Fw: [Wave-Structure-t] Fw: light paradox [1 Attachment]

This is from the Wave-Structure-Matter group.
It's about Light and some may be interested, what are your thoughts?

   ----- Forwarded message ----- From: Karoly Kehrer [email protected] [Wave-Structure-Matter] <[email protected]>To: Yahoo! Inc. <[email protected]>Sent: Saturday, 20 October 2018, 7:51:25 am AEDTSubject: [Wave-Structure-Matter] Fw: light paradox [1 Attachment]
     [Attachment(s) from Karoly Kehrer included below] 



   Hello All,
Please give me your feedback on the subject detailed below.
Thanks
Karoly Kehrer
 1 Paradoxes of light. 8/2/18                               
Abstract.Themass of the EM radiation is discussed. According the laws ofphysics, it seems that the EM must have a well defined mass toavoid the infinities built into the equations.
Preamble.Thereare among many - yet unanswered - question in physics andastrophysics about the duality problem. 
 Islight a wave, or is the light a particle?
Whenthe light quanta (Planck energy quanta) collides with an electron it- according to Einstein's yet unproven idea[p1] itsuddenly became a “photon”[1]; a tiniest billiard ball with no volume, nor weight? that kicks the electron ofits basic state to a higher (vibration) energy state by giving itsenergy (h*f)[2] to the electron. When the electronreturns its basic state it releases this energy in the correspondingwave form.
 Itdoes not have to became a particle, since the electron is not aparticle either as the Heisenberg theory and the Wave Structureof Matter [WSM] theory proved it.[3]
Electronsand protons are the products of space vibration, (standing waves) andthey are not tiny balls.
                             “Atomsare not things” Heisenberg. [4]2Theproblem: Thespeed of light can have a paradoxical values. If one rearrangesPoincare's world-famous equation [5] he arrived toon year1900:                                     E=m*c2  one gets c2=E/m[m/s]
ittells if m=0 and E is non zero then c2  becomes infinite.Toavoid it, it should be assumed that the quanta of the photon must have nonzero mass.
Itturns out that at different frequencies light can be associated with different masses (virtual mass?) as it can be seen in the attachedcalculations.                 c=1/sqrrt (nu0/epsilon0), or c=h*f/m [m/s]
 Thespeed of light in freespacecalculated by Maxwell [6]iswell known and well proven.   Onthe other hand entanglement theory requires that the informationmust have infinite, or close to infinite peed, so light as we knowtoday cannot fit to this requirement.
Theattached Planck equations are using the corespondent mass and thePlanck minimum vibration value[7] 
 if fPl=1.85487 * 10 -43[1/s], it gives the matching result of          2.99989* 105[km/s] (Please see calculations)                         [mPh=h*fPl//c2   or E/ c2]
andit may also say that the mass of light quanta cannot be zero.
 3 Thesame result can be achieved if any E averageis used with its corresponding mass. [Pleaserefer to the attached MatCad calculations].
Thereis an other paradox, that the more energetic the electromagneticradiation, the heavier the corresponding mass gets.
Thesecond problem with the famous Poincare equation 
                                 E=m*c2 that one gets m=E/c2 [kg]
 suggestthat m cannot be zero if E is nonzero, and c hasa real velocity.
Additionaltwist to this paradox is, if c is zero then E becomes infinite, or if c is infinite then E becomes zero.
Ifone try to find some logical answer, one has to consider that noneof these zeroes an infinite can have real physical meaning. In thecase of gravity one gets at R=0 infinite force [F=oo]. Although itcan be proven that R cannot shrink to zero if one is applying Pauli's exclusion law[8] [Rcannot became smaller than the diameter of the proton]
Summary.
1/m=E/c2 Since E is well defined value,3.4 eV= 5.4*10-19[J] energy transfer needed for moving theelectron on a higher(N 4) orbit. [9] Takenthis energy, the equation predicts the weight as
 46.056*10-36 [kg] and c= 2.99989*108[m/s]. The electron'smass=9.109× 10 −31 [kg]; then the electron and photon mass ratiois~106.
2/If m is calculated by using the growing average of f orJ, then then photonmass increases. Forexample at 10^3 eV The mass is 1.781 10 –33  [kg] 3/ If one is using the minimal Planck frequency of (1.85487*10-43 Hz) in the Planck equation, one gets the minimum photon mass as                                 m=sqrt(h*f)/c2= 1.366 * 10 – 87 [kg]
Explanationsand Further readings.
Accordingto quantum mechanics, a particle can be described as a wave thatspreads out over a great distance. Yet the particle is still justone particle. You can't detect it in two places at once. Whenphysicists observe the particle in a particular location, they saythat the wave function—the mathematics that describes how aparticle could be in multiple places at once—has collapsed. 
Ina new researchpublished in Nature Communications,GriffithUniversity's Howard Wiseman and colleagues use a single particleto show that the wave function really does collapse in a strangeway. In so doing, their work backs upyears of research into quantum entanglement, in which particles areconnected in a mysterious way even when separated,so that observing or affecting  5oneinstantly affects the other.
