not “some kind of massive particle with motion.” The confusion stems from the inability of some folks to distinguish the difference between matter and motion. Some, like Captain Bligh, apparently will never get over it.]  

BW: Of course, that doesn't explain what kind of particle or groups of particles compose the mass of light, nor what proper motion they include. I'm working on that.

[GB: Sorry, but light, like all other motions, does not have mass. As with all wave motion, only the particles through which light waves travel have mass. Sound and water waves are motions in the atmosphere and in the ocean. Those motions do not have mass—only the individual particles (nitrogen and water molecules) have mass. Although this is quite simple, the contrary belief is so deeply rooted that it has become second nature to us. It amounts to the “soul” of regressive physics.]

---

[1] Borchardt, Glenn, and Puetz, Stephen J., 2012, Neomechanical gravitation theory, in Volk, G., ed., Proceedings of the Natural Philosophy Alliance, 19th Conference of the NPA, 25-28 July: Albuquerque, NM, Natural Philosophy Alliance, Mt. Airy, MD, p. 53-58. [ http://www.worldsci.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_6529.pdf]

[2] Michelson, A.A., and Morley, E.W., 1887, On the relative motion of the earth and the luminiferous ether: American Journal of Science, v. 39, p. 333-345.

[3] Sagnac, Georges, 1913a, The demonstration of the luminiferous aether by an interferometer in uniform rotation: Comptes Rendus, v. 157, p. 708–710.

---, 1913b, On the proof of the reality of the luminiferous aether by the experiment with a rotating interferometer: Comptes Rendus, v. 157, p. 1410–1413.

Tired Light Theory vs. Untiring Light Theory

Blog 20150819

Captain Bligh writes: “Are you saying that light shifts its energy when encountering a new medium?”

This question was stimulated by my discussion of why the speed of light decreases by 25% when it enters water. That’s right, although light travels at 300 million m/s in vacuum, it travels at only 225 million m/s in water. Now, from the neomechanical standpoint we are reminded that light is motion. Light is not a thing, so strictly speaking, the word “it” does not apply to “it” (see how difficult it is to avoid using the nominative case for what is really a predicate?).  Another  lesson: Even if light was a microcosm (which it is not, despite Einstein’s claim), “it” would not be able to change “its” own motion independent of all else. All changes in motion—accelerations—are the result of collisions between microcosms. If light were a microcosm, it might decelerate by 25% when it entered water, but there would be nothing to cause it to accelerate 33% when it left the water. Nothing of the sort ever occurs, of course, because light is motion. It is not a thing. 

Now, remember that the velocity of wave motion is determined by the medium in which it occurs. Thus, the velocity of sound in air is 343 m/s, while the velocity of sound in iron is 5,120 m/s. Because sound, like light, is a motion and not a thing, the energy concept does not apply to it. Sound, like light, does not have mass, so the kinetic energy equation would be written as:

KE = 1/2 mv² = 1/2 (0)*v² = 0

Note, however, that the E=mc² equation remains valid for explaining the transfer of submicrocosmic (internal) motion to supermicrocosms (aether particles) in the macrocosm. Nonetheless, the KE equation above explains why there is no gain or loss of energy when light or sound enters a new medium. It also is one of the reasons Einstein had to consider his light corpuscle, the photon, to be massless. Of course it had to be massless, since it really did not exist. It had no xyz dimensions because light is motion, not matter—the petard bedeviling relativity at every turn.
 

