An addendum to my Topic of Energy and Matter

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by Gerry Nightingale, Jun 6, 2014.

  1. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    There are single photon generators and detectors.
    http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?arnumber=6729066
    You may recant at your leisure.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,867
    This is what, the 5th or 6th time he has been demonstrably shown that he is wrong? I assume this will also be the 5th or 6th time that he will dodge and/or ignore the truth.

    Showing him he is wrong is quite easy, breaking through his delusions so that he admits he is wrong is niegh on impossible!
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,237
    Gerry:

    Hint: when you apologise to somebody in future, don't include the word "but", because that kind of negates the apology by trying to justify the offence. But let's move on...

    Both of those guys conducted experiments in electromagnetism and so helped develop the theory of electric and magnetic fields. Faraday was not formally educated, but he still ended up with a fundamental law of electromagnetism named after him, because it was he who discovered the relevant effect (electromagnetic induction).

    No. The causes were already well understood by the time Einstein came along. Electric charge creates electric field; moving charge creates magnetic field; and so on.

    I've never heard of "ultimate gravity".

    Are you saying you don't believe that black holes exist? That seems strange for somebody who claims to admire (and presumably agree with) Einstein.

    There's also a lot of evidence for them. To pick one example at random, there's a very nice data set that shows that there is an extremely large black hole at the centre of our galaxy. Over time, we've seen many stars orbiting the hole. The size of the object they orbit is constrained by observation. With it's observed mass and size, it can't be anything other than a black hole. Or, at least, nobody has come up with any plausible alternative so far.

    I don't understand what that means.

    It sounds to me like you're confusing relativity with quantum mechanics. In this post, you've talked about gravity, but you've said virtually nothing about QM.

    There are plenty of detectors sensitive enough to detect single photons. There are also many sources that can be dialed back to emit single photons. Try google.

    Also, did you know that Einstein invented photons? He actually won the Nobel prize for them.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Gerry Nightingale Banned Banned

    Messages:
    278
    In reply to Alex G., re: your #141 post.

    Are you serious? Using theoretical numerical sequences to verify the ACTUAL existence of a matter-less state-of-condition? Do you really think a single "wave-point" existence

    is "proof" of a "single photon?".

    NO.


    (Thanks for reading!)
     
  8. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,867
    Imagine my surprise that you were not able to break through his delusions!
     
  9. Gerry Nightingale Banned Banned

    Messages:
    278
    In reply to James R., re: your # 143 post.


    (1) I apologized for the over-all "tone" of my response to you...and that was all.


    (2) If you do not "understand" what I write...what of it? I have already been assigned the status of "delusional asshole", so why attempt to understand anything I write?

    If it is all "mindless drivel", then there is no tenable reason to respond.

    (3) There are NO "blackholes", as they are purported to exist...conditions that manifest "magic" as "real things". I do not believe in QM "magic", and without a religious

    adherence to a doctrine of QM magic...I am then able to "see clearly".

    (4) There is NO PROOF of singular-photon existence, and there never will be any proof. There are no devices that can emit a single-photon, and any attempt to "prove to me"

    that such devices exist will not be believed, at least not by me.



    For example: To build a device that is capable of emitting a single photon would mean that the device is capable of "knowing" "when and where" a photon will be emitted! And

    further, the device would need an inherent ability to exert "force" on a single photon, so as to channel it toward something of substance so the photon's energy can be registered
    as "there". Obviously, QM serves well to create workable theory into reality...such as "wave" mechanics easily describe "how a television works"

    To inform me that a device exists that can both "emit and detect" a single photon....no device can "create" ONE measurable quantifiable "photon".

    By corollary, no device can "detect" a single photon.


    (5) Your last sentence "Einstein invented photons" and "received a Nobel for them" is completely incorrect.

    Einstein did not "make-up" the word "photo" or "photon". They are Greek in origin, and he used the term "photon" to define a "discrete packet of energy".

    A.E. was awarded the Prize for "creating a definable theory of photo-electric effect"...i.e., his theory can be verified by mathematics as well as reality.



    (Thanks for reading!)
     
  10. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    You don't read very well. The hardware of the generator are single photon detectors. Now when you say 'show me a single photon', I could say 'open your eyes' But in this case there are actual real world mechanisms for you to deny exist.

