Probably some very stupid questions…

[fncceo]

That still doesn’t answer the question of, what puts them in motion?

When an electron changes from a higher state to a lower state it loses energy and that energy is given up in the form of a massless photon. The energy release puts the photon in motion and, because it is massless , it leaves the atom at the speed of light.

 

[fncceo]

How do they make the rockets so small though!

Child labor. They have tiny, little hands.

 

[ThisIsMe]

In a way... photoreceptors in your retina perceive them and pass that to your brain that it interprets as sight.

Aaahhh, see, this leads me into one of my next questions that I was going to ask later. In my understanding, you can’t see light (photons), you can only see the things that light reflects off of. Why is that? What is the process that happens when a photon bounces off an object? We don’t see the photons as they travel from the source, but apparently when they hit an object, the frequency changes and then the photons become something that IS visible to our eye.

So in essence, we can’t see light, only the things light reflects off of, right?

I have more on this, my brain kinda goes down a rabbit hole on this subject (i don’t know why!). Such as, how the photons travel from an object to our eye, why don’t if that’s the case, why do we see clearly and not streaks of color through the air , if photons travel in a straight line, color and light should be shooting everywhere right? What is the nature of “color”?

Lol I warned ya, I ponder on some off the wall things sometimes. Sorry I had to lay it out here!

 

[fncceo]

In my understanding, you can’t see light (photons), you can only see the things that light reflects off of.

That's actually not true. We perceive photons. We perceive objects that emit them and we see objects that don't emit photons but are reflecting them.

 

[ThisIsMe]

A

When an electron changes from a higher state to a lower state it loses energy and that energy is given up in the form of a massless photon. The energy release puts the photon in motion and, because it is massless , it leaves the atom at the speed of light.

Ahh, so the motion of a photon is actually created by a physical state change of an electron?

 

[Dekster]

Do all photons move at the same speed?

Yes.

I wouldn't be so sure. There are different types of photons.

 

[ThisIsMe]

That's actually not true. We perceive photons. We perceive objects that emit them and we see objects that don't emit photons but are reflecting them.

True but we only perceive things that emit them because they have a medium that makes them visible (the filament of a bulb for example), but the photons themselves are not visible to the human eye are they? If they were, how could we see at all? How would we not perceive streaks of light through the air? Am I thinking about it all wrong? I was thinking that the photon, being massless was also without visual representation until it made contact with something, then a change occurred, and the photon “picked up” information from whatever it contacted and transmitted it to our eye.

 

[fncceo]

but the photons themselves are not visible to the human eye

They are far to small for the human eye to see individually... but we definitely perceive their existence when they strike our retinas

 

[fncceo]

How would we not perceive streaks of light through the air?

Too small... and they have to strike our retina to be detected

 

[Leo123]

Here's a 'monkeywrench' light can be waves or particles. The famous double-slit experiment shown that when light waves are 'observed' they are particles. I think our eyes perceive light as particles. My theory is we don't really see light because it is a high frequency wave (like radio waves only higher). Just like we don't 'see' radio waves but when they are 'observed' by a radio antennae, electrons result.

Similarly, you don't see a light wave until it hits something "observed" say, like a color. The waves interact with the elements in the color and produce what we see as red, yellow, green, blue. JMO Probably wrong but....

 

[Robert W]

No, it’s just stuff that I wonder about from time to time. I have others too, it figured I’d start here. I’ve got some doozies that may or may not be relevant to anything. But this is a discussion forum so…discuss…or…don’t?

I’m sure there are some pretty fart smellers…err…pretty smart fellers who could answer some of these

Since I studied physics both in high school and in college, let me try their stock reply. Photons travel at the speed of light because that is what light is.

 

[Ringo]

Stupid question: What the hell?...

 

[luiza]

Do all photons move at the same speed? .

It is my understanding that they do not , due to the variable pressures they encounter before star release, both individually and acting in localised "clumps ".
However , in "free mode" they move at the speed of light .
However , I am a layperson in this area and would enjoy an expert's understanding .

