And to the Aside
Maybe I can answer my own question now.Why are photons limited to the speed of light if they have no mass?
As I understand it Einstein thought that the speed of light was the universal speed limit because at that speed mass becomes infinite. Of course, zero is a kind of infinte so anything with zero mass also has infinite mass and travels at ligthtspeed by definition. (Is that coherent?)
The other thing, of course, is that photons also travel at lightspeed by definition, being by their nature light itself.
I think I've just remembered that the speed of light can vary as well, so that doesn't seem to be such a good frequency from which to measure all other time.
I'm more confused than ever!
posted by Rowland @ Monday, August 01, 2005
7 Comments:
Well, firstly, well done on being the first to leave a comment here!
Secondly, I might have been more ingratiated if you were not a spammer.
Ah, I've just noticed this. You get them too. If you figure out any way to stop them, please let me know.
Tyler
Now, Tyler, (if indeed it really is you, or even if not)
I think it's pretty obvious that I have no knowledge of how to get rid of spam. I could delete the spammers' comments but I think sometimes it's more entertaining to make sarcastic remarks about them safe in the knowledge that they aren't the kind of people who'll be checking back or bothering to read anything that I write.
Do you have a blog Tyler? If not, where are you getting this spam?
Now, rowland, I think you know that I've sent you some links to my websites before (though not all are mine). I don't want to post the link to my blog because it's pretty private. I don't think I would be able to write on it all that I'm really feeling inside if I knew the faces of people who were reading it. And I'm afraid I know your face now, even if it is black and white and possibly in drag. (I'm really sorry if you're not in drag - I guess you're just an attractive guy... or a handsome woman, which would be great in the 19th century and so I mean it as a compliment)
I'd also like to know if you have any solution for the spam because it annoys me when I receive it just like it annoys anyone, and also because sometimes anti-spam things have the unfortunate side-effect of interfering with my work of letting more people know the secrets of great kissing. Forewarned is forearmed, as they say.
Speaking of forearms, have you found a real person you want to kiss in the long term yet?
Tyl
It may, or may not, comfort you to know that the picture that you see is not me, although it looks quite a lot like how I would look in drag. It's Dorothy Sayers (an author) whose picture someone found in a magazine and noticed it looked just like me, only with feminine touches.
So, you don't have to worry about me seeing your blog.
No, I'm not kissing anyone at the moment, having to make do with my arm, and occasionally, my inflatable sheep.
You're lucky. Sometimes I wish I had more feminine touches.
Sigh... :(
No, not really, it's Dorothy Sayers who has the feminine touches.
I'm not sure whether she considered herself lucky for that. Presumably, from her point of view, she had masculine touches. But maybe lucky in as much as she resembled me...?
Does anyone else have a famous(-ish) doppleganger of the opposite gender?
Post a Comment
<< Home