    Here's the patent of such a device.

    http://www.google.com/patents/US20130056704
     
  11. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,867
    If that is the 'status' you have been assigned, why do you think that would be? Is it because you do not have knowledge? No, most people here, myself included have much to learn. Is it because you don't appear smart? No, that is not a requirement to participate or to be appreciated.

    Is it because when you are presented evidence that is counter to your postion you simply disregard it out of hand without a rational explanation why? Is it because you have stated up front that no amount of evidence or data, no matter how convincing, can change your mind on your interpretation of a scientific principle?

    Now I think we are getting somewhere.

    A mind is a terrible thing to waste. Not being given an opportunity to develop your mind is a tragedy, steadfastly refusing to use your mind when given the opportunity is obscene.
     
  12. Gerry Nightingale Banned Banned

    Messages:
    278
    In reply to post #148.

    I wrote an "alternate theory" in an "alternate theory" section, stating my observations and conclusions.

    You are the one "posting" obscenities, such as your evaluation OF ME as a "delusional asshole".

    I want to stay with Albert as a "fellow traveler" of "delusional assholes".

    ......

    "....no amount of evidence or data, no matter how convincing...." No, not to me. I remain unconvinced! What "evidence" of "what?" Photons? A "single" photon? NO.

    I already wrote out "what I think" in my original topic! And you demand I retract my own logic? Why? Because you and others say I should?

    No...first I need proof of "discrete packets of energy", "singular" photons.



    (Thanks for reading!)
     
  13. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304

    "Single-photon generator and method of enhancement of broadband single-photon emission"
    http://www.google.com/patents/US20130056704

    Complete denial of reality.
     
  14. Gerry Nightingale Banned Banned

    Messages:
    278
    In reply to Alex G., re: your #147 "link".

    An example of "single photon FLUX" is NOT an "isolated" photon.

    ......

    I am certain you can find hundreds of "patents" dealing with photons. (My t.v. has at least 16 that I can see on the labels)

    The Russians have "invented" television all over again, instead of wasting time invading their neighbors...OOPS, my bad.

    ......

    Try again.


    (Thanks for reading!)
     
  15. Gerry Nightingale Banned Banned

    Messages:
    278
    In reply to Alex G. #150 post.

    Unless you can find a "photon held as an UNEXPRESSED "packet of energy", there's not much point of looking for "more proof" to show me.

    This means that a "single photon" is being held in a "capture" environment, WITHOUT loss of it's ORIGINAL energy...you will find no proof that such a circumstance has occurred.



    (Thanks for reading!)
     
  16. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    Simply argument by denial.

    You've spent the entire thread simply saying what you DON'T believe.
     
  17. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    is this why you do not even touch mathematics ?
    funny, you claim to be such a theoretical physicist(keep in mind you have never, even ,attempted a degree of such or any science for that matter) and yet, never touch math,
    the actual funny part is,
    theoretical physics is nothing BUT math.
     
  18. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    but i can see due to what's called " day " light.
     
  19. Gerry Nightingale Banned Banned

    Messages:
    278
    In reply to the "thread troll", re

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    1=1=2 .

    (happy now?) Oh, wait...I forgot "0". It makes a nice "book-keeper".

    Also, I have a Bachelor of Science degree, 228 credits worth. (not bad for 3 yrs.)
     
  20. Gerry Nightingale Banned Banned

    Messages:
    278
    more reply to thread troll.

    Numbers DO NOT equal "theory", theory is theory!
     
  21. Gerry Nightingale Banned Banned

    Messages:
    278
    In reply to Alex G. post # 153, re: ?

    "This entire thread" was started due to responses regarding MY TOPIC!

    (I like your avatar...looks like a "deadhead" on a economy flying-carpet...it matches your intellect and your minor capacity for wit!)

    (go ahead, look for some more "crap that looks really cool and hard to figure out man...I'll put this up and he'll be like "Aw man...whatta' hell I do now?)



    (Thanks for reading!)
     
  22. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    funny, a " bachelor of science " can mean anything,
    were you studying to be a farmer ?(bachelor of science in agriculture)
     
  23. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    theoretical physics is nothing BUT " numbers " / mathematics.
     

Share This Page