[General] Vot

[John Duffield]

John, it’s a “quantum harmonic”.

 

You know Planck length ℓP = √(ħG/ c³). Try just working out 4π/√c³.
Yes the dimensionality is wrong, but the speed of light defines your time
and your distance. All your dimensionality springs from the motion of
light, because in the end, that’s pretty much all there is. 

 

Apart from gravity of course, but’s that’s one for another day. 

 

Regards

John D

 

From: General [mailto:general-
bounces+johnduffield=btconnect.com at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] On
Behalf Of John Williamson
Sent: 06 July 2015 09:39
To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion
Cc: Ariane Mandray; Anthony Booth; Michael Wright; Manohar .; Alexander
Afriat
Subject: [General] Vot

 

Dear All,

As promised, here is a first instalment of the draft electron-photon paper. 

The discussion over mass-energy, and its smoothness, is apposite. It is
worth noting that the main theories of physics work with a sort of square-
root mass-energy density, which must be squared and integrated over to
yield a total (rest) mass or energy. This is the form of the "probabilty
density" in QM for example, or the field in the Maxwell equations. Despite
its pretty much universal presence I'm not aware of a good, general word
for it. If any of you know any better, please share it! Anyway, after
Seuss, I have made up the word "vot" to describe this concept - and to fit
in with my previous nomenclature for the scalar square root mass density I
called the pivot in the papers circulated earlier. Vot is the general term -
and scalar root energy density then becomes p-vot, the magnetic field
(root) energy density B-vot and so on. Remember the general unit for
magnetic field, the Tesla, already has this form - one must square it and
integrate over a volume to get an energy. I'm extending the nomenclature to
give a general name to each of the (16) fundamental space-time forms that
square-root energy can take. Although the p-vot squared and integrated
gives an element of the rest-mass (and has the relativistic transformation
properties of a rest-mass) not that this is not the whole rest-mass of an
EM particle. One must also take such things as the electric field into
account. This also accounts for a good fraction of the total energy of the
particle, is pinned to the p-vot and hence localised, and hence contributes
(as in the discussion of "light is heavy" to what one would weigh on a
scale). To get the total energy one has to add up all the bits.

Anyway this email is a little cryptic - hope the paper itself is more
informative.

It is worth noting that this is very much a draft. Much of the wordy stuff
in there at the moment will go (and must go to fit in the rest) in the
final paper. Perhaps it will help to have the intermediate steps explained
more fully for you all to get what I'm trying to say.

Anyway, see what you think. 

I look forwards to comments.

Regards, John W.

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20150706/507afd4d/attachment.htm>