Minutephysics, everyone.
>>16773452I look like that
>>16773452By that logic, looking through glass should make the candle look wiggly
>>16773475The glass should be opaque like snow.
>>16773475desu, I feel like you're intentionally acting stupid
>>16773452It's unfortunately a very common misconception.
>>16773475candles are wiggely though.
>>16773452so why arent there photons that dodge every glass atom and run through at full speed?
Proof of this actually happening? As I recall there was some incredibly theoretic schizo shit about light's phase or group velocity or some being reduced in thesw refractuve media requiring things like wavefunctions travelling backwards in time
>>16773821There are?
>>16773903>Proof of this actually happening? As I recall there was some incredibly theoretic schizo shithttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huygens%E2%80%93Fresnel_principle
>>16773925a principle is proof? cmon we need to do better chat
>the clear glass magically refocuses the scattered photonsSigh.
>>16773452Ok, no, I have to ask.We know the makeup of atoms(proton, neutron, electron).We know each of these has its own electromagnetic field.We know that light is electromagnetic radiation.Why the FUCK are we still larping about with photon scattering as the cause of variations in velocity, when electromagnetic density is RIGHT THERE.Yes, it's a neutral electromagnetic field, IN TOTALITY, but come the fuck on, retards.>muh speed of light is scatteringScattering causes loss of intensity, not velocity. God, I fucking hate this shit.
>>16773921no there are not.
>>16773983umm no chud the photons are actually completely scattered which is why nobody uses glass for anything other than difraction.
>>16774074Yes there are. That's how waves work.
>>16774568no there are not and waves have nothing to do with this
>>16774714>waves have nothing to do with thisWaves have to do with everything.And yes there are. Energy level determines how likely it is, but any level of photon can pass through any matter.
>>16773937>cmon we need to do betterThe blue sky?
Is the em wave inducing a em field in the atoms which slows it down?
>>16773452is this real, chat?
>>16773995because it's easier to represent the shift due to speed when talking about travel time through different materials as a by product of their inherent structure. 99% of the expressions used are just easier to implement as a result, so they're the most prevalent instead of spectral modulation. Occam's razor always wins.
>>16775634That's not what the razor fucking means.
>>16775637yes it does, the easiest solution is the best solution. how does that not fucking apply here when talking about why people use an easier description of light travel. fuck off.
>>16775639Easy and simple are not synonyms.>why the stick look bent in water?>oh, light bounce off atomYou fucking bellend.
>>16773903>Proof of this actually happening?>Proofhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ewald%E2%80%93Oseen_extinction_theorem
>>16773903photons are also a prticle not just wave
