[General] Challenge

[John Macken]

John W.

 

I must confess that I cannot find the papers that you are referencing when
you say, “as described in the papers circulated.” 

 

Perhaps I can tell you the test that a spacetime model must pass if it is
going to be successful at forming the properties of an electron or a top
quark.  An electron with energy of about 8.2x10-14 J and volume of roughly
λc3 would have energy density of about 1024 J/m3.  A top quark would have
energy density of roughly 1046 J/m3. These energy densities would generate
pressure of about 1024 N/m2 and 1046 N/m2 respectively.  

 

I have been criticized by claiming that my model of spacetime has the
tremendous energy density required to explain the harmonic oscillators of
zero point energy.  However, this tremendous energy density is required if
waves or distortions of spacetime are the building block of any particle.
Therefore, does your model of spacetime have the energy density required to
be the single building block of everything in the universe?  

 

John M.

 

From: General [mailto:general-
bounces+john=macken.com at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] On Behalf Of
John Williamson
Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2015 7:18 PM
To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion
Subject: Re: [General] Challenge

 

Not so,

The medium being distorted in the "medieval torture device" is precisely
that of space and time and of its product and quotients, as described in
the papers circulated.

That is: it is in the space of space-space and space-time areas - and in
that derived from products between them (such as the Poynting vector).

Regards, John w.

  _____  

From: General [general-
bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org]
on behalf of John Macken [john at macken.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2015 6:04 PM
To: Nature of Light and Particles
Subject: [General] Challenge

Hello All,

 

Various graphic representations of electrons have been presented by members
of the group.  They have looked like knots, spirals, loops and even
medieval torture devices. However, not once has there been any description
of the medium or the distortion that is being pictured.  This is the
equivalent of drawing a three dimensional graph except failing to designate
what exactly is being graphed.  

 

When I show pictures of my electron model, I can tell you exactly what is
being graphed.  I have a spacetime field with impedance and a wave
structure.  My electron model produces quantifiable distortions of this
spacetime field.  They have specific wave properties with known strain
amplitude, known frequency and known size. While I cannot predict the
energy of an electron from first principles, I can calculate the energy of
the model being pictured and show that it corresponds to the electron’s
energy.  I do not hide behind the equation E = ħω and say that no further
calculation is required.  I can derive E = ħω from my proposed structure
of the spacetime field.  

 

Therefore, my challenge to the group is to identify what is being shown in
the pictures. Are these waves?  If so, give the details of the medium
carrying the waves. String theory has served as a bad example because they
draw pictures of vibrating strings while claiming that the strings are a
basic building block that is not made of anything more fundamental.  If a
photon or an electric field is your basic building block, are you claiming
that it is also unknowable? 

 

For those that doubt the existence of the energetic spacetime field, I
challenge you to identify the components being pictured in your electron
models. 

 

John M.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20150701/096b8213/attachment.htm>