[General] Bosonic and Fermionic nature of light

Sun Dec 24 09:31:37 PST 2017

Dear Wolf,

comments below

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 6:47 PM, Wolfgang Baer <wolf at nascentinc.com> wrote:

> Always been interested in your experimental setup for showing beam-beam
> interactions
>
> do you have a description of exactly what you do show interactions in a
> vacuum -
>
I have had to make the assumption that air is so much lower density than
any detectors that any interaction of light with air can be neglected. Lack
of funds and time prevent me from actually performing the experiments in
vacuum. Air does effect the refractive index in the light path; however,
the effect is so small that it would not be noticed in our experiments. It
is known that high intensity light can alter the refractive index (general
relativity?); but, the effect is very many orders of magnitude below our
sensitivity.

> how can you tell identical frequency waves in closely spaced parallel
> beams apart if they d interact?
>
You have asked an important question. It is similar to one that I have
recently raised myself.

After interacting with our beam splitter (a parallel surface
neutral-density filter), a single laser beam becomes two parallel beams
with a fixed phase relationship. The relative phase of the 2 waves depends
on the path length of the beam thru the filter. As the beams spread with
their natural individual divergence angle, the two beams will begin to
overlap. Eventually the overlap will become almost complete and the two
beams with identical individual  'footprints' will have a nearly identical
joint far-field footprint (however the light pattern will be quite
different).  If they are out-of-phase, then, even as they overlap, there
will be a 'null-zone' between them. If in-phase, the central zone of the
common far-field pattern will be bright and have at least one pair of
null-zones enclosing it.

If the two out-of-phase beams just out of the splitter have the same
intensity, then, in the far field, there will still be two same-intensity
beams. Are these the same two beams? That is the question. Blocking one of
the beams leaves the other intact but eliminates the null zone that had
separated the two. Thus, it appears that the two uninterrupted beams each
reflect from the null zone and do not interact further. When the null zone
is removed by blocking one beam, light 'bleeds' across the central line and
spreads into the shadow of the blocking mask.

If the two beams just out of the splitter have the same intensity, but are
in-phase, then, in the far field, there will now be three beams (a bright
central beam ad two weak side beams). Obviously, none of these three is one
of the original two. The two original beams interact to provide three
nearly independent beams. Blocking either of the small outer beams will
leave the other two beams nearly unaffected. It only eliminates one of the
null-zones. The other null-zone remains between the two remaining beams and
keeps them separated. The fact that the two remaining beams, of quite
different intensity, maintain their relative size and intensity tells an
interesting tail. The two beams are not identical, yet together, they
create a null-zone as a reflective barrier that prevents more than a small
bit, if any, of the more intense beam from crossing into the weaker beam
region. In its turn, the weak beam will shift intensity further away from
the center line.

The null-zone is established as a region where the two beams have no net
flow. The fact that the two beams are not equal intensity undermines my
hypothesis that only identical-frequency and intensity beams, exactly in or
out of phase, act like identical particles. Surprisingly, the intensity
does not appear to be critical. The phase and frequency appear to be the
critical features. This intensity problem and its implications must be
investigated further.

Andrew M.

> wolf
>
> Dr. Wolfgang Baer
> Research Director
> Nascent Systems Inc.
> tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432
> E-mail wolf at NascentInc.com
>
> On 12/17/2017 6:48 AM, Andrew Meulenberg wrote:
>
>
> Dear folks,
>
> For the last several years, we (Hudgins, Meulenberg, and Penland) have
> been studying the interference effects of identical-frequency waves. Using
> a thin optical flat as a laser-beam splitter, it is possible to easily
> provide closely-spaced parallel beams of coherent light that appear to
> interact indefinitely (in vacuum, and even down to the individual-photon
> level?).
>
> Over the last year, in parallel with the forum discussions of the photonic
> electron, the implications of this interaction have been evolving. The
> first step was the recognition that the two beams were equivalent to
> streams of identical particles. Furthermore, depending on their phase, the
> two beams acted as both bosons and fermions. In their constructive
> interactions (as a Bose condensate?) and destructive interactions (obeying
> the Pauli exclusion principle?), they attracted each other when in phase
> and appeared to repel one another when 180 degrees out of phase. This
> observation (a phase dependence, perhaps related to charge, as suggested by
> Penland) is beginning to expand into explanations and hypotheses for many
> of the laws (and tools) of physics.
>
> Since many of this group believe that leptons are self-bound photons, the
> proposed dual nature of photons, which is dependent on a major
> characteristic of the wave nature of light (phase), could be fundamental to
> the understanding of much of physics. Despite being bosons, by definition,
> photons are seen to have both bosonic and fermionic natures in their
> interactions and, perhaps, within their very nature. Another concept
> includes that of symmetry and parity. Within a photon and its interactions,
> we can find both symmetric and anti-symmetric conditions as well as those
> of even and odd parity.
>
> Thus, within the nature of a photon, we can find the physical bases for
> much of the mathematics that is the basis of theoretical physics. I believe
> that the macroscopic observations, which have led to much of physics
> theory, can be explained in the study of light and its interactions
> (including those with itself). The reasons that this observation is not
> obvious lie within our inability to 'see' the interaction. First, light is
> not composed of point particles. With the exception of a few manufactured
> cases, photons are many wavelengths long (up to 1E8 cycles?). Only if
> photons can interact  (collectively, in time and/or space) over a large
> percentage of these wavelengths will any effects be noticeable without the
> aid of matter as a detector to sum over many interactions. And, even then,
> it is mathematically impossible to distinguish the effects of transmission
> (non-interaction?) or reflection (interaction?) in the coincidence of
> identical photons. Nevertheless, the fact that the mathematics for
> identical particles is different from that of identifiable particles gives
> us the precedent for looking at this aspect of light.
>
> The observation of particle (e.g., electron) interaction is possible
> because the photons composing the particles have all of their high-energy
> nodes collected in small enough regions for their energy density to be
> sufficiently high to distort the space in which they reside. The
> 'permanence' of these structures depends on resonance, which provides and
> depends on a fixed internal phase relationship. Thus, the particular
> interaction of light with itself is reflected in the nature of matter.
>
> Neither the statement that "light interferes with light," nor the
> statement that "light does *not* interfere with light," is completely
> correct. It is the combination of these two statements, along with their
> exceptions and understanding, that provides the basis for understanding the
> physical universe.
>
> Andrew M.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at Wolf at nascentinc.com
> <a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.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 mules333 at gmail.com
> <a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi
> /general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%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/20171224/eef9538a/attachment.html>