|
|
| Author |
Message |
Patti
science forum beginner
Joined: 14 Jul 2005
Posts: 13
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 8:48 pm Post subject:
Re: Pair Productions Questions
|
|
|
Ben Rudiak-Gould wrote:
| Quote: | Patti wrote:
1. Why do you need electric fields or the vicinity of nucleus
for pair production to occur assuming your photons have enough
energy to create the rest mass of electron-positron pairs?
If you just have one photon, the reason is conservation of momentum: there's
no way to choose valid 4-momenta for an electron and a positron that add to
a valid 4-momentum for a photon. This ceases to be a problem when there's a
nucleus nearby to absorb the excess momentum.
If you have more than one photon, you can get pair-production in a vacuum.
2. When the photons zoom near the vicinity of nucleus. Where
do the identities of the electrons and positrons come from??
(since they are not made up of photons) Can you give a rough account of
the stages between the production?
An electron-positron pair arises spontaneously, absorbs the photon, and
interacts (via a virtual photon) with the nucleus. I think that's the best
explanation you're going to get from current theory.
|
In a normal electric field. Only virtual electron-positron is
produced. No virtual proton-antiproton pair is produced. How come?
Is it because there is not enough energy to produced proton-antiproton
pair in the normal electric field (from electron)??
Patti |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
The Ghost In The Machine
science forum Guru
Joined: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 1551
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 1:00 am Post subject:
Re: Pair Productions Questions
|
|
|
In sci.physics, Patti
<particldude@yahoo.com>
wrote
on 14 Jul 2005 13:05:43 -0700
<1121371543.387238.272210@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
| Quote: |
Y.Porat wrote:
The idiot parrots explain things they have no green idea
about what they asre talking about just psrroting.
in that case they should say simply:
we have no green idea how it i sdone!!
but No they keep on 'explaning'
2 the idiot parrots di dgot it untill now that
ENERGY I SMASS IN MOTION!1 and even the photon has mass.
that is solved all th e entanglement
and the photon is just an exception to the rule that
n o mass can reach the velocity of light
just simple as that
3 only idiots physicists have momentum but no mass!!!
4 parrots and crook physicists are interests in making it as comlicated
as possible
in order that 'only they can understand it ......
no t much different from 500 years ago by the church.
ATB
Y.Porat
-----------------------
Y. Photon has no mass. That is why it can travel at c.
Anything with mass travel less than c. What is your arguments
and proofs that photon has mass?
|
The theory is that the photon has no mass. AFAIK the
measurements of photon rest mass have established an upper
bound of about 2 * 10^-16 eV. (This is not to be confused
with the *energy* of a photon, which for a 500 nm visibile
light quanta is about 2.4814 eV. Naively dividing this
by c^2 results in a "pseudo-mass" of 2.757 * 10^-17 eV
s^2/m^2; the problem here is that the units are wrong.)
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0306245
cites this result but suggests it is destroyed by vortices; I can't
say, but this is from the result of a Google search.
--
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
It's still legal to go .sigless. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Y.Porat
science forum Guru
Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 1809
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 2:50 am Post subject:
Re: Pair Productions Questions
|
|
|
there are too many arguments
one general is
tha t once you internalise it
a lot of artificial 'problems' that he false assumption (of no mass..)
created
are magically solved!!
you just have to understans that :
THE PHOTON IS AN EXCEPTION TO THE ABOVE RULE!!
that n omass can reach th evelocity of C
btw was it Einsteins claim that th ephotn has no mass or was it
of his folowers??)
once you realse that
energy i s mass in motion (exactly as in macrocosm!!!!!)
anhyone who is chnging the macroscopic rules
the burdain of prove are - on him !!
you can expand macroscopic rules
you cannot abort them
i hope you realise the difference between expanding a rule
and aborting it .
so if you get it
than all those enigmas of swiching betwen energy and mass
are solves imediately !!
and there are other argumements
that if you accept my word untill now we can go on with it
ATB
Y.Porat
----------------------------- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bjoern Feuerbacher
science forum Guru
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 395
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 6:26 am Post subject:
Re: Pair Productions Questions
|
|
|
John Sefton wrote:
| Quote: |
Patti wrote:
Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote:
Patti wrote:
1. Why do you need electric fields or the vicinity of nucleus
for pair production to occur assuming your photons have enough
energy to create the rest mass of electron-positron pairs?