Through these different measurements,you see the wave function collapse in different ways, thus provingits existence and showing that Einsteinwas wrong.[p2]
http://www.iflscience.com/physics/einsteins-spooky-action-distance-confirmed-new-quantum-experiment/
Read more at:https://phys.org/news/2015-03-particle.html#jCp
This is wherethe experiment's trick comes in: The scientists shot a stream ofelectrons close to the nanowire, using them to image the standingwave of light. As the electrons interacted with the confined light onthe nanowire, they either sped up or slowed down. Using the ultrafastmicroscope to image the position where this change in speed occurred,Carbone's team could now visualize the standing wave, which actsas a fingerprint of the wave-nature of light.
Thisexperiment proves that an EM VAVE according to the calculations abovethat Einstein was wrong [p2]. (Pleasesee [p1])
https://www.nature..com/news/quantum-spookiness-passes-toughest-test-yet-1.18255
John Belldevised a test to show that nature does not 'hide variables' asEinstein had proposed and he was wrong[p4]. Physicists have now conducteda virtually unassailable version of Bell's test. 
It’s a bad dayfor Albert Einstein The most rigorous test of quantum theory evercarried out has confirmed that the  ‘spooky action at adistance’ that the German physicist famously hated — in whichmanipulating one object instantaneously seems to affect another, faraway one — is an inherent part of the quantum world.  6
https://web.archive.org/web/20080817222306/http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2008/813/3
ByPhil Berardelli
ScienceNOWDaily News
13 August 2008This might be a “rare” case about which Einsteinwas wrong[p5]. More than 60 years ago, the greatphysicist scoffed at the idea that anything could [not] travel fasterthan light, even though quantum mechanics had suggested such acondition. Now four Swiss researchers have brought the possibilitycloser to reality. Testing a concept called "spooky action at adistance"--a phrase used by Einstein in criticizing thephenomenon--they have shown that two subatomic particles cancommunicate nearly instantaneously, even if they are separated bycosmic distances. Again, Einstein was wrong[p5a]http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Physics-Albert-Einstein-Theory-Relativity.htm by Geoff Haselhurst And of most significance we can now also understandhow there is a more simplesolution, by describing matter in terms of Spherical Waves inContinuous Space, that clearly explains and solves the problemscaused by Einstein's failure[p6] to find a pure'field theory of matter'. http://www.levitationfun.com/mfield.html                         E=hfand E=mc2so hf=mc2
7
Because higher frequencies have more energy (E=hf), they delivermore mass (E=mc2).Einstein understood that light quanta (photons)are a mass transfer mechanism.In this he was right, but the photon is still not a particle. (Pleasesee [p1])Theflux quanta (flowing particles) or photon exchange frequency is thusmass in motion and is the force of a magnetic field. The frequencyand number of photons exchanged must be extremely high to exertphysical attraction or repulsion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon
Theoreticalphysicist and Nobel laureate Sheldon Glashow explains for PBS NOVAonline (Einstein's Big Idea, October 11, 2005) that, "When anobject emits light, say, a flashlight, it gets lighter." It hasbeen calculated that every second, the Earth is struck by about 4.5pounds of light. (PBS NOVA, Einstein Revealed) In this relationEinstein was right, althoughit does not men that the Photon is a particle.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_paradox#Selected_papershttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_stateAccording topresent-day understanding of what is called the vacuum state or thequantum vacuum, it is "by no means a simple empty space".According to quantum mechanics, the vacuum state is not truly emptybut instead contains fleeting electromagnetic waves and particlesthat pop into and out of existence.
 8Thebending of light by gravity.LarsWåhlin
 =2GmSun / c2rSun0.87 arcsecond Soldnerin 1801Theproof that light bends near a gravitational body and theattemptsto explain this phenomenon is very interesting, because it led to theimpetuous acceptance of Einstein’srelativity theories which to some extent has guided us downthe wrong path.              = 4GmSun / c2rSun1.75arc second
