PHOTONS AND PHONONS OPEN DISCUSSION

[Centraflow]

This will be for discussion of Photons and Phonons, it seems not everything is known about them, they are the two sides of the same coin.

A phonon is the quantum mechanical description of an elementary vibrational motion in which a lattice of atoms or molecules uniformly oscillates at a single frequency.

A photon is a type of elementary particle. It is the quantum of the electromagnetic field including electromagnetic radiation such as light and radio waves, and the force carrier for the electromagnetic force. Photons are massless,[a] and they always move at the speed of light in vacuum, 299792458 m/s.

Over time I will place here what is known and what possible things are not known about them.

Please feel free to post anything about them, but please keep this on topic.

This topic will have an end story which is to do with my investigations.

I would like you to consider that a magnetic field is made up of Photons and that an electric field is also made up of Photons, so both magnetic and electric fields are one of the same things which we call an electromagnetic field such as for example radio waves.

Photons are emitted in many natural processes. For example, when a charge is accelerated it emits synchrotron radiation.

Regards

Mike

[conradelektro]

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

Wikipedia says under "Thermodynamics": The behavior of thermal phonons is similar to the photon gas produced by an electromagnetic cavity, wherein photons may be emitted or absorbed by the cavity walls. This similarity is not coincidental, for it turns out that the electromagnetic field behaves like a set of harmonic oscillators, giving rise to Black-body radiation.

Are you interested in this "similarity"?

Greetings, Conrad

[Centraflow]

Hi
It is the electrical conductivity which is the part which is interesting, but not at super low temperatures but room temperatures and the possible reaction with photons.

Photons are the stuff that magnetic fields are made of so when you switch on a solenoid coil photons pass through it in the form of the magnetic field. If you create an electric field through the center of the solenoid by making it a capacitor using a perpendicular coil running through the center, the result of this under certain parameters is interesting to say the least.

Typing on my phone so may add to this later, thank you for the input

Regards

Mike

[Verpies]

Photons are the stuff that magnetic fields are made of so when you switch on a solenoid coil photons pass through it in the form of the magnetic field.

If it was so then a path of a laser beam passing through the solenoid would be affected, but it is not.

[Centraflow]

If it was so then a path of a laser beam passing through the solenoid would be affected, but it is not.

Hi Verpies,

From what I understand and forgive me as it is not my field, excuse the pun, the electromagnetic interaction is mediated by the constant exchange of photons from one charged object to another. The magnetic field is really just a classical approximation to the photon-exchange picture. In a moving reference frame, a magnetic field appears instead as a combination of a magnetic field and an electric field, so electric and magnetic fields are made of the same "stuff" (photons).

Some electromagnetic interactions involve "real" photons with definite frequencies, energies, and momenta. Electrostatic and magnetic fields involve the exchange of "virtual" photons instead. Very close to an electron is a dense cloud of virtual photons which are constantly being emitted and re-absorbed by the electron. Some of these photons split into electron-positron pairs (or pairs of even heavier stuff), which recombine into photons which are re-absorbed by the original electron. These virtual particle loops screen the charge of the electron so that far away from an electron it appears as if it has less charge than close by.

Normally we wouldn't call any of these fields "matter", but it is true that the electric and magnetic fields which surround a charged object like an electron do store energy, and therefore have a rest mass, via E=mc^2 (in a reference frame in which the electron has no momentum).

My case study is one of an electric field perpendicular to a magnetic field, the electric field is the changing field between capacitor plates (charge/discharge). One plate of the capacitor is the solenoid coil and the other is the perpendicular core of the solenoid in the form of a coil, being perpendicular there is next to no direct induction between the coils but there is interaction one of which is heat generation.

I am trying to find out what this interaction consists of and the only thing I can come up with atm is either photons or phonons.

We know that electrons give up photons and can reabsorb again, we also know that the electrons move in the external part of the circuit (not between capacitor plates), but just maybe something is happening in the electron photon exchange where the photon is reabsorbed creating an energy gain. Where from you might say! I will take a stab at that because if as said a magnetic field is made up of photons, then the Earths magnetic field is a good tender.

Regards

Mike

[Centraflow]

Now to get really heavy

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

Regards

Mike

[Verpies]

From what I understand and forgive me as it is not my field, ...

