2 photons...again

[Shadow]

This is more of a verifying question...Two photons are flying next to each other (same direction) at c...relative to Photon A, is Photon B's velocity c?

[Bob_for_short]

This is more of a verifying question...Two photons are flying next to each other (same direction) at c...relative to Photon A, is Photon B's velocity c?

 

No, two such photons are like one with a doubled amplitude.

[insane_alien]

the frame of a photon is not a valid reference frame. the question makes no sense.

[Fuzzwood]

Particle vs wave form

[Bob_for_short]

the frame of a photon is not a valid reference frame. the question makes no sense.

 

The frame of a photon makes sense in a transparent medium where v < c.

[insane_alien]

you seem to be the only one claiming this. i have searched for an article, journal paper or well, anything that says photons move slower when in a material but i can't find one.

 

the burden of proof isn't on me anyway, its on you. you are the one making the claim that photons don't move at c in a material despite everyone else saying they don't(including the guy you linked to to support your claim).

 

so cough up or shut up.

 

EDIT, btw, this thread has gone majorly offtopic. i suggest a mod move this off topic discussion to its own thread.

[D H]

EDIT, btw, this thread has gone majorly offtopic. i suggest a mod move this off topic discussion to its own thread.

Several posts moved to this thread. Note: The subject of this new thread lies more in the domain of quantum mechanics (i.e., Quantum Theory) than relativity.

[iNow]

This is more of a verifying question...Two photons are flying next to each other (same direction) at c...relative to Photon A, is Photon B's velocity c?

 

Just since this thread got so far side-tracked, I wanted to come back to the question in the OP. As insane_alien pointed out, the question doesn't make sense.

 

The reason for this, Shadow, is that you ask about velocity relative to a photon. When you do that, you posit that a photon can serve as a valid reference frame for comparison. However, a valid reference frame (in this scenario) requires that the comparison object be at rest, and a photon (by definition) is always moving at the speed of light (ergo, can never be "at rest").

 

So, in essence, the photon does not have a reference frame by which to make relative comparisons. This is why your question doesn't make sense. There is no such thing as a valid reference frame for a photon.

[Shadow]

Thanks a bunch iNow, that helps a lot

[iNow]

My pleasure.

[booker]

the frame of a photon is not a valid reference frame. the question makes no sense.

 

What invalidates it?

[insane_alien]

it isn't inertial.

[booker]

it isn't inertial.

 

OK, a frame of reference of velocity c isn't inertial. Why is this a problem, other than that others get real upset about it?

[swansont]

OK, a frame of reference of velocity c isn't inertial. Why is this a problem, other than that others get real upset about it?

 

Because we can't describe it. The transform from one inertial frame to another diverges when you use v=c, and they physics we know and can test happens in frames we can access.