Quote:
Originally Posted by bojan
so we know the difference between the original wavelengths (or, we are assuming we know) and the received ones.
If I received one single photon with my test equipment, I must admit I wouldn't know what to do with it - apart from recording it's energy (which then directly translates into wavelength of course... and photomultiplier tube will not do this job, BTW). And that's about it. I wouldn't have a clue about process that generated that particular photon, so I can't possibly determine it's redshift.
I believe THIS was the core of the question in question.
|
… And I was content with the answers everyone gave me, to my original question.
I don't think anyone providing helpful answers, interpreted the basis of my original question to be in any way dependent upon a single measurement of a single photon. There is clearly a time element basis to the question. How could the last photon be interpreted as the
last photon, unless there was a context (meaning a history of measuring a photon stream or spectrum, which ends up actually defining the
last photon ??)
I think both questions about time dilation and redshift being interpreted on the literal basis of a single photon, were way out of context and yet, the question clearly was all about the context.
Whilst any questions in threads are usually welcomed here, standover demands for answers for out of context questions get what they deserve. Unless I'm mistaken, I don't believe anyone here is under an obligation to answer anyone's questions either. They do so out of generosity and a commitment of contributing value to the site.
Recently, I have noticed that this message seems to have been sadly forgotten (across multiple threads).
Thank you to all answerers who actually contributed to the value parts of this thread. They are much appreciated.
Cheers