[General] Electron

[Andrew Meulenberg]

Dear All,

Chip & Martin have broached the subject of photon quantization.

*"Are electromagnetic waves quantized by their own nature, or is this the
result of the nature of the emitter and absorber"*

My 2 cents worth is that photons are self-generated solitons. They are
resonances (thus quantized by their environment - as perturbed by their
presence) and cannot exist w/o the unique angular momentum, which
'confines' the energy and stabilizes the E = h nu relationship.

The ang. mom of a photon must come from the source &/or the absorber. This
raises a point. How can the absorber effect the radiation of a photon
unless it is also involved in its creation? The standing wave concept works
easily for photonic-energy transfer at short distances, However, how do we
rationalize photon transport over universal distances? That requires the
standing wave to be in time!

A point along these same lines comes from Chips wonderful 'pictures'. A
problem exists if they represent field lines. Field lines are gradients of
a potential. As such, they cannot cross (at least in 3-D, can they in 4D?).
It is the joining or opposition of field lines that provide the attractive
and repulsive forces of charges (and photons). This concept is critical to
the discussion of both photons and of photonic electrons.

How can a photon curl unless the *E*-field lines in the center either
'terminate' on a charge (which they can create?) or are diverted into time?
[Is this what John D was addressing below?] If only diverted into 3-space,
even as a vortex, then the result is like that of a pulsar with the field
lines 'streaming out' from the structure along the axis of rotation. This
violates the concept of an isotropic electron. This is why I have resorted
to the concept of a wormhole in time.

These same questions are being addressed by Bob, Ralph, and myself in the
context of interference effects. Understanding these effects is critical to
understanding both the photon and the photonic-electron. It also addresses
the conditions under which photons pass thru each other or are reflected
from one another.

Andrew

__________________________________

On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 6:48 PM, Chip Akins <chipakins at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Hi John D
>
>
>
> Do you envision a 3D model which is a 3D grid of space with your
> prescribed wave propagating through the 3D mesh? Or are you suggesting a 2D
> wave representation?
>
>
>
> Are you proposing that two EM waves interact to diffract each other?  Has
> this ever been seen in experiment?
>
>
>
> I suspect that a strong source of angular momentum *must also be present*
> in order to catalyze electron-positron pair production (like when gamma
> rays strike an atomic nucleus).  So I think this means the waves will
> otherwise just pass through each other and *the conditions for
> confinement will not exist, absent this additional source of angular
> momentum*.
>
>
>
> Chip
>
>
>
>
>
> There is no charge at the centre. The charge is the twist, the winding,
> the knottedness, the vorticity. Undo it with the opposite twist, and
> instead of two field variations going round at c looking like standing
> field. All, you've got are two field variations moving linearly at c.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> John D
>
> _______________________________________________
> If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light
> and Particles General Discussion List at mules333 at gmail.com
> <a href="
> http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%40gmail.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/20150501/1d2c246c/attachment.htm>