[General] charged photons

Mon Aug 21 06:48:51 PDT 2017

Dear Chip,

I've quickly gone thru your paper and find a lot of common ground (often
separated by language, sometimes by concept). There are many things that I
would comment on had I the time. Over the next couple of years I should be
able to do so.

A couple notes to start with;

   1. You talk of energy causing 'displacements' of space. I would say that
   energy is a result/measure of 'distortions' of space. There is little
   actual difference between displacements and distortions. However, causality
   is an important issue. You make the case for energy as the causal agent and
   I cannot deny that energy is required to distort space. However, what is
   the source of that energy? We can go back to the Big Bang; but, I don't
   think that we are going to solve the problem. Thus, I should not complain
   about your choices here.
   2. You make a very important statement in the paper, the consequences of
   which I have never seen published or properly taught: "Experiment seems to
   indicate that the spin angular momentum of the electron is the same *when
   measured from any direction." *Do you have any references for it?
   Recognition of this fact (?), many years ago, led me to my present view of
   the electron and, apparently, also led you to yours. I have not seen it
   discussed on this forum, where it is crucial; but, not being active I may
   have missed it.  So I have started a new chain.

No material body (gas, liquid, or solid) can have this property of a fixed
angular momentum in any/all directions. Quantum mechanics put this concept
into the realm of QM 'magic' (e.g., "It is quantum number, not a real,
physical, angular momentum"). On the other hand, light, being able to
travel thru light without net interaction, can provide exactly what is
observed. If bound in a spherical shell, it can have equal ang mom in *all*
directions. I thought that I had written this up in one of my Nature of
Light Conference papers, but, if I did, I can't find it readily (parts of
it are in A. Meulenberg, “The photonic soliton,” Proc. SPIE 8832, The
Nature of Light: What are Photons? V, 88320M (October 1, 2013);
doi:10.1117/12.2022001) attached. I apparently did not have time or space
to extend the story of photon self confinement to its self confinement to
form an electron

The transmission of light thru light in a bound system is seen in the
standing waves of
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whispering-gallery_wave#Whispering-gallery_waves_for_light.
If self bound in a wavelength (electron) dimension, rather than in a
multi-micron sphere of the picture. The Goos-Haenscen (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goos%E2%80%93H%C3%A4nchen_effect) or
Imbert–Fiodaraŭ
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imbert%E2%80%93Fedorov_effect) effects will
cause a photon to shift it alignment as it wraps around, and interferes
with, itself in a spherical geometry (resulting in ang mom in all
directions), rather than in a cylindrical geometry (with fixed ang mom).* I
think that this picture becomes the incontrovertible evidence for the
bound-photon model of the electron.*

While your view and mine for ang mom (and the charge separation of
components) of a photon apparently differ, I believe them to be
mathematically equivalent, if your model is slightly extended. Your pairs
of orthogonal components can represent ang mom vectors in *any* direction.
If you take a linear sum of all your pairs, then you can model the observed
ang mom vector in *all* directions.

Since the above two points will likely elicit a major discussion, I will
stop here and continue later as to how our models of the photon, as
composed of two charge components, both correspond and differ.

.Andrew M.

PS When I taught physics lab to engineering students many year ago, I had
to often emphasize the concept of significant figures. Just because their
calculators could give results to 8 decimal places, this did not improve
the significance by writing all of them. They needed to use other criteria
for how many decimal places they should include in their answers. Your use
of 15 decimal places in most of your results indicates that you did not get
such a lesson.
_ _ _ _

Aug 19, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Chip Akins <chipakins at gmail.com> wrote:

