Re: Gravitation and Maxwell's Electrodynamics, BOUNDARY CONDITIONS

Dear Sergey Karavashkin:

"Sergey Karavashkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED] \(formerly\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
...
> > > Thus, should you don't cram but study in your red-stone universities,
> > > you would have less difficulties with understanding, less absurdly
> > > virtual ideas and ambitiously dogmatic statements. ;-)
> >
> > Right.  Provide the link to your "mechanical" model, please.
> >
>
> David, it's now several times as I answered all these questions and
> linked you to my references. No reason to repeat. You "don't see" them
> - well, behave as you want. But I will not deepen into substantiation
> of wave nature of photoeffect until you confirm your readiness to
> perceive complex material. Still I see your very insufficient level of
> knowledge and no willing to discuss seriously serious things. Your
> statement

Here is a nice mechanical model for you:
http://members.aol.com/dlzc/HCP_lattice_model.jpeg
this is an approximate structure for beryllium, namely a hexagonal close
pack structure.  Your light-as-a-wave model should describe how an electron
can be excited from the "atom center" marked number 1.  Note that there are
few paths that will not present energy losses, that are an even number of
segments long.

Body centered cubic and face centered cubic (the two other stackings common
in conductors) are less tightly coupled on a "1" atom center, but the
phenomenon of the photoelectric effect does not seem to care once the
threshold for electron release is met.

> [David]
> >It doesn't in the photoelectric effect.  The quantum output is either
> >proportional to intensity, or the difference between threshold and
> photon
> >energy, depending on how you want to define your nebulous term.
>
> [Sergey]
> says only that even in QM your knowledge is limited with popular
> slogans. If you make principle of it, I'll put on my web site
> CONVENTIONAL diagrams of quantum output of electrons from metal
> superimposed with the plot of reflection factor. I suggested you to
> have an independent consultation in literature, saying, such effects
> have been experimentally revealed very long ago. But you don't need
> knowledge, neither understanding of physical processes. This is your
> right and difficulties of universities and foundations that fund you.
>
> I'm not a waiter, please don't behave with me capriciously. Let us
> suspend this issue until you demonstrate the necessary level of
> knowledge and responsible attitude to our discussion.

It is so nice that you also hide behind quantum behaviours, Sergey.  So you
therefore accept that light arrives in finite packages, quanta, and is not
therefore a continua?  How nice.  I was going to ask on model associated
with the picture above, whether you wanted the forcing function to be an
impulse (LaPlace or Dirac's Delta) or a sine wave.  I guess I have my
answer.  Impulse it is.

I am not funded by a government or university.  I work for a living.

So lets set down the facts:
photon-photon interactions establish that the photon is very narrow
(transverse to the "path").
absoprtion of a photon is on the order of milliseconds
self-interference phenomenon for *all* particles establish some "extension"
in space beyond what we consider a boundary.  Extension of both the "slits"
*and* the particles.
GR does say the same.

I am not trying to sway you Sergey, but I am trying to get you to see a
different side.  The Universe is the medium.  But a wave model is only a
particularly useful model.  Reality is more twisted than any such "simple"
model.

Over and out.

David A. Smith