However it is mine, at least I have a formal degree in it.  But since then, I have rejected it as an ad hoc theory and adopted this and this, so you will not get me talking about "virtual photons".
I just would like to notice that these fields you talk of, are regions of space where some object experiences a force ...so they are "spatial force fields" and you are not defining what constitutes an object nor space.  Is anything that gravitates an "object"? Does force influence anything besides the quantity of motion than an "object" "has"?  Is motion anything else but a ratio between space and time ?  Is motion possible without an "object" ?
We probably disagree whether space even exists without "objects" to measure it and the same goes for time ...so please forgive me if I limit myself to empirical discussion with you.

My case study is one of an electric field perpendicular to a magnetic field, the electric field is the changing field between capacitor plates (charge/discharge). One plate of the capacitor is the solenoid coil and the other is the perpendicular core of the solenoid in the form of a coil, being perpendicular there is next to no direct induction between the coils but there is interaction one of which is heat generation.

Would you still experience the heat generation if the capacitor plates were made out of sheets of fabric woven with thin enameled magnet wires and the solenoid was wound with Litz wire ?

[Centraflow]

Hi Verpies

You will have to give me some time to absorb all that My degree is in Industrial engineering, jack of all trades but master of none and I am nearly 70 and starting to feel it memory-wise.

The first half-hour of the live stream was certainly interesting, as I said give me time to view it all, several hours of it.

Regards

Mike

[web000x]

Hey Mike,

Have you seen Eric Dollard's writings on photons?  He describes them as unification of the E field and B field in the magneto dielectric boundary condition of the electromagnetic field.  I can dig up the paper he wrote.  I think I still have his original drawings in my filing cabinet.

I don't have a lot to add about phonons as I haven't studied that much..

Watching with interest. 

Dave

[web000x]

Here is the compilation that has Dollard's writings on Plancks in it.

http://www.gestaltreality.com/energy-synthesis/eric-dollard/additional-posts-by-e-p-dollard-2012/

Read:

"The Planck Again, Again"

and

"Forces Upon Conductors, and the Planck (1 of 2)" and (2 of 2)

Dave

[Centraflow]

I will read it Dave bit busy atm as a pool cleaner, barman, head cook, and bottle washer

All electromagnetic waves, from radio waves with wavelengths L~km to gamma-rays with L~10e-12 m (i.e. 1 picometre, or 1 pm), are made up of bundles of energy called `photons'. This is a consequence of the `uncertain' quantum nature of EM radiation, where each energy bundle has E = hf (J = Joules), where h = Planck's constant (very small: 6.626e-34 J.s), and f = c/L is the EM radiation frequency in Hertz (Hz), and c = speed of light in the medium (c = 2.998e8 m/s in vacuum). So EM radiation can show `classical' wave-like properties in some situations, and `classical' particle-like properties in others. `Classical' here refers to the physicists' worldview pre-Quantum Revolution of the 1900s-1920s. Wave-like behavior is experimentally seen in interference and diffraction phenomena, when there is a relatively large number of photons, each of small energy (this happens when the wavelength L is larger than the size of the interaction region, e.g. a barrier's slit width). Particle-like `photon' behavior is experimentally seen when the wavelength L is smaller than the interaction region, i.e. when there are relatively fewer photons, each of high energy. Waves (consisting of many `photons', which are not directly seen themselves) will interfere with each other, diffract around corners, and spread out isotropically in all directions if emitted unobstructed by point-like oscillators. Particles or `photons' can be detected by being captured in `pixel' detectors in a CCD camera array, which is designed to absorb the small amounts of photon energy E = hf for the wavelength L of interest. According to a well-known interpretation of quantum physics, first proposed by Danish Prof. Niels Bohr in the 1920s, this quality of wave-particle duality is an unavoidable consequence of the quantum mechanical uncertainty principle - he called this an example of `complementarity' (this now being a philosophical claim about physical reality). The basic conclusion is that the quantum nature of EM radiation is a physical reality confirmed to excellent precision by experiment, and which is very different (and sometimes difficult to appreciate and understand) from the textbook `classical physics' worldview held by such pre-20th century visionary physicists such as Isaac Newton (gravitation theory) or James Clerk Maxwell (electromagnetic theory). It turns out that a 20th-century physicist, Albert Einstein, who overthrew and replaced Newton's gravitation theory with his own more encompassing General Theory of Relativity, was one of the key founders of the new Quantum Physics - but even Einstein had heated debates with Niels Bohr about the nature of physical reality, and over how exactly to interpret how the new quantum physics experimental results (e.g. spectral line wavelength shifts and splittings) could be explained by a more detailed underlying physical picture and model. The main problem here is to come to grips with how a measurement of fundamental particles is made, and how it might be mathematically modeled. This `measurement problem' is apparently necessarily at the mercy of the quantum uncertainty principle, and this is viewed with dislike by those who believe that the underlying mathematical physical model should be deterministic, i.e. ultimately *not* left to irreducible randomness. This was a key point of contention between Einstein and Bohr in the 1930s, which was actually brought face-to-face with actual physical reality in the well-known Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) experiment, initially only a `thought experiment' in the 1903s EPR journal paper, but then carried out by Alain Aspect et al. in the late 1970s with a physical apparatus, configured to test for the so-called Bell inequalities. The result from these EPR experiments seems to be that Bohr's uncertainty and randomness are shown to be present as always and that the quantum physics equations work perfectly well. If there is an underlying physical theory that can predict the results of these EPR experiments, then they seem to have spooky `non-local' effects, which are nowadays taken as evidence for a purely quantum phenomenon called `entanglement'. This new insight is likely to be a key point in the realisation of new physical theories and devices, such as in a quantum gravity theory for black holes and our universe (or multiverse), and in the hoped-for quantum computers which should be able to crack any of the current-day encryption codes. So, the humble `photon' concept has taken us a long way in physics, as well as in our understanding and perhaps future mastery of the physical universe in which we find ourselves!

