[General] double photon cycle, subjective v objective realities

Dr Grahame Blackwell grahame at starweave.com
Wed Jul 6 10:18:27 PDT 2016


Yes Chip,

Certainly the momentum of the confined wave increases - but that increased momentum should not ALL be reckoned as ANGULAR momentum of the electron.

We know that a component of the momentum of that photon is linear - it's the linear momentum of the electron in motion.  There is another component of that photon that's orthogonal to that, i.e. in the direction of the cyclic motion of the photon.  As the linear velocity of the electron increases, the linear component of the photon momentum increases - however the orthogonal, cyclic, component of that photon momentum does NOT increase, since the 'pitch angle' of the helical motion of that photon increases with linear electron velocity, and so also with photon frequency, so as to precisely cancel out the effect of that increased frequency in the resolved-component cyclic direction.

The angular momentum of the electron, dictated by the angular momentum contribution of the photon, does NOT depend on the FULL momentum of the photon - it ONLY depends on that component of the photon that acts cyclically, i.e. the component that's orthogonal to the linear motion of the photon.  That component remains constant (as long as the radius of the photon cycle remains constant).

For example, if an electron is travelling with linear speed 0.6c then its formative photon is travelling in a helical path which, if we were to flatten it out (as in relativistic energy-momentum relation) we'd find that formative photon having a linear motion component of 0.6c and cyclic speed component of 0.8c.  This means that the ANGULAR momentum imparted by the photon will only be 0.8 of that which it would give if it were travelling fully cyclically at speed c (as for a static particle).  Since the frequency of the photon will be increased by a gamma factor of 1/0.8 for such motion, the decreased (0.8) contribution of momentum for increased (1/0.8) frequency will be exactly what it was for the static particle.

I hope that helps make things clearer.

Best regards,
Grahame


----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Chip Akins 
  To: 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion' 
  Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2016 5:15 PM
  Subject: Re: [General] double photon cycle, subjective v objective realities


  Hi Grahame

   

  I think my problem is that I am not yet fully understanding your rationale.

  When I do the math, using my understanding of what you are saying, I get an increasing spin angular momentum, principally due to the momentum of the confined wave increasing.  So I am not yet following your logic well enough to understand.

   

  Chip

   

  From: General [mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] On Behalf Of Dr Grahame Blackwell
  Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2016 7:55 AM
  To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>
  Subject: Re: [General] double photon cycle, subjective v objective realities

   

  Hi Chip,

   

  You and Richard have both referred to experiments demonstrating (or at least indicating) reduction in size of an electron with increasing speed.

   

  I'm not familiar with these experimental findings, nor have I been able to find them by searching.  I'm guessing that such findings must be made by inference, since direct measurement by any means is presumably out of the question.  I'd be most interested to see any papers detailing these experimental findings and how they were derived, if either of you could send them to me.  Many thanks.

   

  Chip, you also asked specifically how I could reconcile invariant electron spin momentum with photon momentum in the context of increasing frequency with increasing speed of motion.  I'd be interested to hear what you thought of my rationale for that, based on linear and cyclic components of photon momentum - since this appears to me to exactly balance and give that invariant momentum with invariant electron diameter.

   

  Best regards,

  Grahame

    ----- Original Message ----- 

    From: Chip Akins 

    To: 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion' 

    Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2016 2:15 PM

    Subject: Re: [General] double photon cycle, subjective v objective realities

     

    Hi Richard and Grahame

     

    The three of us have different models for the confined energy propagation within the electron.

    ... etc



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at grahame at starweave.com
  <a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/grahame%40starweave.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/20160706/e70fda1c/attachment.htm>


More information about the General mailing list