[General] Pivot in the new theory of light and matter

[John Duffield]

Yes John we can cope. We have a boy aged 7. It would be fun. Then we can
talk about canoes and waves, and how canoes pivot as they're displaced
upwards. 

Regards

John D

 

From: General
[mailto:general-bounces+johnduffield=btconnect.com at lists.natureoflightandpar
ticles.org] On Behalf Of John Williamson
Sent: 17 June 2015 01:23
To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion; 'David Mathes'
Subject: Re: [General] Pivot in the new theory of light and matter

 

No John,

Displacement current is displacement current. Current is a vector and is the
vector part of the new theory. Displacement current is very very important
and there is, in some sense ONLY displacement current. Fundamentally.

Yes, meeting up is a VERY good idea. Can you cope with two kids (well
behaved usually) aged 5 and 7?

If not we have a spare bedroom in Troon!

Regards, John.

  _____  

From: General
[general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk at lists.natureoflightandparticl
es.org] on behalf of John Duffield [johnduffield at btconnect.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2015 8:24 PM
To: 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'; 'David Mathes'
Subject: Re: [General] Pivot in the new theory of light and matter

John:

Some interesting stuff there. IMHO your pivot-electric effect is just
displacement current: light is alternating displacement current, space
waves, and where it waves it's curved. So light moving through light follows
a curved path.   

I'd be interested in meeting somewhere closer than San Diego. Oxford is good
for me. London too. And did somebody mention Llandudno a while back or has
that been and gone? And of course, if anybody fancies a few days in Poole,
we have two spare bedrooms. 

Regards

John D 

 

PS: I've pruned this email. They were getting bigger and bigger. 

 

From: General
[mailto:general-bounces+johnduffield=btconnect.com at lists.natureoflightandpar
ticles.org] On Behalf Of John Williamson
Sent: 16 June 2015 19:49
To: David Mathes; Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion
Subject: [General] Pivot in the new theory of light and matter

 

Dear David (and everyone) ..

Please find attached two preprints, one on the new theory of light and
matter presented last year in Marseille at FFP14, the other an update of the
draft paper I posted for comment earlier on photon quantisation  from the
underlying relativistic nature of space and time.

I had intended to get round to replying to you, to Richard and to comment on
the (very beautiful) video posts of John M's stuff . I may not get round to
all of what I would like to do though.

David, I had missed your first post an comments on the "pivot" in the snow
of emails and the rush to finish this round of exams. I am now on annual
leave - and hence have a bit of time to do a bit of proper work. Hihi . very
nice indeed. I love your creativity and getting some insight into your
thinking on what the pivot might be. Some of the ideas you came up with
sounded similar to my initial thinking on how things turned, in my old
theory back in the eighties when I was at CERN.

Some of your subsequent emails referred to what you had said earlier and,
out of context, were a bit confusing for me. Likewise, what I am saying will
be, without reference to the framework of the new theory and the new
differential equations therein, pretty incomprehensible.

But no - that is not what I was talking about at all. I was writing,
specifically, the concept of "pivot" in the context of the new, extended,
theory of classical electromagnetism I am in the process of developing,
aspects of which were presented last year at FFP14 (preprint attached).  The
pivot concept has also been talked about, in the context of forces at
MENDEL2012 or before at a series of lectures here in Glasgow, at a Maxwell
Society lecture in London in 2009 and at the Cybernetics conference there.
The earlier work was in the context of a (more complicated) nonlinear theory
Martin and I have been working on for some time. We are still trying to
progress  that as well, though with mundane work commitments we have had
very little time. My concept of pivot in the earlier work was anyway (very
slightly) different, as our thinking has moved on a lot since then, so it is
better to stick to the work in the current, linear, theory.

Like me,  you have not had time to follow everything and, in particular, you
have not yet found time to take on board all the papers I have posted. This
will have made a good few of the comments I have made pretty
incomprehensible. I have attached the relevant preprints (one updated) for
convenience if anyone wants to know more about what I am talking about
and/or make any further comments. 

I agree with you that we need to become more rigorous in our discussion. I
agree wholeheartedly that we all need to make more effort in defining what
we are talking about, otherwise we will get mired in tiresome discussions of
the meaning of terms. I'm afraid this means, practically, that we reference
what we are talking about where possible, to the proper theory and to the
proper mathematics. For example, when Richard talks about the equation
governing his "charged photon" as being the Schrodinger equation - we then
know that the rigorous behavior of charged photon fluid is, for him, the
same as the probability density squared in Schroedinger quantum mechanics.
One can then discuss this without the words getting in the way. We can then
waste less time wondering just what each other are talking about. As one of
the worst offenders in the confusion stakes this may sound a bit like the
pot calling the kettle black- but I am trying now and will try to do better
in future! 

The new theory, aspects of which are covered in the attached preprints, is
in conventional terms a set of eight, coupled linear differential equations.
They encompass the Maxwell equations. They are better written, however, as a
single linear differential equations over space and time. In this sense, the
new theory has as a basis the proper relativistic properties of space and
time. Built in.

Written as a single equation, the new equation looks similar (and is
similar) to the Dirac equation. It is more comprehensive, however, and
considers mass, charge, current electric field, magnetic field and three
other (unfamiliar to most) kinds of quantities - one corresponding to an
intrinsic angular momentum density, another to an directed volume (we hall
it a hedgehog as it is either inward or outward directed in 3d space) and
the other to a kind of four dimensional hedgehog (which may also be inward
or outward directed and acts a bit like the complex scalar i). I know this
is hard guys - but understanding just how the universe works was never going
to by easy!

