[General] Position

Fri Apr 17 23:14:53 PDT 2015

All,
FWIW I am not proposing a particular electron model. My interest is photon-based elementary particles. A vetting model may come of the effort.
As John W points out, bosons may be the building blocks for leptons and quarks. While this may be true on a limited basis, I'm all for yet another level of quanta-only particles below the bosons. What are bosons made of? So there may be common ground between our two approaches from different directions.
However, I'm looking primarily at three electron models: John W and Martin, and Richard's two models. I simply have not reviewed sufficiently the models by Vivian, by Chip, and by John M. 
IMHO parametric equations, especially Richard's,  are a very essential step toward topological characteristics and solutions. A rigorous paper on electrons and photons, or the whole standard model, would address this form of equations. However, the parametric equations do not stand alone but need to be linked to GRT and QM, preferably QCD and QED.
The current difficulty is that energy density is not addressed by the current set of parametric equations. 
Even if we had internal models of the electron, photon and quanta, we would still have many mountains to climb and many miles to show how these models fit the wider universe of photons, electronics, spintronics, and plasmonics.
So about the best I can do is ask questions and summarize vetting criteria, and in doing so, hopefully show where the line is between impossible and improbable so that Holmes can be invoked. To wit, "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."
Of course, if we add another dimension or change certain assumptions, we may need to review the cutting room floor for ideas vetted as impossible and reconsider them. Alas, we live in a 3D world which is a simplified for practical purposes from a 4D model. We may find that a 5D model will be required, or the possibility of another layer of particles/quanta below the Standard Model. 
Clearly the experimental tools we have are a bit awkward to use at the level of the individual photon or electron. We may need to build molecular level systems that have elementary particle sensors, and these systems communicate  by radio, fiber or wire to a larger system such as a workstation or iPhone. 
Best Regards,

David

   From: Richard Gauthier <richgauthier at gmail.com>
 To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org> 
 Sent: Friday, April 17, 2015 10:26 PM
 Subject: Re: [General] Position

Andrew and others,  I am proposing that an electron IS a helically circulating charged photon. A muon and a tau can also be helically circulating charged photons with different rest energies than the electron. These circulating charged photons (i.e. the electron and also the positron) would be derived for example from the energy of a higher energy photon during pair production in the vicinity of an atomic nucleus. The circulating charged photon of an electron or positron is proposed to have spin 1/2 hbar instead of spin 1 hbar of an uncharged photon (I would like to hear if John W and Martin, Vivian, and Chip agree or disagree on this point about the spin of the circulating double-looped photon being 1/2 hbar due to the electron having this spin at relativistic velocities. This is an important point for both single and double-looped photon models of the electron.) The circulating charged photon has the properties c=f lambda, p=h/lambda and E=hf of an uncharged photon. Its helical circulation and its electric charge are closely related. The general double-loop relativistic charged photon model of an electron does not include a specific model of a charged photon. Various charged photon models can be proposed that would fit the relativistic electron model. I am not proposing a strange type of photon that in special circumstances becomes an electron, but rather ordinary photons or other normal high energy particles that produce circulating charged photons (electrons and positrons) during electron-positron pair production.      Richard

On Apr 17, 2015, at 9:10 AM, Andrew Meulenberg <mules333 at gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Richard,

In looking at your presentation, I was concerned about what the charged photon was supposed to be. Is it an electron? I refer to the photonic electron as general model for an electron that is derived from all or a portion of a photon and still retains much of the photon's characteristics. Are you referring to a specific model of a similar creature? Or, are you refering to a strange photon of a type that, under special circumstances, becomes an electron?

Andrew
___________________________________________-

On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 9:17 PM, Richard Gauthier <richgauthier at gmail.com> wrote:
Chandra, Andrew and others,    My presentation at APS in Baltimore on Tuesday went well in that in 10 minutes I presented the material as planned. The session had about 10 attendees, and was moderated by a professor of theoretical high energy physics from SLAC (This was very good). My powerpoint for the session is attached below.
The moderator asked a question indicating that she had misunderstood (perhaps because of the way I expressed it) a main idea in my electron model. She thought that because I proposed that the electron is a circulating charged photon, that this implies that gamma for the electron model is infinite, making the model absurd. But in the model, while the circulating charged photon’s velocity is c along its helical path, it is the charged photon's longitudinal component velocity v that corresponds to v of the electron. The experimentally measured velocity v of the electron is always less than c, so gamma in the model is normal and not infinite. I didn’t have time to clarify this to her after my talk so I will try to do so by email. I hope no one in this group has the professor’s misunderstanding of my model on this point.      Richard
_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at richgauthier at gmail.com
<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>

_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at dmath777 at yahoo.com
<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/dmath777%40yahoo.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20150418/32d3e931/attachment.htm>