I watched a history channel documentary the other day, about the sun. Ever since, I have this idea floating in my head and I want to ask someone that may know the answer. I figure this is the best place to ask...

There was a part in the documentary that discussed about the time it takes for a photon travelling from the core of the sun to its surface. And I wonder...

Since a photon is a particle with a mass. Since the sun (or any other star) has a gravitational field and it is spinning.

Do we have the same amount of photons emitting from the sun at its equator towards the elliptic, with the amount of photons emitted towards the poles?

Is the sun as bright towards the elliptic, as it is towards the poles?

If not, doesn't that mean that all our measurements based on luminosity of a star, are going down the drain, since we ignore the orientation of that star?

I know it is a silly question but I need the answer to get that out of my mind.

I would think photons would be emitted in no particular direction. Usually when they talk of photons they are talking about light and the speed of light. The sun isnt particularly high in gravitation compared to black holes and massive blue stars. So its ability to bend light is quite limited. therefore since it is emitting the light I would hazard a guess that photons of light are emitted randomly from the Sun such that their isn't a massive difference in light emission from the poles to the equator. The suns spin is relatively slow at 27 days so its rotation is nominal.

article about Gravity darkening

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

I would think photons would be emitted in no particular direction. Usually when they talk of photons they are talking about light and the speed of light. The sun isnt particularly high in gravitation compared to black holes and massive blue stars. So its ability to bend light is quite limited. therefore since it is emitting the light I would hazard a guess that photons of light are emitted randomly from the Sun such that their isn't a massive difference in light emission from the poles to the equator. The suns spin is relatively slow at 27 days so its rotation is nominal.

article about Gravity darkening

A nice picture....

---

I watched a history channel documentary the other day, about the sun. Ever since, I have this idea floating in my head and I want to ask someone that may know the answer. I figure this is the best place to ask...

There was a part in the documentary that discussed about the time it takes for a photon travelling from the core of the sun to its surface. And I wonder...

Since a photon is a particle with a mass. Since the sun (or any other star) has a gravitational field and it is spinning.

Do we have the same amount of photons emitting from the sun at its equator towards the elliptic, with the amount of photons emitted towards the poles?

Is the sun as bright towards the elliptic, as it is towards the poles?

If not, doesn't that mean that all our measurements based on luminosity of a star, are going down the drain, since we ignore the orientation of that star?

I know it is a silly question but I need the answer to get that out of my mind.

I thought the Ulysses Mission had a photometer but I don't see results listed for it. However the effect if any would be such a small fraction from relativity as to not be measurable with todays instrumentation. Sunspots are thousands of time bigger differences.

---

Since a photon is a particle with a mass.

Photons are massless.

---

Since a photon is a particle with a mass.

Photons are massless.

Explain gravitational lensing.

---

The rest mass of a photon is zero. Since it has an energy E=hf, where h is the Planck constant and f is its frequency, its relativistic mass is E divided by c square. This explains gravitational lensing and also why black holes are ... black.
Tullio

---

I found the documentary on youtube and this is it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8k7GAFTUp4
Now we have the same framework (as long as this video is up there)

My question arose at 7:40->end. It is a valid question if you think photon movement as particle movement. Mass and spin can affect a particle moving out of the sun. What I didn't see, was the photon moving through plasma part. It is not a photon moving electrons on an atom. It is a photon giving energy to plasma. It is not the photon that is travelling out of the sun core, but it is the energy of that photon released on the surface of the sun.

However I would like to see those Ulysses data backing up some photon emission model.

PS @Gary, If those periodic sunspots darken the sun so much, how can we be sure about the planets we have discovered till now? Maybe they are sunspots as well. I don't know, I use this thread to cover the questions I cannot ask wikipedia.

Perhaps, this is the most silly question ever ask =,<

What is the name of our solar system? Because, as I know, it was found many solar systems looks like in other star

---

N = R x fp x ne x fl x fi x fc x L

The rest mass of a photon is zero.

I've read a bit on this, but putting aside the math for the moment (from anyone) - when would a photon ever be found "at rest"?

... What is the name of our solar system? Because, as I know, it was found many solar systems looks like in other star

From Sci-Fi stories, there's a good consensus on calling our sun "Sol" and so our solar system is the "Sol" system.

Or we can just use the description to name our solar system the "Solar System" just as we call our planet by the name of what we stand upon, "The Earth".

(Really by that reckoning, we should call our planet "The Water", or is that for when the whales and dolphins take over?)


Is there any 'official' naming from the IAU?

Keep searchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

There are methods for slowing down photons using laser in cryogenic labs and they can be brought down to very slow speeds, but not zero.

---

There are methods for slowing down photons using laser in cryogenic labs and they can be brought down to very slow speeds, but not zero.

There was one experiment where the photons were apparently stopped, stored, and restarted. (this was only about a year after I read about the experiment where the speed was reduced to a few miles per hour). These experiments used a laser trap of some sort, if I recall correctly.

---

BOINC WIKI

There are methods for slowing down photons using laser in cryogenic labs and they can be brought down to very slow speeds, but not zero.

There was one experiment where the photons were apparently stopped, stored, and restarted. (this was only about a year after I read about the experiment where the speed was reduced to a few miles per hour). These experiments used a laser trap of some sort, if I recall correctly.

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/27mar_stoplight.htm

---

There are methods for slowing down photons using laser in cryogenic labs and they can be brought down to very slow speeds, but not zero.

There was one experiment where the photons were apparently stopped, stored, and restarted. (this was only about a year after I read about the experiment where the speed was reduced to a few miles per hour). These experiments used a laser trap of some sort, if I recall correctly.

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/27mar_stoplight.htm

That's of some interest - I believe I recall similar info related to the possibility of photon computing, and secure communications.

With regards to the OP's qeustion/comment on apparent luminosity then, wouldn't it be possible that any of the three [or more] "methods" described - but occurring naturally, alter the properties of light (or any energy) traveling through space.