|
|
On 5 Apr 2006 03:30:32 -0700, "George Dishman" <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>
>jgreenfield@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> Henri Wilson wrote:
>> > On Mon, 3 Apr 2006 23:39:08 +0100, "George Dishman"
>> > <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>
>> Does a light source emit x photons per sec, in any given direction?
>
>Only if the brightness is constant.
>
>> Does the number of photons arriving at a target per time INCREASE
>> when the source approaches the target?
>
>No, it is still constant if the source brightness and
>speed of approach are constant, but the number is
>higher than if the source wasn't approaching.
George, I think Jim knows that. Don't stall for time...
I think Jim meant if the source is caused to approach, the number of photons
arriving would increase.
>This
>effect makes the source look brighter but it doesn't
>change the received frequency (colour) or energy of
>individual photons. If you made an attempt to follow
>the conversation between Henry and myself, you
>would have found I said that a couple of days ago.
Don't bring me into this George.
Jim is obviously right here and you are procrastinating.
>> DO the photons deliver MORE ENERGY?????????
>
>There is another effect called Doppler shift which you
>are forgetting which also operates and it does change
>the received frequency (colour) of each photon. I've
>been trying to teaching you what causes Doppler effect
>based on your riflemen for weeks but you insist on
>changing the subject all the time.
George, Jim is NOT forgetting about doppler shift.
>The energy of an individual photon is proportional to the
>received frequency (whether the source is moving or not)
>so the change of frequency caused by Doppler produces
>a change of energy.
I think Jim knows that George.
>> (the answer being yes, George is desperate to avoid the comparison)
>
>The answer being that the energy is proportional to
>the frequency, Jim is desperate to pretend we hadn't
>already addressed the comparison. Here is a reprise:
>
>You suggested the analogy of a burst of gunfire to
>represent a photon and I addressed that a few days
>ago as I had promised when you finally gave an answer,
>the correct one as it happens, to my question about
>scenario (3).
>
>As an analogy for a photons of different colour, bursts
>of gunfire hitting the target at different rates (photon
>frequency) do damage (photon energy) proportional to
>the rate, therefore bursts must be of equal duration at
>the target.
>
>That means bursts from a high frequency source contain
>more bullets than a burst from a low frequency source
>and in the analogy it is the increased number of bullets
>in the burst that causes the increased amount of damage.
>
>Now where do you want to go with this Jim, or are you
>again going to pretend I didn't answer?
I've had enough...I'm getting out!
>
>George
HW.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
|
|