Conservation of momentum.
Wrong.
The photon has spin in one plane. It
is two-dimensional.
You bring it in close in order to spin it
in the second plane.
This makes it three-dimensional.
Momentum plus a healthy amount of
spin is changed into an electron and positron.
|
Utter nonsense.
Hint to "Patti": Sefton is one of our many resident cranks. Simply
ignore him.
Bye,
Bjoern |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bjoern Feuerbacher
science forum Guru
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 395
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 6:28 am Post subject:
Re: Pair Productions Questions
|
|
|
Patti wrote:
| Quote: |
Ben Rudiak-Gould wrote:
Patti wrote:
1. Why do you need electric fields or the vicinity of nucleus
for pair production to occur assuming your photons have enough
energy to create the rest mass of electron-positron pairs?
If you just have one photon, the reason is conservation of momentum: there's
no way to choose valid 4-momenta for an electron and a positron that add to
a valid 4-momentum for a photon. This ceases to be a problem when there's a
nucleus nearby to absorb the excess momentum.
If you have more than one photon, you can get pair-production in a vacuum.
2. When the photons zoom near the vicinity of nucleus. Where
do the identities of the electrons and positrons come from??
(since they are not made up of photons) Can you give a rough account of
the stages between the production?
An electron-positron pair arises spontaneously, absorbs the photon, and
interacts (via a virtual photon) with the nucleus. I think that's the best
explanation you're going to get from current theory.
In a normal electric field. Only virtual electron-positron is
produced.
|
Reference, please. I'm not sure what exactly you are talking about.
| Quote: | No virtual proton-antiproton pair is produced. How come?
Is it because there is not enough energy to produced proton-antiproton
pair in the normal electric field (from electron)??
|
Probably.
Bye,
Bjoern |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bjoern Feuerbacher
science forum Guru
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 395
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 6:31 am Post subject:
Re: Pair Productions Questions
|
|
|
John C. Polasek wrote:
[snip]
| Quote: | OK, let' say I get the part about
|
Unfortunately, you did not get it.
| Quote: | "Particles are simply excitation states of
fields. The electromagnetic field gets de-excited (loses an
excitation, a photon), and the "electron field" gets excited (gains
two types of excitations, an electron and a positron)",
but why did you leave out the part about phlogiston? :>)
|
Because that is wholly irrelevant here?
| Quote: | Can't you see that this kind of talk sounds like Harry Potter stuff?
It's voodoo and more voodoo.
|
To the ignorant and uninformed, maybe yes. Thanks for clearing up what
you are.
| Quote: | My paper proves how the vacuum can have real permittivity and how it
is able to do so only by virtue of a matrix of ep cells of specific
size.
|
Don't confuse "prove" with "assert".
| Quote: | QED is still wondering what's behind the Green Door.
|
In no way.
Bye,
Bjoern |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bjoern Feuerbacher
science forum Guru
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 395
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 6:33 am Post subject:
Re: Pair Productions Questions
|
|
|
John Sefton wrote:
| Quote: |
John C. Polasek wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 17:10:07 +0200, Bjoern Feuerbacher
bjoern.feuerbacher@pci.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:
John C. Polasek wrote:
On 14 Jul 2005 04:20:31 -0700, "Patti" <particldude@yahoo.com> wrote:
1. Why do you need electric fields or the vicinity of nucleus
for pair production to occur assuming your photons have enough
energy to create the rest mass of electron-positron pairs?
2. When the photons zoom near the vicinity of nucleus. Where
do the identities of the electrons and positrons come from??
(since they are not made up of photons) Can you give a rough
account of
the stages between the production?
3. How come the pair dissolves back into photons. What would
it take to make permanent electrons out of it??
4. Does this mean given enough energy. We can create a holodeck
where any stuff can be precipitated at will??
5. Suppose you supply a photon energy equivalent to the rest
mass of dozens of W Bosons. What would dictate whether
the output would results in hundreds of electron-positron
pair or pions or muons or W Bosons?? What control their
expressions??
Patti
I have developed a new theory
Thanks for showing that you don't know what "theory" means in science.
that analyzes ep pairs in detail showing
the "quantum vacuum" is all ep pairs.
Don't confuse "showing" with "asserting".