The new theory, rather than needing to posit spinors, derives them. Like the
Dirac equation it has at the simplest level just four solutions,
corresponding to double-covering field-pivot vortices in 4-momentum space.
One pair is negatively charged, the other positive. In each pair there is an
intrinsic spin which can be either leftwards or rightwards. From the
perspective of the new theory, where Dirac initially went wrong was in his
assignment of the intrinsic nature of mass in his (too large) algebra. 

The fact that the solutions are vortices in momentum space and not
space-space means one has to look at a projection to see what they look like
in space. This is why they can be both spherical and toroidal. Sphere and
torus are both projections of higher dimensional spheres.

In the simplest extension of the new theory over and above Maxwell, my
concept of the "pivot" acts as a seventh dynamical  "field" component. This
is the "P" term in the differential equations in the two papers attached. 

Unfortunately, it is the paper yet to come though, on the photon and
electron, which has not been drafted yet, which will explain the pivot
aspect in more detail. Though, in some senses, I should be working on doing
that rather than writing this email - this process is helping to clarify my
thoughts on explaining myself. This is a job for the next few weeks.

The draft photon quantization paper (attached) now has a note on the Phat
photons David M picked up, which I have now referenced (thanks to David).
There has been some revision, to explain points of confusion arising in the
discussion with this group.

In the new theory, the pivot, like the electric and magnetic fields, is
smooth and continuous and can take any value. This value is usually zero in
free space since it is strongly scavenged by existing material particles -
which absorb it as low-energy heat.  In contrast to the proper nature of the
electric and magnetic fields (tensor or bi-vector components) the pivot is a
Lorentz invariant scalar transforming like a rest-mass. It is next to
impossible to produce and measure free pivot (if it exists at all) as it
would rapidly be sucked into anything that looks like a pre-existing
particle (such as any measurement equipment). If it exists anywhere in the
universe it would need to be far from existing matter. It could then
constitute a candidate for dark matter - which may itself be worth a paper
suggesting this possibility (I'm happy to co-author one such with any of you
with expertise in cosmology or astrophysics).

So - how does the new theory introduce forces strong enough to constrain
light? Briefly, the Poynting vector usually is S = E X B, representing a
kind of field momentum density . within the new theory this gets an extra
term such that Sp = E X B +EP, where P is this new Pivot term (which is
always zero for free space). It is this product of electric field and pivot
which is related to the confinement force (force density components arise
form its 4-differential). Now the difference between this rest mass density
in the new theory and in that of Dirac, for example, is that here the Pivot
is dynamical - in the same way that E and B satisfy a differential equation
with respect to both space and time, so too does the pivot (you need to look
at the equations in the paper). The rate of change of pivot is related to
the charge. This makes (QED) sense as it constitutes mass-energy exchange.
Clearly, from the equation its effect is to introduce curvature into the
momentum density flow, as it is in the direction of the electric field,
which is perpendicular to the Poynting vector. In the presence of pivot the
direction of momentum transport curves smoothly, which is why I called it
the pivot. If you get enough pivot, the idea is that the field may propagate
round and round in circles in an electro-pivot-magnetic vortex. An
elementary (rest) massive particle. The pivot-electric effect does not stop
the magneto-electric flow, merely turns (pivots) it. Enough pivot is not a
very great deal - the same order of magnitude as the magnetic field (with
which it shares the same physical units) will suffice.  It is then the
interaction between the electric field and the pivot (as in the equation
above) that provides a confinement mechanism for something that is no longer
light (though related), but now an electron. There are a further set of
particles with tighter twists. These have the mass spectrum of the higher
leptons (the muon and tauon).

The differential of the momentum is, of course, a confining force. The
radius of curvature sets a size scale. Though the curvature is in a peculiar
(4-momentum) space this may be expressed in metres and is lcom/ 4pi. The
thing is self-confined partly because the pivot is two differential orders
away from the field, and hence is 180 degrees out of phase. More pivot means
more mass, a tighter curve and hence a smaller object (as is observed).
Similar objects all have the same mass, if charged, because they can
exchange mass-energy with one another through photon exchange and hence
equilibrate.  It is all very very beautiful!

Just for information this note (and the preprints) is intended to be
forwarded to other people in a few other groups who may be interested and
with whom I am currently corresponding (mostly people copied in earlier
emails. including Tony Booth, Basil Hiley, Roger Penrose, Michael Wright and
Alex Afriat but also some folk in another study group Martin and I belong
to). 

It strikes me that Andrew is right that we, as a group, may need more
interaction after San Diego, both within our group and with an extended
group including the people mentioned above and others each of you may know.
Anyone interested in organizing a conference or workshop in Europe perhaps?
Anyone prepared to help with trying to find funding for travel and so on? I
would do it, but I have so very little time now and no talent for organizing
anything (even myself!). I need to conserve as much energy and time as
possible into scraping a little time together to develop and promote the new
theory. We could hold it here in Scotland in Edinburgh or Glasgow, or in
Oxford or Cambridge, Amsterdam, Brno or Prague perhaps? Some of us are
anyway trying to organize a European group to further the new physics. The
European members of the group may wish to get involved with this for the
next round of funding. Some of you may also have industrial contacts willing
to help sponsor such an effort in return for participation and interaction
with the group. All are welcome! My experience in the past is if we can get
a few people on board it can rapidly snowball. Networking at the conference
can help - but it is always better to prepare the ground beforehand.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20150617/d8533e46/attachment.htm>