[General] Photon Structure

Sun Feb 5 04:08:39 PST 2017

The STOE suggests the photon is a magnet becasue it is polarized in a magnetic field. When moving it generates a plenum(GR "space", gravitational ether). The movement through a slit produces a Young's diffraction pattern. Photons come with different energies each with a field frequence. then the frequencies resonate to produce entanglement and coherence for the diffration experiments.
Hodge 
--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 2/5/17, ANDREW WORSLEY <member at aworsley.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [General] Photon Structure
 To: phys at a-giese.de, "Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion" <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>
 Date: Sunday, February 5, 2017, 5:18 AM

 Hi Albrecht/All

 Agreed until you get to the paired charges-much simpler
 oscillating electric field will do, that generates a
 perpendicular magnetic field.

 The question that is not generally understood is how is that
 mganetic field generated.

 ========================================
 Message Received: Feb 03 2017, 04:48 PM
 From: "Albrecht Giese" 
 To: general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
 Cc: 
 Subject: Re: [General] Photon Structure

 Hi Al, hi John Hodge,

 The question of a photon as a corpuscle can be answered in a
 positive 
 sense. There are measurements which give us constraints.

 One is the experiment of my thesis done in a high energy
 laboratory. We 
 have created photons by stopping electrons. These photons
 made a flight 
 of about 3 meters through the air and were then detected by
 pair 
 production in a thin layer of metal. The energy of the pair
 could be 
 precisely measured. It reflected the energy used in the
 creation 
 process. So, there was an object flying from the source to
 the 
 (pair-)detector which carried a well defined energy. And
 notice that the 
 pair production process cannot collect EM energy until a
 certain amount 
 is achieved. No, it is one single event going on with one
 object. This 
 object is conventionally called "photon".

 Next question for the particle wave problem: How can this
 corpuscle 
 "photon" cause interference patterns? The answer is not
 difficult if we 
 follow the original idea of de Broglie: This corpuscle
 "photon" is 
 accompanied by an alternating field which causes the
 interference. And 
 how is this field created? I think there is no other way
 then to assume 
 that the photon has a pair of electric charges inside. This
 pair is in 
 permanent motion and causes the alternating field; and
 causes so during 
 the motion of the photon a wave.

 Any problems with this?

