RE: Photons and determinism, part 2
February 24, 2015 at 7:58 pm
(This post was last modified: February 24, 2015 at 7:59 pm by Surgenator.)
(February 24, 2015 at 6:54 pm)bennyboy Wrote:You're taking the limits of equations to determine the behavior. We know those limits are longer valid. So how are you determining the true behavior of the photon?(February 24, 2015 at 1:33 pm)Surgenator Wrote: Two problems, the photon reference frame in an invalid frame and the number of possible interactions have to be equal independent of the frame.You say it's invalid because it breaks the math. But that's only when you are trying to "boost" our reference frame to that of something moving at the speed of light, isn't it? But I don't have a problem with that, because the fact that the math is broken is an indicator that something tricky is up with causality.
Quote:Quote:Your also making another fallacy where your assuming that because a photon hit your eye it was destined to hit your eye. There are countless photons that are on a trajectory toward your eye right now, so why are you not blinded by them? Answer.That's not an assumption, that's my conclusion: since the photon has hit my eye, and since in its frame time does not pass, it is not subject to any possible alterations, even from our point of view, and even though wee see the photon to have "travelled" for a thousand light years.
Bullshit. Imagine I put pulse a laser that is on the moon which will hit your eye. I know it takes a little over 1 second to reach your eye. Can I or can't I put a piece of paper to block the laser light from hitting your eye. According to your logic, the photon left the moon and reached your eye instantly. According to me, I blocked the lasers path and it never reached your eye. Who's right?
You also failed to answer to what happened to all the other photons going toward your eye that never hit it.