[General] High impact publications

Wed Nov 25 17:25:10 PST 2015

Hello Chandra,
    I would like to recommend Edward Zampino as a new member of our Nature of Light and Particles e-mail discussion group. I have been in contact with him and I think he will be a great addition to the group. He has an electromagnetic model of the electron which he developed independently and which he summarizes in the attached draft paper which he has given permission to attach:

 Below is a quote from Ed explaining his approach to modeling the electron:

"I think that the modeling of the electron is the kind of problem that you can’t really work on often. I would read a little, think about it. Drop it. Get a vision. Do calculations. It is a slow, contemplative process.
At least that is the way it is for me.

I did have the idea of modeling the electron as a circulating photon at one time. I visualized this as a wave packets in orbit on a circle.  
I rejected this idea because it seemed that a photon in orbit would have to be held in orbit by an extreme curvature of spacetime.  I knew from General Relativity that an enormous
mass like the mass of the sun was needed just to bend the path of star light by around 1.38 seconds of arc. (approximately) So to hold photons in an orbit with a radius of approximately 
the Compton wavelength would require nearly a mini-black hole as the core of the electron. So I decided to go with the idea of a standing E&M wave on a circle. This leads to other, bigger,
questions. How would a standing E&M wave on a circle ever be formed? Why would it remain stable?

In the model, the standing wave is formed by the clockwise and counter-clockwise moving waves in constructive interference. I call these the right-mover and left-mover. Each of them would not exist without
the other. The standing wave is imagined to be a stable physical configuration. ( But why? I don’t know yet.) The spin of the electron is not the motion of the right or left mover. They don’t cancel out the
the spin. In the model, it is the whole standing wave that rotates around the axis of symmetry. ( the Z-axis )  Yes, I picked alpha to be 1/2 (a spin adjustment factor in the model--Richard)  . I can only say this about it: I realized that the standing E&M wave is not a continuous rigid body of mass, and so by its nature, will not have a moment of inertia for a ring of continuous mass density, namely, mr2  . I just made the hypothesis that the moment of inertia was a fraction of that mr2. An undetermined co-efficient. What fascinated me is this formula for the spin-angular momentum apparently worked when the mass of the electron was taken to be exactly what was derived earlier in the paper. (The m = h/2πcR.)

What bothers me about the helical photon model is the same thing that bothered me about the photon trapped in a circular orbit. What holds it in its orbit?

There are other problems with the standing E&M wave too. I even wonder if it makes any sense at all that a configuration of electrical and magnetic fields can even exist in order to create such a thing, Is this even possible
with admissible solutions to Maxwell’s equations? "