Newtonhimself queried the possibility of light being bent by gravity but itwas not before the beginning of the 18th century that a Germanastronomer, Johann Georg von Soldner (1804), presentedcalculations based on Newton’scorpuscular theory that light weighs and bends like high speedprojectiles in a gravitational field, which produced a value of                  = 2GmSun / c2rSun 0.87 arcsecond bendingangle for light grazing the Sun. Fifteen years earlier Sir HenryCavendish made the same calculations, but his results were neverpublished ??? (Will, (1993). Over hundred years later, 1911,Einstein published his first paper on the bending of light based onthe equivalence principle which holds that anything, regardless ofmass, accelerates equally in agravitational field as Galileohad proved it ~300years ago. Einstein also obtained a deflection angle of which is theNewtonian value and the same angle previously published by Soldner.[It appears that Einstein?again copied Soldner by letter to letter just he he did withGerber's equation][p7-8]while the scientificcommunity at the timewere unaware of vonSoldner’s paper?  9[nottrue, for how Einstein wasable to copy theequations, when according to himit was not until the year 1921 when Soldner’s work wasrediscovered?]Aboutfour years after his first paper in 1911, Einstein haddevelopedthe General Theory of Relativity (1915) which prompted him to modifythe above Newtonian value by adding the effect of curved space-time.           = 2GmSun / c2rSun 0.87 arcsecond vonSoldner         = 4GmSun / c2rSun 1.75arc second Einstein  (1.7505395arc second) thusdoubling the bending angle resulting in a new value of 1.75arcseconds but Einstein's argument was falls[p9].[please refer to Figure 1] Figures cannot be shown on yahoo mail. Please refer to the attachment.
Thefactor of “2” is necessarysince light has to pass through tworefractiveindices, one at the entrance and one at the exit of thegravitationalfield, produced by the Sun. and had nothing to do withbent space.
Thenew result was published by Einstein on November 18, (1915) and wasvaguely verified by Crommelin and Eddington during the solareclipse expeditions of May29, 1919 when the sunlight was blocked bythe Moon, starlight grazing the Sun’ssurface became visible and the bending angle of the starlightwas revealed. While the expeditions were being planned. Eddingtonwrote: “The present eclipseexpeditions may for the first time demonstrate theweight of light (i.e. Newton’svalue) and they may also confirm the added effect of Einstein’sweird theory of noon-Euclidean space, or they may lead to a result of yet more farreaching consequences of no deflection”(Eddington, (1919)). The verification of Einstein’s additionalbending angle of 0.87” due to curved space totaling 1.75” ledto instant fame and blind acceptance of his relativity theories”.[please refer to Figure 1]Einstein’srelativitytheories, although they sometime [p9]. produce the right numbers, have often been criticized for beingweird since they are conceptually difficult and often impossibleto understand. 10
Oneserious-problem with Einstein’s bendingof light theory is the assumption that light accelerates andfalls closer to a gravitating body according to the equivalenceprinciple, which would account for the first 0.87 arc second of bend,while the rest, or 0.87 arc second, is due to the obscure warping ofspace. The main objection is that lightdoes not accelerate but, on the contrary, itdecelerates, or slows down in a gravitational field inaccordance to observations. However, the introduction of warped orcurved space is what formed the basis forEinstein’s General relativity theory which is a mathematicalmodel based on geometry and rather mimics gravitation thanexplains it, Thefree space velocity of electromagnetic waves through space isequalto the square root of the gravitational potential or gravitationaltensionof the Universe at our frame of reference.
 Theadditional increase of gravitational tension by individualgravitating bodies, such as the Sun for example,will have the effectof slowing the free space value of c to an amount determined by thestrength of the g field.
Thefree space velocity of electromagnetic waves through space is equalto the square root of the gravitational potential or gravitationaltension of the Universe at our frame of reference Where is the cosmicgravitational tension generated by the total mass in the Universe.The additional increase of gravitational tension by individualgravitating bodies, such as the Sun for example, will have the effectof slowing the free space value of c to an amount determined by v cuniv univ sun 1 c Gm rc, where sun is the gravitationaltension of the Sun at the radial distance r from the center of theSun and m the mass within r. The above Equation is in agreement withexperimental data. 
                     to=tf sqrt1-2GM/rc2 11         t 0 is the proper time between events A and B for a slow-ticking observer within the          gravitationalfield,    
   - t f is the coordinate time between events A and B for a fast-ticking observer at an arbitrarily large distance from the massive object (this assumes the fast-ticking observer is using Schwarzschild coordinates, a coordinate system where a clock at infinite distance from the massive sphere would tick at one second per second of coordinate time, while closer clocks would tick at less than that rate),  
   - G is the gravitational constant,  
   - M is the mass of the object creating the gravitational field,  
   - r is the radial coordinate of the observer (which is analogous to the classical distance from the center of the object, but is actually a Schwarzschild coordinate),  
   - c is the speed of light, and  
   - r s = 2 G M / c 2 is the Schwarzschild radius of M .

