What's the size of a photon?

What's the size of a photon?
Google gave literally zero answer.

pic not related.

Other urls found in this thread:

scienceforums.net/topic/27337-does-a-photon-have-physical-volume-or-geometrical-size/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Massless pleb

Picture has photon mass. It's resting mass is 0

I know it's massless, but what about it diamater/volume?

We can see them, they touch our retina/photoreceptors, so it must have a diameter/volume!

scienceforums.net/topic/27337-does-a-photon-have-physical-volume-or-geometrical-size/

It can't have volume without mass exactly. It has a wave function instead.

>can't answer simple question
>has to obfuscate with meaningless equations
Physicists, ladies and gentlemen.

so if it doesn't have a size/volume, we can put an infinite number in a 1cm3?

I'm not a physicist bud, was just curious too and thought I'd help you out by researching it myself. Sorry man.

Okay I'll try to awnser your question again then.
>a photon's "size" is roughly half a fermi, which is .5×10to the power of -15m

not him but citation needed

scienceforums.net/topic/27337-does-a-photon-have-physical-volume-or-geometrical-size/

>forum
was thinking about academical work

Just trying to help ya man, fuck me. Wikipedia describes it's volume in terms of P, it's momentum (mass × volume), but doesn't seem to leave room for mass when at rest. Look up photon on wikipedia and don't ask people on sci if you're going to be an ass to someone simply offering what he can. I figured it was better than nothing, if noone else replied at least you got my 2 cents. Even though that's not much.

Plus you're asking about it on Veeky Forums. I'm sure that science forum is more likely to be accurate than Veeky Forums's Veeky Forums board would be. It actually has some great conceptual awnsers. I thought you said you didn't want some equation shit anyway when I posted my first post of a fucking screenshot from wikipedia anyway

Yea I agree, you're fucking asking about the size of a photon like a moron would and then when someone actually is willing to help you with your stupid question you bash them for it. You're lucky anyone took the time to awnser your dumb fucking nonsensical shit in the first place. Grow up.

you replied to different persons thinking it was the same as op (me)

I'm not that guy you're confusing people.

You're being uncessary rude like him.

The wavelength CAN NOT be less than Planck Length (1.616*10^-35 meters).

...

Honestly it's a silly question. It's more useful to consider them as point in space rather than actually taking up any physical space. Besides, since their spin, it's really irrelevant how much space they take up anyway.

>silly question

yet, no clear answer.

implying denying truth insults physicists

it's a silly question because you're taking the particle interpretation as a literal definition

Just came back to this thread. See? I wasn't a complete idiot. It is a silly question to ask if you even slightly understand particle physics. My awnsers were definetely good ones and you just shat on it.

Asking for the size of an elementary particle is like asking for the weight of a bit of data.

There is no 'size of a photon' because there's always a photon which is smaller

Yes, that's how bosons work