All this leads to the “tired light theory” favored by Edwin Hubble. The indeterministic opposite of that theory might be called the “untiring light theory.” Regressive physicists, who invariably favor such idealisms, see no reason for light to be affected by their imagined “perfectly empty space” through which it supposedly travels as a particle for 13.8 billion years from galaxy to eyeball. But, as I have proclaimed before: “In neomechanics, no microcosm or motion of microcosms could travel from point A to B without losses.” In the real world we cannot transmit electricity from New York to San Francisco without losses. Light is the same. Theoretically, all wave motion should behave the same way even though the losses may be insignificant at short distances. It is claimed that sound waves are redshifted when the distance is great enough (Pallidin, 2004). That is because of neomechanical interactions between the particles in the medium required for wave motion. All microcosms follow the Eighth Assumption of Science, infinity (The universe is infinite, both in the microcosmic and macrocosmic directions). Thus, aether_-1, which we speculate is the medium for light transmission, is made up of aether_-2 particles. This means that some of the motion of aether_-1 particles must be absorbed internally and taken up by the submicrocosms we call aether_-2 (Puetz and Borchardt, 2011) via Type C neomechanical interactions (Borchardt. 2007). Regressive physicists, being steadfast aether deniers and believers in finity, remain estranged from any such ideas. That was not the case with Hubble, who discovered the cosmic redshifts and had this to say: "If they are valid, it seems likely that red-shifts may not be due to an expanding universe, and much of the current speculation on the structure of the universe may require re-examination." (Hubble, 1947).

References

Borchardt, Glenn, 2007, The Scientific Worldview: Beyond Newton and Einstein: Lincoln, NE, iUniverse, 411 p. [ http://www.scientificphilosophy.com/The%20Scientific%20Worldview.html ]

Hubble, Edwin, 1947, The 200-inch telescope and some problems it may solve: Publications of the astronomical society of the Pacific, v. 59, no. 349, p. 165.

Pallidin, 2004, Why does sound wave frequency not decrease over distance?, Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community [ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/why-does-sound-wave-frequency-not-decrease-over-distance.15125/ ].

Puetz, Stephen J., and Borchardt, Glenn, 2011, Universal cycle theory: Neomechanics of the hierarchically infinite universe: Denver, Outskirts Press, 626 p.

Using mind and consciousness in freedom

Blog 20150812 by George Coyne

To properly comprehend what this article is referring to it is necessary to read it without any motive to benefit from it.

In this essay the word mind refers to the unique neuronal network that exists in every human brain. Although the brain exists as organic matter, the mind does not have an actual existence. The mind is not an entity within the brain, but simply the pattern that has formed and continues to develop from the connections between brain cells. Many of these are already present at birth, having become part of the inherited hard wiring of the brain. The rest come about as a result of interactions between the organism and the environment. What is known as “personality” is part of this structure as is the “ego” “I” and “self image” The way the brain interacts with the world is determined by the mind. Every encounter with the external environment, including other people, affects the way the brain structures this mind which in turn influences the way it meets with and interprets the world. This is a continual process in which the brain is constantly making changes to this wired mind which in turn influences future encounters with the environment.

When the neurons that comprise this network are firing in communication with one another and the whole network, then consciousness is present and operating. It serves an obvious and indispensable role in enabling one to function in the world. But it is important to understand that it does not have existence in the sense that matter that comprises the brain exists. Rather it occurs as a type of motion within the brain when the neurons in this structure are firing together to generate the various aspects of consciousness. As an analogy, running occurs, rather than exists, when the body is in rapid horizontal motion on the ground. “Running” does not have any existence, it is merely an occurrence that depends on a type of movement of a body. By thoroughly understanding and appreciating this distinction between existing and occurring, then one will never be hindered or mystified in seeking to understand what consciousness is because one will stop thinking of it as a thing.

In order for the brain to fully use and benefit from consciousness without succumbing to the limitless illusions that always comprise it when the brain is not alert, it is necessary to completely understand that consciousness is never a “thing” that exists as an entity but simply an occurrence that can help the organism deal with and relate to the physical environment and social world. When such an awareness is present then the brain uses consciousness as a valuable tool without identifying itself with it. This enables the brain, without any effort, to stop being confused by all the illusory beliefs within the realm of consciousness that were previously thought of as reality. A brain that is awake to this fact is able to have an awareness that uses consciousness without being confused or deluded by it. Any degree of effort to be free of the illusions of consciousness shows that the brain is still caught in the web of illusions because the very effort is evidence it is actively identifying with consciousness.