Jim understands that eventually the LHC will be used to accelerate heavy particles.

Jim reckons a phosphoresent particle will emit the lowest energy photon. (and highest for that matter)
-- madness, Nov 10 2011

[MaxwellBuchanan] reckons that the lowest energy photon would be produced by electrically charging Wales and then waiting for continental drift to move it back and forth a few times.
-- MaxwellBuchanan, Nov 10 2011


Well, my brain just moved to a lower energy state after reading this, maybe someone should go after that photon.
-- Custardguts, Nov 10 2011


What with, a butterfly net ? Or maybe a drinking glass and a piece of paper, like for catching bees, wasps, spiders, butterflies and cats ?
-- 8th of 7, Nov 10 2011


Maybe the photon, dejected as a result of it's depressing origins, will give up on the whole wave/particle duality thing and just go bum around the pub for a while. I'll go start looking, shall I?
-- Custardguts, Nov 10 2011


[MaxwellBuchanan] reckons that if, instead of charging Wales, we could instead magnetize it before shaking, then the photons would not only have the lowest possible energy, but would also radiate neutrinos axially to the photon's path, thereby decreasing their energy below zero.
-- MaxwellBuchanan, Nov 10 2011


Jim seems to spend a lot of time thinking about photons when he's not piloting hydrogen-powered space-trains.
-- Alterother, Nov 11 2011


[marked-for-deletion] No detectable idea.
-- ldischler, Nov 11 2011


I gather the lowest possible energy for anything is 6.626*10^-34 joule seconds.
-- Voice, Nov 11 2011


//I gather the lowest possible energy for anything is 6.626*10^-34 joule seconds.//

Either you're asking for some moral support here (in which case, it should read //6.626*10^-34 joule; seconds?//), or you're referring to something Heisenbergy.

If the latter, then a photon which exists for a billion seconds could have 6.626*10^-43 Joules of energy.
-- MaxwellBuchanan, Nov 14 2011


And whether Heisenbergy, Planckaceous, or Einsteiniferous, //lowest possible// is incorrect; it would be a non-possible value (much as it's incorrect to state that c is the "highest possible" speed for a baryon).
-- spidermother, Nov 15 2011


if .99...inf is equal to 1 then c is the highest speed of a baryon.
-- Voice, Nov 16 2011


.99...inf = 1, but c is still not the highest speed for a baryon. It is a non-allowable speed, not the highest allowable speed. It's an important distinction.
-- spidermother, Nov 16 2011



random, halfbakery