What force should be bigger?

[DimaMazin]

What force should be bigger: necessary force for change of polarization of red photon or necessary force for change of polarization of blue photon?

[swansont]

If you have circular polarization, this is associated with the photon having spin angular momentum of ±hbar. Changing this value is not associated with the wavelength.

 

 

[DimaMazin]

Can wave motion be caused by quantum entanglement? Why entangled particles on distance cannot wave each other?

Edited December 6, 2020 by DimaMazin

[swansont]

1 hour ago, DimaMazin said:

Can wave motion be caused by quantum entanglement? Why entangled particles on distance cannot wave each other?

Caused by? No. 

“wave each other”? I don’t know what that is.

[DimaMazin]

What is the velocity of a photon in a mirror tube when the diameter of this tube is less than the wavelength of the photon? Does it reduce or increase velocity of the photon due to wave strikes?

[joigus]

48 minutes ago, DimaMazin said:

What is the velocity of a photon in a mirror tube when the diameter of this tube is less than the wavelength of the photon?

There would be lots of diffraction. Direction would change considerably. Photon ending up just about anywhere.

48 minutes ago, DimaMazin said:

Does it reduce or increase velocity of the photon due to wave strikes?

In vacuum photons don't change rapidity. In medium, they do, according to refraction index.

[swansont]

1 hour ago, DimaMazin said:

What is the velocity of a photon in a mirror tube when the diameter of this tube is less than the wavelength of the photon? Does it reduce or increase velocity of the photon due to wave strikes?

If it’s a waveguide below cutoff, there can be no photon. If it’s a single-mode waveguide, the nominal speed is c, but the presence of the walls probably represents an index>1 due to the evanescent interaction, so it’s less than c. For multi-mode, the path isn’t straight, so the propagation speed is definitely less than c.

Or are you asking about the scharnhorst effect?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scharnhorst_effect

 

[DimaMazin]

3 hours ago, swansont said:

If it’s a waveguide below cutoff, there can be no photon.

 

If  cutoff exists for red photon, but blue photon can be there. Then  acceleration of the very long waveguide from the source of the blue photon can turn the blue photon into red photon . Then how the photon can disappear in the waveguide?

Edited December 31, 2020 by DimaMazin

[swansont]

3 hours ago, DimaMazin said:

If  cutoff exists for red photon, but blue photon can be there. Then  acceleration of the very long waveguide from the source of the blue photon can turn the blue photon into red photon . Then how the photon can disappear in the waveguide?

Explain the middle part. Why would acceleration of the waveguide affect the photon?

[DimaMazin]

1 hour ago, swansont said:

Explain the middle part. Why would acceleration of the waveguide affect the photon?

The acceleration of the waveguide can turn the blue photon into red photon relative to the waveguide only when it does not affect the photon.

[swansont]

55 minutes ago, DimaMazin said:

The acceleration of the waveguide can turn the blue photon into red photon relative to the waveguide only when it does not affect the photon.

If it doesn’t affect the photon, why would the wavelength change?

 

[DimaMazin]

7 hours ago, swansont said:

If it doesn’t affect the photon, why would the wavelength change?

 

The acceleration increases negative velocity of the waveguide relative to source of the photon. Negative velocity creates redshift of the wavelength relative to the waveguide.

[swansont]

6 hours ago, DimaMazin said:

The acceleration increases negative velocity of the waveguide relative to source of the photon. Negative velocity creates redshift of the wavelength relative to the waveguide.

You don’t need acceleration for that, and that redshift is in the waveguide’s frame, not in the source frame. If it’s transmitted in the source frame, it would be transmitted in all frames.

[DimaMazin]

On 1/1/2021 at 4:42 PM, swansont said:

You don’t need acceleration for that, and that redshift is in the waveguide’s frame, not in the source frame. If it’s transmitted in the source frame, it would be transmitted in all frames.

How do you define what photon cannot travel in thin waveguide becouse it is thin for the photon?Why do you think that source frame is more important for such definition?

Why polarity of photon wave cannot be rotating? If it can be rotating then what is energy of the rotation?

Edited January 3, 2021 by DimaMazin

[swansont]

4 hours ago, DimaMazin said:

How do you define what photon cannot travel in thin waveguide becouse it is thin for the photon?Why do you think that source frame is more important for such definition?

I don’t think it’s more important; relativity says it’s not. It’s also true that if an event happens in one frame it happens in all frames, and I am free to pick the frame in which I check.

 

4 hours ago, DimaMazin said:

Why polarity of photon wave cannot be rotating?

Who said it can’t?

4 hours ago, DimaMazin said:

If it can be rotating then what is energy of the rotation?

Polarity doesn’t represent an energy difference. So it’s zero. A linearly polarized photon has the same energy as a circularly polarized photon of the same frequency. 

[DimaMazin]

On 12/7/2020 at 1:32 AM, swansont said:

 

“wave each other”? I don’t know what that is.

For example two photons with the same fraquency are traveling together. They have horizontal polarizations. Then fraquency is time to do left amlitude or right amlitude. When one photon makes left amplitude then another photon makes right amlitude  for support of momentum law.

[swansont]

2 hours ago, DimaMazin said:

For example two photons with the same fraquency are traveling together. They have horizontal polarizations. Then fraquency is time to do left amlitude or right amlitude. When one photon makes left amplitude then another photon makes right amlitude  for support of momentum law.

 You’re describing photons out of phase, which would destructively interfere, so more information about the situation is needed.

“Support of momentum law” makes no sense.

[Abigaelle28]

On 1/3/2021 at 2:34 PM, swansont said:

I don’t think it’s more important; relativity says it’s not. It’s also true that if an event happens in one frame it happens in all frames, and I am free to pick the frame in which I check.

 

Who said it can’t?

Polarity doesn’t represent an energy difference. So it’s zero. A linearly polarized photon has the same energy as a circularly polarized photon of the same frequency. 

 

On 12/31/2020 at 1:15 PM, swansont said:

If it’s a waveguide below cutoff, there can be no photon. If it’s a single-mode waveguide, the nominal speed is c, but the presence of the walls probably represents an index>1 due to the evanescent interaction, so it’s less than c. For multi-mode, the path isn’t straight, so the propagation speed is definitely less than c.

Or are you asking about the scharnhorst effect?

https://www.shuttle-paris-airports.com/paris-shuttle  

 

Basically, what is relativity in your opinion? I think it's a fixed ideology

[swansont]

3 hours ago, Abigaelle28 said:

Basically, what is relativity in your opinion? I think it's a fixed ideology

Relativity is a notion in physics that some variables depend on the frame of reference in which they are measured. Einstein developed the theories of special and general relativity to deal with mechanics and its dependence on reference frames (GR incorporates gravity)

As a theory it makes predictions and has been extensively tested, and is supported by these experimental results. It's not an ideology.