Quote:
On 2002-11-03 19:00, AgoraBasta wrote:
You've got some very exotic and rather unphysical ideas about "photons". A photon is a particle only in event of non-elastic interaction, otherwise there's no photon, only a wave. And guess what - you can't get inelastic photon/proton or photon/electron interaction at the energies we're talking of; so you can have just any arbitrary number of "photons" out there to interact with IGM particles elastically.
|
This isn't right. The number density of photons is a well determined quantity no matter what the energy scale. Even if your photons are more wavelike than particlelike they are still photons and are still quantatized.
Quote:
Quote:
|
You should get out a bit more and actually become FAMILIAR with the paradigm you are railing against. That might allow you a bit more integrity.
|
Same to you...
|
Except, I'm not railing against a paradigm, I'm railing against a model that is nonstandard.
Quote:
|
I suspected you'd get carried that very way. I really had to make it more clear. Mean free path is of little importance, it's the integral path that matters.
|
You care to make a meaningful distinction between these two things at the densities we are talking about?
Quote:
|
Interactions are elastic, so they need not be point-like. There are two fields - first, the diffuse "light" field and second, the rarefied degenerate IGM plasma/gas. Particles' motion "weaves a dense web of paths" out of the degenerate IGM plasma, increasing effective cross-section by many orders of magnitude.
|
But NOT detectability of such interactions. With a finite detector size and a low density you are in a needle in a haystack problem. Sure, if I could observe everything in the universe I might see the annihilation and degradation of the background, but when it's as numerous as it is, there's really no measuring such an interaction. That's the end of it. You can read more about it
here or
here.
Quote:
|
Furthermore, if you admit the presence of matter flows in the IGM induced by the ULF non-thermal background, then your argument about IGM self-interactions loses almost all of its validity (since the motion is mostly ordered at the scale considered).
|
Cite? I don't believe this to be true at all.
Quote:
|
In the 2-20 GHz band, they have a good chance to be resonant and in equilibrium. In other bands there are other processes, which may or may not be considered as thermal - that depends on the observation scale.
|
You need to be more specific. Low-energy interactions will just not be observable.
Quote:
|
It makes a perfect sense to me - protons don't come without electrons out there somewhere. So you'd better count both those components in IGM scattering of background. And if there really are crowds of neutrinos - all bets are off altogether.
|
Well, we have a lower and upper bound on the mass of neutrinos which end up contributing not a significant amount to the gravitational dynamics and kinematics of the universe at the present epoch. Earlier in history, though, they certainly did.