From: jj@j.j
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> Bill Sloman wrote:
> > On 15/02/2026 1:21 am, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> >> And, of course, that Planck's radiation formula exactly predicts the
> >> spectral energy distribution of black-body radiation is (and was the
first)
> >> observational evidence that light energy is actually quantized.
> >
> > You've got it exactly backwards.
>
> No, I do not.
>
> > The failure to find formula that
> > matched the spectral energy distribution of black body radiation was the
> > "ultraviolet catastrophe" and Max Planck's resort to energy quantisation
> > to get a formula fitted the data was a desperate improvisation.
>
> Nevertheless, this was evidence supporting quantization.
>
> > Einstein's use of energy quantisation to explain the photo-electric
> > effect did actually exploit experimental observations, and Planck was
> > initially very dubious about it.
>
> Irrelevant.
>
> >>> invariably use tricks with non-linear optics, coincidence detectors and
> >>> statistical foul play. That includes the experiments of Aspect,
> >>> Grangier, Zeilinger, Kwiat, Gisin and numerous others.
> >>
> >> Yeah, in your mind everybody is "insane", except you. Particularly the
> >> people who, by contrast to you, have actually studied this :-D
> >
> > You don't seem to have studied it all that thoroughly.
>
> LOL
>
> >> BTW, by address munging you are violating network standards.
> >
> > Not that you bother to tell us where we could find them.
>
> I already told you three times or more. You simply do not pay enough
attention.
>
>
Nope. Doesn't say that.
Try again, or stop whinging about it.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