Verpies I still not have watched all 3.5hrs of that stream
Quote
If it was so then a path of a laser beam passing through the solenoid would be affected, but it is not.
Unquote

It seems that the wavelength and proximity of the solenoid (diameter) makes a difference to interference.

Regards

Mike

[Verpies]

If it was so then a path of a laser beam passing through the solenoid would be affected, but it is not.

It seems that the wavelength and proximity of the solenoid (diameter) makes a difference to interference.

That's the Aharonov–Bohm effect.  It does not affect the path.

[Verpies]

My degree is in Industrial engineering, jack of all trades but master of none and I am nearly 70 and starting to feel it memory-wise.

Any engineer is deeply rooted in the 3D of space and 1D of time paradigm.
I think I can safely write that almost everyone and especially engineers are convinced that objects exist in some kind of a 3D aquarium of space carried by a river of time, which they think is 1D or scalar.

As long as you are stuck in that paradigm, force fields (electric, magnetic, gravitational) will always be an abstract concept to you, whose properties you might be able to describe with vector field equations (where vectors represent force variations in space) but you will never be able to understand what really causes these forces. ...or what a "force" is in general ( ...and I do not mean the mere relationship F=ma ).
It is the ossification of the mind that keeps people stuck in this rut.  Unfortunately, usually older brains are more ossified.  This is a matter of neural physiology of an adult brain that has established certain neural pathways and certain ways of thinking. This is in stark contrast to babies that do not have ingrained ways of thinking.  So unless you are an exceptional individual or have recent history of psylocibin use (or other neuro-deorganizing substances) your chances at 70 are low that your brain will be able to abandon the old way of thinking and adopt a new one.

Knowing an empirical math which describes how some phenomenon behaves, does not constitute an understanding of this phenomenon.
e.g. the gravitational force is proportional to the product of the masses and is inversely proportional to the square of the distance between these masses. Also, this force is omnidirectional in 3D space.
However, being able to describe all these properties of gravity and measure it with great precision, does not mean that you really understand what gravity is and what causes it ...and thus, Ad Hoc explanations like virtual particles, gravitons and bending of space are invented and crammed into minds of captive students that just want to get a passing grade.

The same case can be made about the electric and magnetic fields and their alleged combination - the photon.

[Centraflow]

Don't tell me about it

I experiment and then look at what is causing the phenomenon.

I started looking in the last 3yrs at others inventions and investigated as to how it works eg. the TPU of Steven Mark's. I investigate a lot before I start, this one is an eye opener in the end.

I need to understand what the full reaction is before I do more on this, hence the topic of Photons or Phonons, take your pick

Regards

Mike

[Grumpy]

'Fields of force" or "force fields" might be a better approach, unless photons/phonons is going that direction.

[Centraflow]

'Fields of force" or "force fields" might be a better approach, unless photons/phonons is going that direction.

