[General] Challenge

[Roychoudhuri, Chandra]

Thank you, John Macken, for underscoring this vital point!

Let me elaborate the issue even further:
The purpose of physics is to make models to understand the REAL PHYSICAL processes that are being used by nature to perpetuate the cosmic evolution. Meaning, if we perceive something as a wave; then something PHYSICAL (real material or real field) must waving. Similarly, if we model a particle as locally looped oscillation (of some kind); then something physical must be looping.

If, what is waving or looping, is a physical field (rather than some “substance” of old notion); then there are two possibilities. The physical field itself is moving spatially and temporally, as the case may be. Or, the local value of the modeling parameters (under consideration) held by (or, constituent of) the parent field are changing (oscillating); but the physical field itself is stationary, serving as the universal Inertial Reference Frame.

Chandra.

From: General [mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] On Behalf Of John Macken
Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2015 1:04 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/20150630/c3a9f171/attachment.htm>