[General] Photon Structure

Mon Feb 6 13:17:29 PST 2017

Next Installment of Photon Structure from John M.

Hello All, 

I am building on the explanation of a photon and the universe I started on 2/2 and 2/3.  On 2/2 I explained that quantized angular momentum represents the highest level of quantization because angular momentum always comes in discrete units of ½ ħ.  The quantized energy of a photon is a lower level of quantization because a photon’s energy can be adjusted to any level depending on the frame of reference used to absorb it.  The statement was made that the transfer of energy is merely a byproduct of transferring a quantized unit of angular momentum. A wave with quantized angular momentum acquires particle-like properties

In the 2/3 post I attached a paper that showed that gravitational waves (GWs) encounter spacetime as possessing vacuum energy compatible with the energy density required of the vacuum by quantum field theory.  The equation for the vacuum energy density (Uv) encountered by a wave propagating in the medium of spacetime at angular frequency ω can be written several different ways, but the simplest is:

Uv = kω2c2/G = kc4/Gλ2       (7)

This equation uses reduced wavelength (lambda bar) = λ = c/ω. Also k is a numerical constant near 1.  For GWs, k = 1/16π but the paper explains that the more fundamental value is: k = 3/8π. This equation (7) has amazing implications.  The GW designated GW150914 at 200 Hz encountered spacetime as having energy density more than 1010 times the energy density of osmium. An electron with Compton frequency about 1020 Hz (ω = 7.7 x 1020 s-1) encounters spacetime having energy density of 1068 J/m3. It is shown that the proposed model of Planck length vacuum fluctuations explains the formation and annihilation of not only virtual electrons but all the virtual particles of the standard model. Eq. (7) was also shown to have surprising additional applications.  For example, it converts to the Friedmann equation for the critical density of the universe and converts to the equation for the energy density of black holes.  These and other tests support the validity of this model.  This background brings me to today’s point which is: 

The energetic Planck length vacuum fluctuations which fill the vacuum are the basic building blocks of all particles, all fields and all forces. This sea of vacuum fluctuations is the most perfect superfluid possible.  

Waves in spacetime possessing angular momentum were part of vacuum energy in the Big Bang. These waves were isolated by the superfluid properties into quantized units with angular momentum units of ½ ħ or ħ. This isolation and quantization makes the observable particles and photons present in the universe. The superfluid properties of the spacetime field are explained in section 3 of the attached paper starting on page 4.  Macroscopic superfluids are well known to isolate angular momentum into rotating vortices with ħ angular momentum. References [9 to 11] in the attached paper show pictures of the rotating vortices in a Bose-Einstein condensate superfluid. The point is made that a fundamental particle such as an electron is analogous to a quantized vortex in a Bose-Einstein superfluid. 

This attached paper shows how the properties of an electron are created from this model of spacetime.  The superfluid vacuum energy has a resonance at the electron’s Compton frequency. The paper shows how ½ ħ quantized unit of angular momentum achieves the energy of an electron.  It also shows how this rotating vortex distorts the surrounding vacuum energy to create the electron’s curvature of spacetime. The paper also derives electric charge but obtains Planck charge rather than charge e.  Planck charge is the most fundamental unit of charge because it is based on the permittivity of space.  Charge e is about 11.7 times less than Planck charge (α1/2 less).  Since the gravitational force and the electrostatic force are derived from first principles in this model, new insights are obtained from this model. Predictions are made about the relative strength of these forces. One of the predictions is that the gravitational force is related to the electrostatic force through a square term explained in the paper. This is proven correct in the paper. 

My next post will move on to another part of this paper which gives the model of an electric field and a photon.  Surprising predictions are made which are also proven correct. These correct predictions supports this model. 

John M.        

From: General [mailto:general-bounces+john=macken.com at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] On Behalf Of af.kracklauer at web.de
Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2017 5:09 PM
To: general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
Cc: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>
Subject: Re: [General] Photon Structure

Hi all, especially Chandra & Wolf:

Seems to me that since using the photo-electric effect is based on just counting the number, not their individual energy, that the quantization of E&M interaction will be seen as virtually independant (above a threshold) of the energy consideration (content) of a photo electron, i.e. 1 ea. fast p.e == 1 ea. slow p.e.  Both are just one p.e. through the counting circuit.