[snip more wild fantasies]
Bye,
Bjoern
OK, let' say I get the part about
"Particles are simply excitation states of fields. The electromagnetic
field gets de-excited (loses an excitation, a photon), and the
"electron field" gets excited (gains two types of excitations, an
electron and a positron)",
but why did you leave out the part about phlogiston? :>)
Can't you see that this kind of talk sounds like Harry Potter stuff?
It's voodoo and more voodoo.
My paper proves how the vacuum can have real permittivity and how it
is able to do so only by virtue of a matrix of ep cells of specific
size. QED is still wondering what's behind the Green Door.
John Polasek
Which part makes which excitation? The voo or the doo?
|
Ridiculing something simply because you don't understand it makes
you only look childish.
| Quote: | And are these 'point-like' excitations?
|
Yes.
| Quote: | What in the world is Bjoern talking about?
|
About QED, the most successful and accurate theory which physics,
even science as a whole, ever had.
| Quote: | I, too, have arrived at the negative field overlying the
positive field and when they are spun together,
they separate.
|
*That* is voodoo talk.
| Quote: | But the question still stands, why are they of a specific
size? Why is an electron always exactly an electron?
|
Because if it weren't an electron, it wouldn't be called an electron. Duh.
Bye,
Bjoern |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lysdexia
science forum Guru
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Posts: 1207
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 10:44 am Post subject:
Re: Pair Productions Questions
|
|
|
|
bizarre |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lysdexia
science forum Guru
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Posts: 1207
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 10:48 am Post subject:
Re: Pair Productions Questions
|
|
|
did get
3 is meaningless.
interested |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Sefton
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 06 May 2005
Posts: 143
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 2:10 pm Post subject:
Re: Pair Productions Questions
|
|
|
Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote:
| Quote: | John Sefton wrote:
John C. Polasek wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 17:10:07 +0200, Bjoern Feuerbacher
bjoern.feuerbacher@pci.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:
John C. Polasek wrote:
On 14 Jul 2005 04:20:31 -0700, "Patti" <particldude@yahoo.com> wrote:
1. Why do you need electric fields or the vicinity of nucleus
for pair production to occur assuming your photons have enough
energy to create the rest mass of electron-positron pairs?
2. When the photons zoom near the vicinity of nucleus. Where
do the identities of the electrons and positrons come from??
(since they are not made up of photons) Can you give a rough
account of
the stages between the production?
3. How come the pair dissolves back into photons. What would
it take to make permanent electrons out of it??
4. Does this mean given enough energy. We can create a holodeck
where any stuff can be precipitated at will??
5. Suppose you supply a photon energy equivalent to the rest
mass of dozens of W Bosons. What would dictate whether
the output would results in hundreds of electron-positron
pair or pions or muons or W Bosons?? What control their
expressions??
Patti
I have developed a new theory
Thanks for showing that you don't know what "theory" means in science.
that analyzes ep pairs in detail showing
the "quantum vacuum" is all ep pairs.
Don't confuse "showing" with "asserting".
[snip more wild fantasies]
Bye,
Bjoern
OK, let' say I get the part about
"Particles are simply excitation states of fields. The
electromagnetic field gets de-excited (loses an excitation, a
photon), and the "electron field" gets excited (gains two types of
excitations, an electron and a positron)",
but why did you leave out the part about phlogiston? :>)
Can't you see that this kind of talk sounds like Harry Potter stuff?
It's voodoo and more voodoo.
My paper proves how the vacuum can have real permittivity and how it
is able to do so only by virtue of a matrix of ep cells of specific
size. QED is still wondering what's behind the Green Door.
John Polasek
Which part makes which excitation? The voo or the doo?
Ridiculing something simply because you don't understand it makes
you only look childish.
And are these 'point-like' excitations?
Yes.
What in the world is Bjoern talking about?
About QED, the most successful and accurate theory which physics,
even science as a whole, ever had.
I, too, have arrived at the negative field overlying the
positive field and when they are spun together,
they separate.
*That* is voodoo talk.
But the question still stands, why are they of a specific
size? Why is an electron always exactly an electron?
Because if it weren't an electron, it wouldn't be called an electron. Duh.
Bjoern, you miss a lot of deeper meanings. |
Maybe you're a wader.