https://docplayer.net/32425434-The-bending-of-light-by-gravity-lars-wahlin.html Thebending due to aberration can becalculated using Snell’s law where  ()/c earth n c v.Equation shows that the velocity of electromagnetic waves cannot slow to zerono matter how strong the gravitational tension is, thus most probablyruling out the existence of so called black holes.
Figure1 The factor of “2”is necessary since light has topass through tworefractiveindices, one at the entrance and one at the exit of thegravitationalfield, produced by the Sun.

 12
Figures cannot be shown on yahoo mail. Please refer to the attachment.

  2 Soldner's original diagram Figure 3 Support for Soldner'scalculation
http://lefteris-kaliambos.wikia.com/wiki/EINSTEIN%27S_WRONG_THEORIES
Thebending of light in gravitational fields is much better [and muchsimpler] explained by Snell’s law of refraction (see Fig. 1above)which was experimentally established by Willebrod Snell andtheoretically by René Descartes over three hundred years ago.Snell’s law is based on the discovery that when light enters amedium which retards its velocity of propagation, such as a piece ofglass or agravitational field, it will bend at an angle determined bythe combination of its change in velocity and angle of incidence. Theadvantage of using Snell’s law is that it eliminates both the ideathat (light weighs ?)and the notion of curved space. Snell'law (or inFrance, Descartes’ law) can be written as
                             n=c/v=sinα'/sinα''                  =2[450-sin-1((v*sinα)/c)]=1.75 Note:The Sun's surfaceconditions are rather unstable due to flares and magnetic storms,therefore the value of v may be uncertain.
https://docplayer.net/32425434-The-bending-of-light-by-gravity-lars-wahlin.html
Americanphysicist Compton in1923 showedexperimentally that a photonhas momentum p = hν/c.Moreover the absorption of a photon in the Compton scatteringcontributes not only to the increase of the electron energy ΔE butalso to the increaseof the electron mass ΔΜ,which means that the photon has not only energy (hν) but also mass                              m= p/c = hν/c2.Onthe other hand in 1963 the two American physicists French and Tessmanshowed experimentally that Maxwell’s electromagnetic theory involvesmisconceptions. 13                                 hν/m = ΔΕ/ΔΜ = c2 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johann_Georg_von_Soldner
AlbertEinstein calculated and published a value for the amount ofgravitational light-bending in light skimming the Sun in 1911,leading PhillippLenard to accuse Einstein of plagiarisingSoldner's result. Lenard's accusation against Einstein is usuallyconsidered to have been at least partly motivated by Lenard's enthusiasm for the DeutschePhysik movement. At the time, Einstein may well have beengenuinely unaware of Soldner's work, [Althoughthe equation he used was the same as that of Soldner] Hemay have considered his own calculations to be independent andfree-standing, requiring no references to earlier research.Einstein's 1911 calculation was based on the idea of gravitationaltime dilation. In any case, Einstein's subsequent 1915 generaltheory of relativity argued that allthese calculations had been incomplete, and that the "classic"Newtonian arguments, combined with light-bending effects due togravitationaltime dilation, gave a combined prediction that was twice as highas the earlier predictions? 

14 to 19 are the calculations 
Figures cannot be shown on yahoo mail. Please refer to the attachment.
 20
Notes
 Accordingone calculation there is 7*1045kg Photons in theobservable Universe against 1054kg baryonic material. The other calculation shows 3*1097kg, if using the minimum weigh calculated by the Planck constant.It means that we may have 3*1043times more photons than baryons? Canit be a missing mass or the dark energy?


Seemy (Lars Wåhlin) "12AMERICANPHYSICISTS REJECT EINSTEIN"). Under this condition in 1993 Ipresented my paper of dipolephotons which led to my discovery of Photon-MatterInteraction.
[1-10]are referenced in the paper titled EINSTEIN'sLEGACY by Dr.K Kehrer 2018 September

Figures can be scrambled by yahoo mail. Please refer to the attachment.









  









 
 


















 




















 



















 

















 20
NotesSeemy (Lars Wåhlin) "12AMERICANPHYSICISTS REJECT EINSTEIN"). Under this condition in 1993 Ipresented my paper of dipolephotons which led to my discovery of Photon-MatterInteraction.
[1-10]are referenced in the paper titled EINSTEIN'sLEGACY byDr.K Kehrer 2018 September