3

# Does light have Mass?

DNA Thumbs drive

1
Thu 18 Dec, 2014 09:05 pm
@peter jeffrey cobb,
Google expressed over 3 million points of view to you..........If you do not want to accept them, that is ok as well. I have no serious point of view, on space time equations.
peter jeffrey cobb

1
Fri 19 Dec, 2014 01:34 am
@DNA Thumbs drive,
Ok. Thank you.
I'll try to keep my questions on this matter (a pun) to others that have a point of view on it.
If anyone missed the conversation, we were discussing the current description of structures that says zero mass. I see it as someone adding a math problem coming out with the number zero and than describing structures made of zero mass. (Made out of nothing) . It sounds comical so I'm trying to understand how is zero mass still used to describe structures.
peter jeffrey cobb

1
Fri 19 Dec, 2014 04:04 pm
@peter jeffrey cobb,
If someone is explaining a structure to you and in the middle they said "and this structure is zero inches long. The reason for this is because a structure 5 inches long combined with a structure -5 inches long. "
Wouldn't you question the -5 inch structure to exist?
Zero mass, zero volume, when giving the description of structures the number zero don't make sense to me.
Does it make sense to anyone else?
DNA Thumbs drive

1
Fri 19 Dec, 2014 08:28 pm
@peter jeffrey cobb,
Imagine a pill bottle with 5 pills, and an antimatter pill bottle with 5 antimatter pills, they combine, and pills never were.

Do you follow?
peter jeffrey cobb

1
Fri 19 Dec, 2014 08:43 pm
@DNA Thumbs drive,
Anti matter. Ok I'll challenge that theory.
That sounds like our -15 inches structure.
Does this anti matter has a negative volume too?
DNA Thumbs drive

1
Sat 20 Dec, 2014 06:35 am
@peter jeffrey cobb,
Imagine a pill bottle with 5 pills prescribed for schizophrenia, and an antimatter pill bottle with 5 antimatter pills prescribed for anti schizophrenia, they combine, and schizophrenia pills never were. However the empty bottle remains, as only the pills were annihilated due to the reaction?

Do you follow?
peter jeffrey cobb

1
Sat 20 Dec, 2014 10:34 am
@DNA Thumbs drive,
Yeah I think you are saying you believe in a structure with negative volume. (Giggles) could you explain how when it touches another structure how it magically disappears? Does it go to another Universe? How does it get there?
peter jeffrey cobb

1
Sat 20 Dec, 2014 12:18 pm
@peter jeffrey cobb,
Being that physics deals with physical objects, should we put non physical structures in a more suited place? Like the fairy tale section?
0 Replies

DNA Thumbs drive

1
Sat 20 Dec, 2014 01:05 pm
@peter jeffrey cobb,
You clearly need to watch more Star Trek.
peter jeffrey cobb

1
Sat 20 Dec, 2014 02:03 pm
@DNA Thumbs drive,
I don't watch much tv .
I find that the world around me is much more entertaining.
So do you want to defend this point of view of yours about structures with negative volume being able to exist?
DNA Thumbs drive

1
Sat 20 Dec, 2014 02:51 pm
@peter jeffrey cobb,
Pete, I have no clue as to what you are speaking about. You might want to tune into TV, for the Latuda and Abilify commercials. And Star Trek, beats this any day, even more so, if you believe in space time fluctuations in the neutral zone.
peter jeffrey cobb

1
Sat 20 Dec, 2014 05:02 pm
@DNA Thumbs drive,
No. I do not believe in a "physical" description of any structure that the number for the volume is negative.
I find it comical to even suggest that non physical structures be part of physics.
DNA Thumbs drive

1
Sat 20 Dec, 2014 06:13 pm
@peter jeffrey cobb,
Yes Pete, but will your denial of the obvious positive situation, effect your escape, into a world not of photons and electrons, but of cyber non-reality.
peter jeffrey cobb

1
Sat 20 Dec, 2014 06:42 pm
@DNA Thumbs drive,
Hey do you think they should make a department called negative physics to keep all the negative volume structures. .. the whole negative volume Universe theories together?
That way we can describe the physical Universe.
DNA Thumbs drive

1
Sat 20 Dec, 2014 07:22 pm
@peter jeffrey cobb,
Pete, forget the universe, you are missing all of the wonders of life here on the Earth. Have you ever seen a dolphin jump out of the water at sunset, or a humpback whale exhale it's last breath. Don't miss the beauty that is under your feet, for what you will never find in the cosmos.

peter jeffrey cobb

1
Sat 20 Dec, 2014 07:44 pm
@DNA Thumbs drive,
It is isn't? Hey I love your first name.
I will open a topic next to discuss how dna evolved.
It will be an honor to hear your point of view there.
But this topic about using the number zero to describe a structure.
DNA Thumbs drive

1
Sat 20 Dec, 2014 07:59 pm
@peter jeffrey cobb,
DNA controls all evolution, so it is impossible for it to have evolved. DNA was created with the computer that it controls, you. However sometimes, as in any computer program, the programming is not quite perfect, and issues arise.

peter jeffrey cobb

1
Sat 20 Dec, 2014 08:35 pm
@DNA Thumbs drive,
Ok I just opened a topic to discuss DNA. Now we can leave this one for discussion of using the number zero to describe a structure.
Quehoniaomath

1
Sun 21 Dec, 2014 05:03 am
@peter jeffrey cobb,
well the question is "Does light have mass"? Of course one first has to know what is 'mass' and 'science' doesn't , and one has to know what is 'light' and 'science' doesn't.

Hence the question has no meaning.
DNA Thumbs drive

1
Sun 21 Dec, 2014 07:37 am
@Quehoniaomath,
Not true, science knows what both mass and light are on a fundamental Earth level, but the new questions, involve, where does mass come from in the first place. Enter the theoretical God particle that some unproven mathematical model demands, and must exist for the model to be correct, but as we know, the model does not need to be correct. There is work currently being done, apart from the supercollider, that seems to be indicating that quantum spooky entanglement, is actually an instantaneous transmittal of information, which crushes the light as top speed in the universe postulate, which means throw away all books and begin again. So the frustrating thing, is knowing that we as a race, are discovering, that the more we know, that the less of what we knew yesterday makes any sense. However, what is mass and or light, are not questions that necessarily have an answer, in the form that we are looking for, or might even understand, if presented with.

### Related Topics

New Propulsion, the "EM Drive" - Question by TomTomBinks
The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek

Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 06/29/2022 at 04:55:05