[General] 21st century linear, first order theories. Are there any others?

Fri Dec 11 10:45:04 PST 2015

John
My apologies for this late response. I'm slowly catching up on the volumes of traffic.
I find that physics is in need of roadmaps. Given all the various types of models we have centered around the photon including both electron and spacetime, just a simple comparison between models would help. However, by using specific types of mathematical approaches such as Dirac or Weyl, there may be useful insights into the common threads between these models.
When I see Dirac and Weyl, I also think particles and in particular, Majorna. Not that this matter for linearization but the three types of particles matter as topological transformations. So linearization may not be the only approach.
Also, I don't like just linearization. Yes, I use it to make experiments work most notably Hoyle-Narlikar (linearized GRT). However, I fear I'm missing out on something by not extending the series or using exponential notation and using the full GRT. Furthermore, GRT appears inadequate at galactic distances.
In that regard, Peter Rowlands work has been mentioned. I would suggest The Theoretical Minimum (Susskind). Also, Dynamic Theory (Pharis Williams). 
The Theoretical MinimumThe Theoretical Minimum is a series of Stanford Continuing Studies courses taught by world renowned physicist Leonard Susskind.  These courses collectively teach everything required to gain a basic understanding of each area of modern physics including all of the fundamental mathematics.

While the focus of this ongoing discussion has been on photon, electron and spacetime with occasional forays into quarks and the remaining bosons, there is this nagging question about how to model neutrinos. 
Nobel-winning discovery of neutrino oscillations, proving that neutrinos have mass
For me, this gets back to the charge-mass relationship which appears to be a direct relationship in some case. However, it's not clear that the relationship between charge and mass is linear.

Best
David

      From: John Williamson <John.Williamson at glasgow.ac.uk>
 To: "af.kracklauer at web.de" <af.kracklauer at web.de> 
Cc: Nick Bailey <nick at bailey-family.org.uk>; "Mark, Martin van der" <martin.van.der.mark at philips.com>; "general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>; Ariane Mandray <ariane.mandray at wanadoo.fr>; "pete at leathergoth.com" <pete at leathergoth.com>; David Williamson <david.williamson at ed.ac.uk>
 Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2015 8:01 PM
 Subject: [General] 21st century linear, first order theories. Are there any others?

#yiv3903682786 BODY {}Dear all,
I’m just writing a paper on the new linear set of differential equations I proposed last year and want to compare it to similar work in the 21st century, or fairly recently at least. I usually like to read a couple of papers before breakfast (thanks for keeping me supplied guys – especially David John D and Al) – but I’m just drawing a blank here. What should I be looking at?To be specific: is anyone aware of any other equations which have been proposed this century or in the second half of last century which can be written in the linear first-order form d (something) = 0?
For reference, what comes to mind in the early twentieth are the Dirac equation and the Weyl equation. There were other guys playing with things around then, but my mind has gone blank (Eddington?). Shroedinger’s, of course, has second order derivatives (though, as Dieks has argued it has first order features imported though the adoption of the de Broglie relation – and I am going to refer to that). I’m also not talking about further work on Dirac or Maxwell such as that by Hestenes or using the Bateman method on the Maxwell equations (of which the most advanced work, in my view, is that of Martin which he and I will review over the Christmas “vacation”). I’m talking about proper, basic, first order equations of light, matter or anything else.
David – you were proposing I write a review of comparable work (and I am delighted that you are going to review the various electron models!) – but I’m talking here about linear theories expressed in (vector) differential form, not about any specific model within them. Tony … your stuff is brilliant but second order – anything else you are aware of?  Nick … Pask’s stuff was brilliant too – did he express anything new in linear equations? Also, of course, not referring to work on such perturbative theories as QED and non-perturbative stuff such as QCD, most of the “standard model” and the various string theories. Chip, Albrecht, Richard ... you have been looking at lots of electron and photon models - anything there? Joakim, Adam, Mayank ... anything caught your attention? Chandra, Al, Martin … anything on light beyond Maxwell or in “quantum entanglement”? Michael M, David, Viv … anything out there in space?
Maybe I’m being stupid at this time in the morning and more things will come to me after another cup of coffee, but I’m drawing a blank here. Any further suggestions would be helpful!
Regards, John.
_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at davidmathes8 at yahoo.com
<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/davidmathes8%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/20151211/3e67548b/attachment.htm>