I think may go that direction, it is open within these possibilities

Regards

Mike

[Centraflow]

Let us look at this

Every time charges accelerate, photons are produced. In an AC  wave, the electric field is under constant acceleration one way, then the other. This produces photons at the frequency of the AC  wave.

It doesn't matter if it is in a capacitor as an electric field or an inductor as a magnetic field. (a moving electric field will produce a magnetic field and vice-versa) this is how radio waves are transmitted as photons (electromagnetic waves).

Regards

Mike

[Grumpy]

The current thought is that photons are the carriers of force. 
Thus photons have to be created whenever a force is active.

Where are the photons when I push an object?

[web000x]

Hey Mike,

This may help you if you feel that the phenomena you are investigating is due to gravitational force or the localized aether.  This is a video showing a modern replication of the Michelson Morley experiment that orients the axis of the rotatable interferometer horizontal to the earth's surface and shows varying interference patterns, unlike the original M-M experiment. 

https://youtu.be/7T0d7o8X2-E

Dave

[Verpies]

This is a video showing a modern replication of the Michelson Morley experiment that orients the axis of the rotatable interferometer horizontal to the earth's surface and shows varying interference patterns, unlike the original M-M experiment. 
https://youtu.be/7T0d7o8X2-E

How do we know that the vertical gravity vector does not distort the interferometer ?

[Centraflow]

The current thought is that photons are the carriers of force. 
Thus photons have to be created whenever a force is active.

Where are the photons when I push an object?

I like the words you have used "current thought".

In the same frame of thought clouds of photons exist around an electron, when electrons move in a resonant circuit or a metal resonates or a structure resonates (like a suspended bridge), photons are expelled in one moment and reabsorbed in another.

A permanent bar magnet has lines of force which are a static magnetic field, put two north poles together and the force appears, is it the photons being ejected and reabsorbed that is causing this?

Regards

Mike

[Centraflow]

Hey Mike,

This may help you if you feel that the phenomena you are investigating is due to gravitational force or the localized aether.  This is a video showing a modern replication of the Michelson Morley experiment that orients the axis of the rotatable interferometer horizontal to the earth's surface and shows varying interference patterns, unlike the original M-M experiment. 

https://youtu.be/7T0d7o8X2-E

Dave

Yes, have seen that a few years ago, thanks for posting.

Regards

Mike

[web000x]

How do we know that the vertical gravity vector does not distort the interferometer ?

We don't.  But I find it curious at which the angles of rotation where the pattern shifts and believe it warrants further experimentation.

Dave

[Smudge]

In the same frame of thought clouds of photons exist around an electron, when electrons move in a resonant circuit or a metal resonates or a structure resonates (like a suspended bridge), photons are expelled in one moment and reabsorbed in another.

The word "cloud" suggests the photon particles are stationary, but they are not.  Moving at light velocity the localized cloud is the density of particles that are emitted radially in all directions from the electron.  Of course the electron continually absorbs particles the are arriving from all direction but that background has uniform density.

A permanent bar magnet has lines of force which are a static magnetic field, put two north poles together and the force appears, is it the photons being ejected and reabsorbed that is causing this?

It is the difference between the arrival direction of the absorbed particle and the emitted direction that, by momentum exchange, causes a net force in a given direction.  That angular difference depends on the velocity of the electron and that of the other electron within whose "cloud" our test electron is moving.  That brings in the v/c factor relating magnetic force to the electric force between our two charges.  For the magnets you have orbitting/spinning electrons absorbing and emitting photon particles.
Smudge

[Centraflow]

The word "cloud" suggests the photon particles are stationary, but they are not.  Moving at light velocity the localized cloud is the density of particles that are emitted radially in all directions from the electron.  Of course the electron continually absorbs particles the are arriving from all direction but that background has uniform density.
It is the difference between the arrival direction of the absorbed particle and the emitted direction that, by momentum exchange, causes a net force in a given direction.  That angular difference depends on the velocity of the electron and that of the other electron within whose "cloud" our test electron is moving.  That brings in the v/c factor relating magnetic force to the electric force between our two charges.  For the magnets you have orbitting/spinning electrons absorbing and emitting photon particles.
Smudge

Agreed.

Under C of E for every photon emitted one has to be reabsorbed, that is the common thought so as to conform with C of E, I disagree, it's not uniform as a photon expelled from one electron could be absorbed by a different electron, it has to be time dependant.

Regards

Mike