Richard

> On Nov 23, 2015, at 5:29 AM, Roychoudhuri, Chandra <chandra.roychoudhuri at uconn.edu> wrote:
> 
> I would be happy to facilitate such a publication through Physics Essays or SPIE. 
> Chandra. 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S® 5 ACTIVE™, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
> 
> 
> -------- Original message --------
> From: John Williamson <John.Williamson at glasgow.ac.uk <mailto:John.Williamson at glasgow.ac.uk>> 
> Date: 11/23/2015 3:49 AM (GMT-05:00) 
> To: davidmathes8 at yahoo.com <mailto:davidmathes8 at yahoo.com>, Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org <mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>> 
> Cc: "Mark, Martin van der" <martin.van.der.mark at philips.com <mailto:martin.van.der.mark at philips.com>> 
> Subject: Re: [General] High impact publications 
> 
> Thanks David,
> 
> Replies below.
> From: General [general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org <mailto:general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>] on behalf of davidmathes8 at yahoo.com <mailto:davidmathes8 at yahoo.com> [davidmathes8 at yahoo.com <mailto:davidmathes8 at yahoo.com>]
> Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 8:21 PM
> To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion
> Subject: Re: [General] High impact publications
> 
> 
> 
> (Preface: This past week I was a counselor/chaperone for a couple of dozen young people (total 250 attended) at a 6th grade science camp which covered topics from Stream and Pond biology to Lightsaber technology. More than one of these fine young men in my cabin where interested in science fiction. When they learned of my education and experience, they asked a lot of questions. One wanted to know more about electrons and gravity while a Dr. Who fan wanted to build a time machine. I answered best I could but like many things this week, it was difficult for them to visualize what I had read and seen...and carefully analyzed and modeled. So in the context and spirit of educating eager 6th grade science students the following was written with an eye toward bringing "what's inside the electron" and other out of the box thinking towards building a bigger box.)
> 
> John
> 
> I would be glad to proofread as well.
> 
> While Martin and you have done an amazing job researching the electron and providing a detailed long term research study, yet with all due respect to both of you, it is only one model among many. 
> 
> True!
> 
> May I suggest a neutral survey paper summarizing the history of electron models focusing on the last ten years. Such a paper would provide a quicker view educating folks who might need to know about the general science issues (every school and university worldwide). A tree diagram of relationships could be developed, and a road map of where to go from here in the 21st century (quantum gravity, action at a distance, scalability and other topics beyond the 20th Century Nobel winners).
> 
> One goal of the neutral paper would be to provide an overview as well as guidance into any non-standardized language.  For the models emphasizing waves over particles or quantization of spacetime, show that in science not to box oneself in and exclude nature but attempt to define the box of nature at least in our universe. 
> 
> Visualization is very important to communicating ideas Such a paper would be aimed somewhere between explaining to one's mother or a 6th grader. The graphics and images of the electron, photon and quanta can be compared side by side as well as individually. Web sites can be referenced. 
> 
> I have about a dozen science teachers that would love an article or two at the general level for "out of the box" learning on what's inside the electron. One suggested we have a Saturday workshop or presentation over at the California Aerospace Museum 
> 
> http://www.aerospaceca.org <http://www.aerospaceca.org/>
> 
>  or at one of the Northern California universities (CSUS, U of Pacific, UC Davis, UC Berkeley, Stanford, UC Santa Cruz)
> 
> While I can see developing materials for Advanced or IB education, the effort of an article would be focused on STEAM (formerly known at STEM) education. STEAM education is Science, Technology Engineering, Art and Mathematics. 
> 
> For each model or scientific paper proposed, an article level version aimed at the high school students would be invaluable where not only would the science be explained but the tools of science be explained. Some of us have direct access to scientists and engineers to take the papers we have written and write an article to that level.
> 
> Mom wants to know too. Make the pictures pretty.
> 
> Whether a single survey paper or an edited collection of papers, or both...there is a need to reach the future scientists and engineers of tomorrow now.
> 
> I Agree that this would be a useful thing for someone to do - but would feel very uncomfortable about having my name on such a paper, when one of the models was my own. Perhaps it would be a good idea for you to write it?
> 
> 
> Best
> 
> David
> 
> 
> 
> From: John Williamson <John.Williamson at glasgow.ac.uk <mailto:John.Williamson at glasgow.ac.uk>>
> To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org <mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>> 
> Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 10:40 AM
> Subject: Re: [General] High impact publications
> 
> Thanks John.
> 
> 
> From: General [general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org <mailto:general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>] on behalf of John Duffield [johnduffield at btconnect.com <mailto:johnduffield at btconnect.com>]
> Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 6:06 PM
> To: 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'
> Subject: Re: [General] High impact publications
> 
>  
> I volunteer to do some proofreading.  
>  
>  
>  
> From: General [mailto:general-bounces+johnduffield=btconnect.com at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org <mailto:general-bounces+johnduffield=btconnect.com at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>] On Behalf Of John Williamson
> Sent: 20 November 2015 17:47
> To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org <mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>>
> Subject: [General] High impact publications
>  
> Dear All,
>  
> Over the last decade or so Martin and I have submitted over a dozen papers to the peer reviewed press without any success.
> I would like to try again with a paper, perhaps to Phys. Rev, on the new theory. I’m looking for several things.
>  
> Firstly, a proof reading  of the manuscript, This is more especially to pick up things that are not clear in the explanation of the science – not the English.
>  
> Secondly – suggestions of which journal might be appropriate. The manuscript will be about 30 pages in pre-print form. I’ve included a title and abstract of the first draft below for information.
>  
> Thirdly – I understand that it is now the done thing to “help the editor” by suggesting appropriate referees. I have never done this before, so advice on whether to do this at all,  appropriate people and the right way to do this would be appreciated.
>  
> Regards, John.
>  
> Root-energy in space and time <x-msg://23/UrlBlockedError.aspx>
> A relativistic formalism is developed to describe a dynamical square-root energy density transforming within a set of space-time forms. A minimal formalism to describe the process is adopted, with as few starting parameters as possible. The simplest general linear equation within this model is derived. A restriction to the bi-vector forms alone has a structure which parallels the free-space Maxwell equations. Allowed solutions of this subset are quantised in that they represent the exchange of a packet of energy. Including a (square root) invariant mass density leads to new kinds of solutions which are re-circulating within momentum-space and exhibit an intrinsically fermionic 720 degree symmetry. Comparisons are made between the solutions of the new model and the physical properties of the photon, electron and positron.
>  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at davidmathes8 at yahoo.com <mailto:davidmathes8 at yahoo.com>
> <a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/davidmathes8%40yahoo.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1 <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/davidmathes8%40yahoo.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1>">
> Click here to unsubscribe
> </a>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at richgauthier at gmail.com <mailto:richgauthier at gmail.com>
> <a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1 <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1>">
> Click here to unsubscribe
> </a>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20151125/083eb58d/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Zampino E and B field model of the electron as a Standing Wave rev15.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 284691 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20151125/083eb58d/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20151125/083eb58d/attachment-0001.htm>