> *Hi Andrew*
>
>
>
> I have been thinking about you recently. Some of the research I have been
> doing reminded me of some of the things you suggested earlier about the
> nature of the photon and electron.
>
>
>
> Once you talked about how it appears that an electron is made of a
> “rectified” half of a photon.
>
> I have come to a similar conclusion, but got there from a completely
> different approach.
>
> If you are interested please read the attached paper.
>
>
>
> Warmest Regards
>
>
>
>
>
> *Hi All*
>
>
>
> *Attached is a paper on electric charge. It approaches the subject from a
> completely different perspective.*
>
> *Please comment.*
>
>
>
> Chip
>
>
>
> *From:* General [mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=
> gmail.com at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] *On Behalf Of *Andrew
> Meulenberg
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 03, 2017 3:40 AM
> *To:* Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <
> general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>
>
> *Subject:* Re: [General] charged photons
>
>
>
> Dear John,
>
> I look forward to your new paper. If it is based on a time-dependent
> model, then it could address: several problems with the 'common'
> interpretation of QM, Wilczek's concept of sequestration, and my view of
> phase transitions rather than quantum jumps.
>
> Andrew M.
>
> _ _ _
>
> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 6:03 AM, John Williamson <
> John.Williamson at glasgow.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> Hello Richard,
>
> I think the mechanism for photon radiation from an electron is an overlap
> of a specific field configuration with an internal electron wave-function.
> The electron wave-function contains both mass-like and field-like
> components. If one overlaps this with a specific field configuration -
> equal and perpendicular (but static) electric and magnetic fields, the
> resultant cancels the mass like terms and the result is a copy of the
> original wave-function, but at lower energy, plus is a PROPAGATING pure
> field part of the resultant. the propagating part is quantised if the
> emitting charge is quantised (which it usually is).  The reverse process is
> also possible - propagating field converted to localised energy. That is
> the internal electron wave-function acts as a generator or absorber of
> photons. This process is described, though not very well, in my first SPIE
> paper. There is also a (much better explained) version nearly ready to
> submit. Will copy this to the group when I send it off.
>
> Regards, John.
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* General [general-bounces+john.williamson=
> glasgow.ac.uk at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] on behalf of Richard
> Gauthier [richgauthier at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 02, 2017 6:53 AM
> *To:* Andrew Meulenberg
> *Cc:* Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion; Hans Montanus
> *Subject:* Re: [General] charged photons
>
> Hello Andrew, John W and all,
>
>
>
>     Andrew, thanks for the link. A Weyl fermion, though not the same as a
> spin-1/2 charged photon, could be a step in this direction, since a Weyl
> fermion is a massless chiral fermion. It also has not been detected as a
> separate fundamental particle.
>
>
>
>      By the way, a new colleague Hans Montanus wrote to me recently “For
> all the photon models for the electron, always the question raises to me:
> how can photon be radiated off from an accelerating electron? If the
> electron is a circling (or double circling in the toroidal model) photon,
> then it rather is a photon radiated off from an accelerating (the circling
> photon as a whole) photon. Similarly, pair creation would mean two circling
> photons coming of from a single (usual, non circling) photon. Do you know
> if there are models for such processes?”
>
>
>
>      Do you have any thoughts on these questions about radiation of a
> photon from an accelerated circling photon, and pair creation from a single
> non-circling photon?
>
>
>
>          Richard
>
>
>
> On Aug 1, 2017, at 4:16 AM, Andrew Meulenberg <mules333 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Dear Richard,
>
> We have demonstrated experimentally that photons can exhibit fermionic as
> well as bosonic natures. The charged-photon model, as a transient during
> the transition between photon and lepton pair, can be supported
> theoretically as well. It may be possible to use additional concepts to
> support your model:
>
>
> http://www.nature.com/news/big-bang-gravitational-effect-obs
> erved-in-lab-crystal-1.22338
>
>
>
> The Weyl Fermion, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weyl_semimetal), as a
> charged, massless, particle, might be worth exploring in that context.
>
> I don't have time to explore the concept myself right now; but, I would be
> interested in your comments, if you (or others) do get the opportunity to
> look at it.
>
> Andrew M.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20170821/0c3a9d6e/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Self focusing 19 format.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 512633 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20170821/0c3a9d6e/attachment.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 2013 non-linear photonic SOLITON d.pptx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.presentationml.presentation
Size: 3072586 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20170821/0c3a9d6e/attachment.bin>