 Albrecht

 Am 03.02.2017 um 06:22 schrieb Hodge John:
 > Experiment has rejected wave models of light.
 > Know? By a simulation that posits the structure that
 agrees with experiment such as photon diffraction and
 interference.
 > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMAjKk6k6-k
 > http://intellectualarchive.com/?link=item&id=1603
 >
 > Hodge
 >
 > --------------------------------------------
 > On Thu, 2/2/17, af.kracklauer at web.de 
 wrote:
 >
 > Subject: Re: [General] Photon Structure
 > To: general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
 > Cc: "'Nature of Light and Particles - General
 Discussion'" 
 > Date: Thursday, February 2, 2017, 6:58 PM
 > 
 > Challenge
 > for those seeking to fathom the structure of
 > "photons": How will a candidate theory of the
 > photon structure ever be verified? This is a problem
 > insofar as the best that can be done is to consider
 the
 > result of measurement, which will then be an intrinsic
 part
 > of the result. It is utterly IMPOSSIBLE to observe
 what
 > went on behind the measurement----thus it can never be
 > known! Therefore, photons are hypothetical entities
 built
 > on the result of interacting by means of E&M
 (something)
 > using "photo electrons", which are countably
 > discrete giving the impression that, whatever made them
 flow
 > was also discrete---an unjustified jump in logic!
 > 
 > 
 > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 02. Februar 2017 um 20:33
 > Uhr
 > 
 > Von: "John Macken"
 > 
 > 
 > An: "'ANDREW WORSLEY'"
 > , "'Nature of
 > Light and Particles - General Discussion'"
 > 
 > 
 > Betreff: Re: [General] Photon Structure
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > Andrew, Richard, Chip and John
 > D.
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > The discussion has turned to
 > whether photons possess discrete packages of energy or
 are
 > quantized waves with no concentration of energy in a
 small
 > volume. My position is: Photons are quantized waves
 > propagating in the quantum mechanical vacuum energy of
 > spacetime.
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > This is too big a subject to
 > be covered in one post, so I will lay out the
 background
 > information in this post, then build on this in other
 > posts. To explain my position I will first quote from
 my
 > paper titled Energetic Spacetime: The New Aether.
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > “Photons are usually described
 > as possessing “wave-particle duality”. However,
 this
 > phrase is just a name given to something that we do
 not
 > understand. The essence of a wave is that it is an
 > oscillating disturbance with a definable wavelength
 and
 > distributed over a substantial volume. A wave
 transfers
 > liner momentum and some waves are capable of
 transferring
 > angular momentum. Any wave disturbs the medium through
 which
 > it is propagating such that energy is being converted
 > between different forms.
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > The essence of a particle is
 > that it is a single unit that differs from its
 surroundings.
 > A fundamental particle is usually assumed to be energy
 > concentrated at a point with no internal structure. A
 point
 > particle or even a Planck length vibrating string is
 > incapable of possessing ħ of angular momentum as a
 > conceptually understandable physical rotation. The
 implied
 > infinite energy density of a point particle also defies
 a
 > physical explanation. Saying a photon has
 “wave-particle
 > duality” is like saying that it has “top-bottom
 > duality”. These are contradictory properties which
 cannot
 > be equal partners. A photon must either be a particle
 that
 > somehow exhibits wave properties or a wave that is
 somehow
 > quantized so that it exhibits particle properties.”
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > Skipping forward in this
 > paper, the question of quantization is addressed. This
 is
 > an important concept because a wave can appear to have
 > particle-like properties if the wave is quantized. The
 > following is a section titled “Strong Quantization”
 from
 > the paper Energetic Spacetime: The New
 > Aether.
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > “It is often said that photons
 > possess quantized energy of E = ħω. However,
 > we will examine the limits of this quantization.
 Suppose
 > that we make an analogy to the equivalence principle
 having
 > a “strong” and a “weak” definition. Similarly,
 the
 > proposal is made that there is a “strong” and
 “weak”
 > definition of quantization. A strong definition of
 > quantization would imply that only integer multiples of
 the
 > fundamental unit are allowed. For example, if energy
 met the
 > strong definition of quantization, then energy would
 only
 > came in discrete units such as integer multiples of 1
 eV.
 > Photons would only come in discrete frequencies which
 would
 > be integer multiples of the universal fundamental
 frequency
 > associated with the universal unit of quantized
 energy.
 > Obviously energy and frequency are not quantized
 according
 > to the “strong” definition. Instead, a photon’s
 energy
 > is only weakly quantized. All of a photon’s energy
 is
 > transferred when it is absorbed, but a photon can
 possess
 > any energy up to Planck energy. The same photon has
 > different energy when viewed from different frames of
 > reference.
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > Compare this to angular momentum
 > which meets the definition of strong quantization.
 Angular
 > momentum only comes in discrete units. All angular
 momentum
 > in the universe only comes in integer multiples of ½
 ħ.
 > This is obvious with fermions and bosons, but a more
 > revealing example can be made using a carbon monoxide
 > molecule (CO) isolated in a vacuum. An isolated CO
 molecule
 > can only possess integer multiples of ħ angular
 > momentum. This translates into the CO molecule only
 being
 > able to rotate at discrete frequencies which are
 integer
 > multiples of its fundamental rotational frequency of
 115
 > GHz. This meets the definition of strong quantization.
 For
 > another example, take a photon that is part of the
 cosmic
 > microwave background. Over the age of the universe
 this
 > photon has lost most of its energy. However, the photon
 has
 > kept 100% of its angular momentum. Angular momentum
 has
 > strong quantization; energy has weak quantization.
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > It is proposed that all
 > quantization in the universe is ultimately traceable
 to
 > angular momentum being strongly quantized. When a
 photon is
 > absorbed by an atom, it transfers 100% of its angular
 > momentum to the atom. All the photon’s energy is
 also
 > transferred to the atom, but that is just a byproduct
 of
 > transferring its ħ unit of quantized angular
 > momentum. The amount of energy transferred from the
 photon
 > to the atom depends on the frame of reference of the
 atom.
 > However, the angular momentum transferred is
 independent of
 > the frame of reference.”
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > In future posts I will develop
 > this idea and show that the particle-like properties of
 a
 > photon can be explained by a wave that possesses
 quantized
 > angular momentum.
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > John M.
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > _______________________________________________ If you
 no
 > longer wish to receive communication from the Nature
 of
 > Light and Particles General Discussion List at
 > af.kracklauer at web.de
 > Click here to unsubscribe
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
 > 
 > _______________________________________________
 > If you no longer wish to receive communication
 > from the Nature of Light and Particles General
 Discussion
 > List at jchodge at frontier.com
 > 
 > Click here to unsubscribe
 > 
 > 
 > _______________________________________________
 > If you no longer wish to receive communication from the
 Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at phys at a-giese.de
 > 
 > Click here to unsubscribe
 > 

 ---
 Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren
 geprüft.
 https://www.avast.com/antivirus

 _______________________________________________
 If you no longer wish to receive communication from the
 Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at jchodge at frontier.com
 <a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/jchodge%40frontier.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">
 Click here to unsubscribe
 </a>