[General] double-loop electron model discussion

[Andrew Meulenberg]

Dear all,

I was swearing a blue streak, when I thought that Mozilla had swallowed my
nearly completed email draft w/o a trace. I find that somehow I had 'sent'
a portion of it, instead of simply putting it away to complete later. I
will complete the portion now (in red). (The longer portion hasn't
resurfaced yet.)

On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:06 PM, Andrew Meulenberg <mules333 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Dear Richard,
>
> Brief answers to your older comments below:
>
> Hi Andrew,   That's a very interesting view that a wormhole connection
> between a created electron-positron pair could resolve the EPR paradox. I
> think that you would need to show that the same wormhole explanation would
> resolve the EPR paradox with other particles that are quantum mechanically
> entangled.
>
> I haven't looked more than briefly at the implications of joining leptons
> by a wormhole. It just seems to fit and leads to some interesting concepts.
> The wormhole concept may answer my question about when do two fermions
> become a boson? The concept of making and breaking the wormhole, might be
> related to coherence length of the constituent photons.
>
> You would also need to show that the appropriate quantum communication
> between two particles could pass between their connecting wormhole to keep
> them entangled.
>
> The thought that "light reflects from the equal light from the other side
> of null-zone in a standing wave" will be developed in our paper (w Bob
> Hudgins as lead author). This could be useful because, if the wormhole is a
> standing wave, as I suspect, then non-equal information will pass between
> the leptons, but equal information will not be. This is just food for
> thought right now.
>
>     There are other sub-quantum hypotheses I suppose about how a photon
> interacting with another photon or an atomic nucleus can create an electron
> pair. Have you studied them and eliminated them as possible contenders?
>
> I have not studied the problem. However, I have not found any papers that
> try to explain pair production on a physical level, rather than just a
> mathematical one. If you know of any, I would appreciate it. Even the
> papers from this group, by my limited definition, tend to be conceptual
> rather than physical. I think that John W. may have made a comment about
> the high-energy density of the curled photon. However, since a photon has
> only periodic and oscillating high-energy spots, it will only interact
> permanently with another photon if the 'spots' of both are aligned in
> space and phase. If a photon is curled about itself so that the curling
> period is resonant with its internal periodicity and it can somehow reverse
> its phase every 1/2 cycle, then the energy density multiplies by orders of
> magnitude and the field lines can all remain pointing in or out. Pointing
> out we can understand as a diverging field called charge.
>


> What happens to the field lines pointing in? They can't simply cancel
> themselves out by pointing in opposite directions. Neither can they escape
> by turning around and escaping thru the 'poles' like a pulsar. The rest
> of the wrapped photon (ball of yarn) is preventing escape & the energy
> density is too high to not distort space. Thus, I proposed the wormhole.
> Just as the field lines of a bar magnet return thru the bar, the electric
> field lines of the curled photon return thru time (the wormhole) that
> terminates at the electron positron pair defined by the field lines
> diverging in 3-space. The model is not bullet proof (yet), but it explains
> a lot of physics. Details still need to be pictured, explained, and
> mathematically validated.
>

Best to all,

Andrew
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20150313/46784006/attachment.htm>