Regarding SED evoking QM:  First, ALL charged entitites are always interacting with ALL other charged entitties.  So to say: Gauss's Law (1/r²) has no off-on switch, it's always on.  The sum total across the universe of these interactions will tend to equiliberate to a state of minimal mutual exchange ===> a state with a Lorentz invariant power spectrum.  That is exactly the ground state of so-called free E&M radiation, usually brought to attention by solving Dirac's Equation, which can be taken (unconventionally) as the initial Ansatz for deriving QM theory.  For more extended story see my papers on www.nonloco-physics.0catch.com <http://www.nonloco-physics.0catch.com>  in Phys. Letts (ca. 90) & Phys. Essays (ca. 93.)

---Al

Gesendet: Montag, 06. Februar 2017 um 01:36 Uhr
Von: "Roychoudhuri, Chandra" <chandra.roychoudhuri at uconn.edu <mailto:chandra.roychoudhuri at uconn.edu> >
An: "Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion" <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org <mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org> >
Betreff: Re: [General] Photon Structure

AL:

Like Wolf, I agree with you that we cannot assume the definitive existence of Einstein’s (1905) “indivisible light quanta”, later named as “Photon”. Let me elaborate using my hat of an experimentalist.

     Photo electron release is a Quantized process; because (i) the electron is a discrete particle and every electron is bound by a specific amount of “quantized” energy in the energy band and/or in the sharp level. But, this required energy for the transition, “Delta.E = hv” , can be provided by many different processes, including “mechanical”, as in collision between Ne-atom and accelerated kinetic electron. Depending upon the velocity of the electron (kinetic energy), the Ne-atom could be ionized (release of a discrete electron), or an electron is pushed to the upper “lasing-level”; as we do in He-Ne laser tube. Kinetic electrons are classical entities under this circumstance; whereas the Ne atom is a “quantum system”. They collaborate very well in energy exchange with simultaneous respect bot the classical and quantum mechanics!!!

    The key point is that successful Quantum Formalism does not require that a quantum transition can take place only when the energy-donor entity has precisely the required quantum of energy to deliver for the transition. This is why none of the QM-fathers have ever formally postulated that any and all quantum transition must be facilitated by a quantum donor that matches the recipients required quantum of energy, hv!!!!!

     In photo electron release, my current position is that the dipole-complex holding the electron has a characteristic resonant frequency “v”. So, an EM wave, having this matching frequency, can strongly and linearly stimulate the dipole. The electron then can be released, only if the propagating EM wave field holds more than the required “quantum cupful” of energy, “hv” within a 10- to 100-Lamda-cubed volume (v-Lambda = c). If the energy density is less; there will be no quantum transition.

     If you calculate the power of a laser beam that contains only one single visible “photon”/sec; it would be around 10^-20 watts (please, check my number). Nobody, to my knowledge, has done any real “single photon” experiment; where s/he first reduced the beam to a single photon/sec and then carried out the interferometry (or any other “single photon” experiment). I request the entire community of “single photon” experimentalists to carry out such a demonstration experiment HONESTLY and successfully to re-establish Einstein’s’ “indivisible light quanta”. 

     I know at least one experimentalist, Emilio Panarella, who showed that when the beam energy density was reduced to the level of “single photon per second”, he could not register the pinhole diffraction pattern, even after waiting for hundreds of hours.

     Why such experiments are so rare? In spite of all the bragging we, the anthropocentric homo sapiens can do; we are very far from accurately and directly measuring 10^-20 watts. We do not have that technology as yet. However, we can use a pre-calibrated stack of neutral density filters to easily reduce a mili watt beam to this low level (single “photon”/sec). My prediction is that, at such low intensity level, nobody will be able to register any “photon” at all because a quantum transition require the presence of an EM wave (besides the RESONANT frequency “v”) of energy density, containing more than “hv”-cupful of energy available within the vicinity of the resonant quantum dipole, around 10- to 100-Lambda-cubed volume.