 

[ThisIsMe]

Here's a 'monkeywrench' light can be waves or particles. The famous double-slit experiment shown that when light waves are 'observed' they are particles. I think our eyes perceive light as particles. My theory is we don't really see light because it is a high frequency wave (like radio waves only higher). Just like we don't 'see' radio waves but when they are 'observed' by a radio antennae, electrons result.

Similarly, you don't see a light wave until it hits something "observed" say, like a color. The waves interact with the elements in the color and produce what we see as red, yellow, green, blue. JMO Probably wrong but....

No, that actually makes sense, at least to me. Still, and this is probably my rudimentary way of understanding, but, when the photons strike an object, they bounce off of it and, I assume shoot out in all directions, but, again, we don’t see anything until it enters the pupil and retina.

Again, it’s one of those things that doesn’t quite make sense to me, because, in order for us to see anything, the light from it has to travel from the object to our eye, and even though light is shooting at us from all directions through the air, again, we don’t see any of it until it enters our eye. Which is why we don’t see streaks of light through the air?

I wonder if it’s a case of, images are inverted in our eye, but our brain is just trained to flip them around to make them right for us, similarly, we can actually see the light through the air, but our brain is trained to filter it out so that the only thing we see is the image.

Am I making any sense to anyone? Lol. I understand what im trying to say but perhaps im not explaining it properly..

 

[ThisIsMe]

Stupid question: What the hell?...

Oh thats easy, that other plane just ran out of gas and was waiting for AAA!

 

[ThisIsMe]

It is my understanding that they do not , due to the variable pressures they encounter before star release, both individually and acting in localised "clumps ".
However , in "free mode" they move at the speed of light .
However , I am a layperson in this area and would enjoy an expert's understanding .

Same here. This is just a series of questions I had because, again, sometimes wonder about things….

 

[ThisIsMe]

Does anyone else not find it interesting that when you see light that is from very far away, like distant galaxies, stars, etc, that what you see is how those objects were a long time ago and that what you see is not exactly how it is today, it’s just that the information hasn’t gotten to us yet, but that every photon we receive from that source is older than the next. In other words, does light have an age? It would seem so since it has a travel time.

Now, regarding light from distant galaxies, it’s kinda like looking into the past in that present day light from the source hasn’t reached us yet. Similarly like how it take about 8 minutes for light from the sun to reach earth. They say the sun could go out and we wouldn’t know it for about 8 minutes.

Now, think about light from some stars, where it takes years for it to reach us. Again, those stars could supernova and we wouldn’t know it for several years, because those “packets” of light (data) hasn’t reached us yet. It seems that light streams to us in a linear fashion.

Let’s say you could build a camera so powerful that you will could zoom in on that object to see it clearly, then put that camera on a craft and send it toward that object at say..half the speed of light, as the camera got closer to the object, would you see a rapid evolution of that object unfold before your eyes? Let’s say that object was a star and it went supernova, as you traveled toward the star you’d be getting data sooner than what people on earth do. That camera might see that supernova before people on earth do, because it’s closer to the object and thus getting the more recent “data”.

Now, if you could reverse the craft carrying the camera at twice the speed of light, you could see the supernova reverse and become a star again, then reverse the craft again, and watch the supernova yet again. It’s kind of like light reaches us like a film from a movie. We see the data that light carries in a linear fashion, kind of like a movie, right?

It’s like they say the world around you is actually older than you perceive, granted it’s only a nanosecond, but the time it takes light to reach your eye from whatever it bounces off of is a delay that could be measured and thus whatever you see is actually delayed, even if by an imperceptible amount.

Whew, went off the deep end in that one lol

 

[Dadoalex]

…but I’m gonna ask them, because that’s how I roll. These are some things that rattle around in my head, and remember “there is no such thing as a stupid question”, right? That’s what they always told me!

