Re: What is a photon

In sci.physics Bertitaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:

On Wed, 11 Jun 2025 12:24:06 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
 

In sci.physics Bertitaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:

On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 0:38:01 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
>

In sci.physics Bertitaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:

On Mon, 2 Jun 2025 21:36:17 +0000, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>

On 6/2/2025 3:52 AM, rhertz wrote:
[...]
>
Afaict, think of a photon traveling along a field line at the speed of
light in space,

>
The photon or brief electromagnetic pulse spreads out as per inverse
square law. Photons in phase are lasers.

>
Nope, bunches of photons spread out per the inverse square law and many
devices produce photons in phase.

>
Idiot, particles don't split up smoothly and infinitely in all
directions and how on earth can particles have interference patterns.

>
No one said that, crackpot.
>
Since particles don't generally split, individuals don't follow the
inverse
square law, only bunches do, crackpot.

 
Bunches of Einsteinian moronic particles like you do not follow any law,
Penisnino. Only absurd conjectures from rabid imagination. Problem is
that thanks to fear from nukes, money and propaganda they have global
prestige. Which Arindam has punctured. It will take time for the whole
stinking gasbag to deflate.

AI evaluation of the above text:

The text you've provided is hostile, ad hominem, and lacking in
substantive or constructive critique. Here's an objective evaluation:
Tone and Language

    Tone: Aggressive, inflammatory, and derogatory.

    Language: Uses personal insults (e.g., “Penisnino”), pejorative
    metaphors (“moronic particles,” “stinking gasbag”), and emotionally
    charged language without presenting evidence or logical argumentation.

Content Evaluation

    Lacks Reasoning: The message makes strong claims (e.g., "do not follow
    any law," "absurd conjectures") but provides no supporting facts or
    logical structure.

    Propaganda Allegations: Mentions “fear from nukes, money and
    propaganda” influencing prestige, but without elaboration, this
    remains an unsupported assertion.

    Mentions "Arindam": Presumably referring to a person challenging
    mainstream ideas, but there's no context or explanation of who this
    is or what arguments they present.

Constructive Value

    Minimal: As written, the text is not useful for debate or discussion.
    If the intent is to challenge scientific or political orthodoxy,
    it would need to present clear arguments, sources, or logical
    critique rather than resorting to mockery or insult.



--
penninojim@yahoo.com