John |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Y.Porat
science forum Guru
Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 1809
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2005 7:21 am Post subject:
Re: Pair Productions Questions
|
|
|
John C. Polasek wrote:
| Quote: | On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 17:10:07 +0200, Bjoern Feuerbacher
bjoern.feuerbacher@pci.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:
John C. Polasek wrote:
On 14 Jul 2005 04:20:31 -0700, "Patti" <particldude@yahoo.com> wrote:
"Particles are simply excitation states of
fields. The electromagnetic field gets de-excited (loses an
excitation, a photon), and the "electron field" gets excited (gains
two types of excitations, an electron and a positron)",
but why did you leave out the part about phlogiston? :>)
Can't you see that this kind of talk sounds like Harry Potter stuff?
It's voodoo and more voodoo.
My paper proves how the vacuum can have real permittivity and how it
is able to do so only by virtue of a matrix of ep cells of specific
size.
------------------- |
'able to do so only by virtual of matrix of ep cells !!
specific size !!
ehhh!!
dont you see that your suggestion is just another
Hurry potter stuff??
dont you realise that a particle i ssomethng much more
basic than a field?
dont you realise that a field cannot exist without
some particles that give it birth??
do you have evidence of the existance of a field
without the existance of some particles
somewhere nearby of further away??
ATB
Y.Porat
----------------- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John C. Polasek
science forum Guru
Joined: 30 Apr 2005
Posts: 321
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2005 11:31 pm Post subject:
Re: Pair Productions Questions
|
|
|
On 16 Jul 2005 02:21:55 -0700, "Y.Porat" <maporat@012.net.il> wrote:
| Quote: |
John C. Polasek wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 17:10:07 +0200, Bjoern Feuerbacher
bjoern.feuerbacher@pci.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:
John C. Polasek wrote:
On 14 Jul 2005 04:20:31 -0700, "Patti" <particldude@yahoo.com> wrote:
"Particles are simply excitation states of
fields. The electromagnetic field gets de-excited (loses an
excitation, a photon), and the "electron field" gets excited (gains
two types of excitations, an electron and a positron)",
but why did you leave out the part about phlogiston? :>)
Can't you see that this kind of talk sounds like Harry Potter stuff?
It's voodoo and more voodoo.
My paper proves how the vacuum can have real permittivity and how it
is able to do so only by virtue of a matrix of ep cells of specific
size.
-------------------
'able to do so only by virtual of matrix of ep cells !!
specific size !!
ehhh!!
dont you see that your suggestion is just another
Hurry potter stuff??
dont you realise that a particle i ssomethng much more
basic than a field?
dont you realise that a field cannot exist without
some particles that give it birth??
do you have evidence of the existance of a field
without the existance of some particles
somewhere nearby of further away??
ATB
Y.Porat
-----------------
Porat your stuff is pretty hard to read anyway but on top of that you |
are mixed up. The quotation "Particle are..." is not mine, it's
Bjoern's QED stuff to which I am objecting.
Look at my paper on Permittivity where I derive how it is possible
even to store energy in a vacuum. And there you will finally find the
seeds of everything in the universe, each "seed" containing an ep pair
in a shell 3.54x10^-14m.
That pair is what responds to a vacuum electric field like a
sqeezebox, each particle moving oppositely and elastically, storing
the electric energy in the "spring".
John Polasek
http://www.dualspace.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lysdexia
science forum Guru
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Posts: 1207
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 5:27 am Post subject:
Re: Pair Productions Questions
|
|
|
|
don't, Harry, existence |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nick
science forum Guru
Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 795
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 5:39 am Post subject:
Re: Pair Productions Questions
|
|
|
No forces without matter.
Its the unified field. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Y.Porat
science forum Guru
Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 1809
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 2:49 pm Post subject:
Re: Pair Productions Questions
|
|
|
no forces without matter thats right
it ios because
th eforce agents are residuals of matter
if you like methaphorically:
splashes ' from the matter
so if there is just vacum nothing can come out of it!!
ATB
Y.Porat
------------------------- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Google
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
The time now is Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:38 pm | All times are GMT
|
|
Mortgage | Credit Cards | Debt Management | Online Advertising | Advertising
|
|
Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
|
|
Other DeniX Solutions sites:
Electronics forum |
Medicine forum |
Unix/Linux blog |
Unix/Linux documentation |
Unix/Linux forums
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Forum index
»
Science and Technology
»
Physics
»
Particle
