Re: Relativity and the nature of light. Waves or particles?

Le 22/10/2024 à 22:29, clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) a écrit :

Richard Hachel: Re: "The two lightnings will be simultaneous for the
station master, but ALSO for the traveler." Sound is constrained to one
speed in the atmosphere. The person walking towards the ambulance will
hear the siren at S + 3 mph. You are denying that. You are making an
irrational denial of relative motion, as shown by the analogy to sound.

You are making a mistake by equating sound and light.
They are not the same physical principle of propagation.
Sound propagates in a medium, and depends on the quality of this medium.
Light propagates in "nothing at all", or rather, does not propagate.
Sound has a medium: air.
Light has no medium, and it was a mistake to look for something that could support its propagation.
Light is an instantaneous transaction of energy between two atoms, so we cannot really talk about "propagation" which requires a speed, that is to say a ratio of distance over time.
The question is what gives light an aspect of propagation when there is no propagation? What gives it a wave-like appearance, when there is no wave? What gives it the appearance of a particle when there is no particle.
If you think about it, what the photon seems to be surfing on is not an ether, it is not something metric, it is not something compact.
It is simply universal enisochrony.
In short, the photon does not exist, but seems to exist, and if we had to propose something on which it surfs, it would be spatial anisochornia.
In short, it surfs on time.
By crossing space, it crosses time for the observer who studies it, and thus gives an impression of speed, of surfing on "this time".
But this is only an illusion. Between the two atoms, between here and there, there is nothing at all; not the slightest existence.
When the quantum leaves the atom, it is already instantly at the level of an atom of the receiver.
Niet, ether.
R.H.