One thing to keep in mind about light is that a photon all by itself can't
change direction. The only thing ("force") that can effect the motion of
a photon is the presence of matter/energy (a gravitational field), and even
then the photon is still following a straight line in the curved space
caused by the presence of matter (a "geodesic"). A photon can't just make
a right turn, or whatever. When light appears to change directions such
as when it is focussed by a lens, it is because it has been absorbed, and
"new" light waves are emitted in the new direction.
Dan C.
At 10:50 PM 25-10-02 +0100, Qkano wrote:
>
>
>> I just thought extinction was a formulae modelling the observations.
>of the
>> form A*e(exp(-Bx)) The solution of the differential equation for
>> extinction, you know....? That the loss of light per unit length is
>> proportional to the light intensity at that point....
>>
>> Chris.
>
>
>It seems from a bit of research that the Extinction Theorem is not
>discredited quackery in itself but sadly it seems to be a favourite
>reference for pseudoscientists - like the one I quoted.
>
>The real theorem Dan referred to exists - though there seems to be no
>good explanation of it on line (you have to buy a book). I'm gonn try
>to look it up in Blackwell's on Sunday.
>
>
>
>In physics there are a lot of counter-intuitive thingumies. Are they
>real? Does it matter?
>
>
>In general the questions cannot be answered (are unanswerable) so are
>moot ....
>
>Bob
>
>
>
>
>