Ok, so, first up….

Do all photons move at the same speed? Can some photons move at different speeds or are all photons moving at the same speed? What causes them to have speed? What is their mechanism of propulsion? In other words, how do they move and what keeps them going?

edit I should note, please explain in layman’s terms…VEEERY layman’s terms. I’m just a normal person with some odd questions that I’d like to learn about but I’m not a physicist or anything like that.

All photons move at the speed of light.
They move in a single direction unless impacted by gravity.
They will continue to move in that direction until they are absorbed or reflected.
There is no "mechanism" of propulsion.

Consider you are in space. Far from any galaxies, planets, or other bodies.
You throw a baseball
The ball is a photon
It will continue to move in the same direction at the same speed until it is impacted by some external force. Say a catcher's mitt.
When the ball hits the mitt the mitt absorbs the ball's energy. you can feel this.
When a photon strikes and object some or all of its energy is absorbed by the object.
Any remaining energy is reflected as a lower energy photon.
You will see these energy changes as different colors.

Beyond this the question cannot be answered in "layman's terms"

 

[Leo123]

No, that actually makes sense, at least to me. Still, and this is probably my rudimentary way of understanding, but, when the photons strike an object, they bounce off of it and, I assume shoot out in all directions, but, again, we don’t see anything until it enters the pupil and retina.

Again, it’s one of those things that doesn’t quite make sense to me, because, in order for us to see anything, the light from it has to travel from the object to our eye, and even though light is shooting at us from all directions through the air, again, we don’t see any of it until it enters our eye. Which is why we don’t see streaks of light through the air?

I wonder if it’s a case of, images are inverted in our eye, but our brain is just trained to flip them around to make them right for us, similarly, we can actually see the light through the air, but our brain is trained to filter it out so that the only thing we see is the image.

Am I making any sense to anyone? Lol. I understand what im trying to say but perhaps im not explaining it properly..

Look up the double split experiment.

 

[Leo123]

Does anyone else not find it interesting that when you see light that is from very far away, like distant galaxies, stars, etc, that what you see is how those objects were a long time ago and that what you see is not exactly how it is today, it’s just that the information hasn’t gotten to us yet, but that every photon we receive from that source is older than the next. In other words, does light have an age? It would seem so since it has a travel time.

Now, regarding light from distant galaxies, it’s kinda like looking into the past in that present day light from the source hasn’t reached us yet. Similarly like how it take about 8 minutes for light from the sun to reach earth. They say the sun could go out and we wouldn’t know it for about 8 minutes.

Now, think about light from some stars, where it takes years for it to reach us. Again, those stars could supernova and we wouldn’t know it for several years, because those “packets” of light (data) hasn’t reached us yet. It seems that light streams to us in a linear fashion.

Let’s say you could build a camera so powerful that you will could zoom in on that object to see it clearly, then put that camera on a craft and send it toward that object at say..half the speed of light, as the camera got closer to the object, would you see a rapid evolution of that object unfold before your eyes? Let’s say that object was a star and it went supernova, as you traveled toward the star you’d be getting data sooner than what people on earth do. That camera might see that supernova before people on earth do, because it’s closer to the object and thus getting the more recent “data”.

Now, if you could reverse the craft carrying the camera at twice the speed of light, you could see the supernova reverse and become a star again, then reverse the craft again, and watch the supernova yet again. It’s kind of like light reaches us like a film from a movie. We see the data that light carries in a linear fashion, kind of like a movie, right?

It’s like they say the world around you is actually older than you perceive, granted it’s only a nanosecond, but the time it takes light to reach your eye from whatever it bounces off of is a delay that could be measured and thus whatever you see is actually delayed, even if by an imperceptible amount.

Whew, went off the deep end in that one lol

The new Webb telescope has seen fully formed galaxies where we previously thought there were none. Therefore our Big Bang timeline and indeed the creation of our Universe could be younger than we thought.