What is the wavelength of a 1 Hz photon ? The particle-wave non-sense

[Marvas]

Given that wavelength = speed of light / frequency, for a 'photon' of 1 Hz we get a wavelength of 300.000 Km. Yup, that is a 'quantum particle' right there ! The science of the very small.

Or of the very smallminded ??
Who on earth can imagine a particle being 300000 km long?

Oh no, its the great genius Einstein. Yes, that guy again ! (as his german fangirl would say in her relative punchline)

There's a reason why this guy again was kicked out of highschool. Not only he could not understand basic physics, like say refraction, but the sheer amount of brainfarts that he could release in curved spacetime was incompatible even with kindergarden level curriculum. In other words, he was 'special'. So he was sent to a special institution, where he formulated his special theory of relativity. Which was immediatelly approved by the special scientific community, because it made perfect non-sense.

P.S. No titans of science were harmed during the making of this thread. Because there are none in this thread. The thread is about what a titan of science, Tesla, reffered to as a 'fuzzy haired crackpot'. So rude, but so true.

 

[COLGeek]

You really don't like Albert Einstein, do you? You seem to go out of your way to discredit him and his works at every possible opportunity.

Why? Seems like a personal issue more than a science one.

 

[Marvas]

I don't like frauds in general (relativity), and this guy again is the biggest fraud in the history of modern science. I would have no problem with him if he was a fringe fuzzy haired crackpot smoking weed and fabulating about curved spacetime and particlewaves in his special institution. But instead he is considered as you say as a titan of science, on par with or above Newton, who's theory of gravity was replaced by Einstein's, or Maxwell, who's aether theory was replaced by einsteins photons, or Tesla. Who absolutelly rejected his titanic work.
And I see that you ignore my arguments which prove that he was a looney and that his theories were plain wrong. Or you wait until they gain traction so you can jump on the bandwagon when they do. That is a logical fallacy. Waiting for others to aprove that I disproved him, so that you can aprove me based on their aproval. But anyway it doesnt matter if you aprove me or not. You're just a moderator. And probably dont even understand anything related to the subject, other than Einstein is a titan of science which is the axiom of the century.

 

[COLGeek]

I don't like frauds in general (relativity), and this guy again is the biggest fraud in the history of modern science. I would have no problem with him if he was a fringe fuzzy haired crackpot smoking weed and fabulating about curved spacetime and particlewaves in his special institution. But instead he is considered as you say as a titan of science, on par with or above Newton, who's theory of gravity was replaced by Einstein's, or Maxwell, who's aether theory was replaced by einsteins photons, or Tesla. Who absolutelly rejected his titanic work.
And I see that you ignore my arguments which prove that he was a looney and that his theories were plain wrong. Or you wait until they gain traction so you can jump on the bandwagon when they do. That is a logical fallacy. Waiting for others to aprove that I disproved him, so that you can aprove me based on their aproval.

No, I think your arguments are weakened by your attacks on Einstein. Merit and points can be made without resorting to name calling and petty behavior.

I recommend you give it a try.

As is, no one will take you seriously.

 

[Marvas]

And how is my argument that a photon of 1 HZ is 300000 km long according to Einsteinian particle-wave physics weaked by this ? The only reason I attack Einstein is because this obvious enormity is his theory. If a professor calls a student stupid because he says stupid things, like say 1>2, or particles are bigger than the earth, that doesnt mean he is attacking the student. It means that the student is stupid. But in your view that would weaken the professor's arguments, and no one will take him seriously. And everyone will take the student seriously instead, and agree that 1>2, and that particles are bigger than the earth.

 

[COLGeek]

And how is my argument that a photon of 1 HZ is 300000 km long according to Einsteinian particle-wave physics weaked by this ? The only reason I attack Einstein is because this obvious enormity is his theory. If a professor calls a student stupid because he says stupid things, like say 1>2, or particles are bigger than the earth, that doesnt mean he is attacking the student. It means that the student is stupid. But in your view that would weaken the professor's arguments, and no one will take him seriously. And everyone will take the student seriously instead, and agree that 1>2, and that particles are bigger than the earth.

I don't think we are communicating effectively. In your example, call a student stupid is an insult. Telling the student he/she is mistaken and then explaining why is not. Which method will be better received by the student?

See (and understand) the difference?

 

[Marvas]

But calling someone stupid is not an insult. It's an informal noun. According to Oxford dictionary at least:

noun
INFORMAL

1. a stupid person (often used as a term of address).
   "you're not a coward, stupid!"

So in your opinion no one is ever stupid, only mistaken, and we should remove this word from the dictionary alltogether. Because it can only be used as an insult, not as it was intended- to call out stupid people when they are stupid. And those two stupid dogs were also insulted. Instead the author should have named them 'two mistaken dogs''.

But one is making a mistake, like drinking water from the sea, and one is drinking water from the toilet. First dog is mistaken cause he doesnt know sea water is salty, second dog is stupid cause he sees the water is yellow yet he still drinks it.

 

[COLGeek]

Carry on then, insulting and disrespecting others. Stupid, when used as you are using it, is derogatory.

Ignorant, as in meaning a lack of knowledge, is often misused in the very same way.

Whether you intend it or not, your points get lost by your method of casting doubt on the works of others. That weakens your argument.

Have a good day.