    I have underscored this point, citing Panarella and my “resonance fluorescence experiments, in my book, “Causal Physics” [now the paperback is available for $20 from Amazon.]

Chandra.

From: General [mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] On Behalf Of Wolfgang Baer
Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2017 2:55 PM
To: general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org <mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org> 
Subject: Re: [General] Photon Structure

I agree with Al - we must be very careful to identify what we actually experience from the theoretical inferences derived from those experiences. This is not only true of the photo-electric effect but all leaps of faith made when we do not properly take into account the physics of the observing instrument. My paper "Photons as Observer Transitions in the Event Oriented World View" SPIE 2015 provides an example of how such leaps of faith may have happened.

Al would you please explain how " the universe of background charges (Olber-like) causes QM effects"

Thanks

wolf

Dr. Wolfgang Baer
Research Director
Nascent Systems Inc.
tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432
E-mail wolf at NascentInc.com <mailto:wolf at NascentInc.com> 

On 2/3/2017 8:01 PM, af.kracklauer at web.de <mailto:af.kracklauer at web.de>  wrote:

Hi Hodge et al.:

The implicit assumptions behind some of your statements here seem to be based on currenty dogma.  To get at least the points I have been trying to make, start over from the fact that all ostensible observations of  E&M "fields" are actually observations of impunged fields on photo electrons, which can be counted (mostly after an avalanche ...).  The parcelization of the electron is the source of the impression that the cause of its motion is parcelized.  This is a leap of logic.  In fact, per orthodox theory, every electron is always bathed in the interaction (field if you like) of all ether charges in the universe at all times (- to + inf.) because there is no off-on switch to Gauss's Law (1/r²). The total effect of the universe of background charges (Olber-like) causes QM effects while the near charges have indiviually observable  effects described by (mostly) classical E&M theory.

BTW, the word conglomeate  "the diffraction of one photon"  makes no sense, even in orthodox Q&M, as all that can be observed is actually just one photo-electron. To see the diffraction pattern requires an ensemble of many such observations so as to see the distribution of single photo-electon responces.  Attribution of ensemble distribution characteristics to single entities is again an unsupported leap of logic.

Best, Al

Gesendet: Samstag, 04. Februar 2017 um 00:33 Uhr
Von: "Hodge John"  <mailto:jchodge at frontier.com> <jchodge at frontier.com>
An: "Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion"  <mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org> <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>
Betreff: Re: [General] Photon Structure

Hi Al, Chip, Albrecht, Andrew, and John D.

the diffraction experiment with low intensity (one photon in the experiment at a time) produces a diffraction pattern. The pattern characteristics such as the spacing of the minima depends on the photon's energy. that is it depends on the photon. in the experiment say between the mask and screen. So it cannot be from all other photons in the universe.
Problem, how does the wave / alternations effect the photon. I suggest reflection from matter (mask and screen).
Electric charges are reflected from surfaces (see books o antenna theory). So, it is plausable that such a model could satisfy my photon diffraction experiment. Slight changes in my equations would probably yield the same solution. I chose the gravity wave model to unite it with GR, to allow spin=1, and to yield the polarization of photons in magnetic fields.
Hodge
--------------------------------------------
On Fri, 2/3/17, John Macken  <mailto:john at macken.com> <john at macken.com> wrote:

Subject: Re: [General] Photon Structure
To: "'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'"  <mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org> <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>, phys at a-giese.de <mailto:phys at a-giese.de> 
Date: Friday, February 3, 2017, 3:30 PM

_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at Wolf at nascentinc.com <mailto: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 af.kracklauer at web.de <mailto:af.kracklauer at web.de>  Click here to unsubscribe  <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/af.kracklauer%40web.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20170206/2b853d54/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: QM FoundationF.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 483267 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20170206/2b853d54/attachment.pdf>