[General] light and particles group

Chip Akins chipakins at gmail.com
Tue Jan 24 14:42:19 PST 2017


Hi Albrecht

 

Thank you for the pilot wave reference. But of course if a particle is a
wave then it would not need the same sort of treatment.

 

I thought you might like that approach due to your model.  

 

But the personal struggle I have with your model is simply that it does not
tell us what particles are, and my quest is to understand specifically that.

 

Warm Regards

 

Chip

 

From: General
[mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com at lists.natureoflightandparticles.
org] On Behalf Of Albrecht
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 4:34 PM
To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion
<general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>
Subject: Re: [General] light and particles group

 

Hi Chip, hi all,

regarding the ongoing confusion about the "wave structure" of particles I
would like to remind you all of the approach of Louis de Broglie to this
problem. In his view a particle is a bullet surrounded by a "pilot wave"
which accompanies this bullet and guides it. - This approach was once
strictly rejected by Heisenberg. But John Bell writes in his famous book
"Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics" that he has investigated
the discussion about the pilot wave and that he did not find any serious
physical counter-arguments to it. According to him, Heisenberg's activities
against it were nothing else but bashing of de Broglie.

I like this approach of de Broglie. I like it particularly because it fits
seamlessly into my model of two orbiting massless sub-particles.

Albrecht


Am 24.01.2017 um 12:35 schrieb Chip Akins:

Hi Chandra

 

Yes. Momentum is measured as you indicated.

 

But if the electron is a circulating "wave structure", and has the property
of inertial mass, then momentum is likely an inherent part of the "wave"
itself. 

 

As we have discovered, the inherent momentum of the confined wave can cause
the property if inertial mass, which further clearly illustrates why E=mc^2.

 

But since space is massless, there must be a mechanism which creates
momentum for these waves, which is different from the way longitudinal
momentum is carried by a wave in a material medium made of particles of
mass.

 

This more fundamental form of momentum must be created without using mass,
since no mass is present in "empty" space.

 

So if this is how things work then we may have the most fundamental form of
energy = differential displacement of space.

And now perhaps we have the most fundamental form of momentum = delta Fc
sine(theta) t = E/c.

If this is true then delta Fc/Fc = pi, simply because that is the only form
which yields the correct momentum of such a wave.

 

Chip

 

From: General
[mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com at lists.natureoflightandparticles.
org] On Behalf Of Roychoudhuri, Chandra
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 1:10 PM
To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion
<mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>
<general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>
Subject: Re: [General] light and particles group

 

Chip: I like your thinking approach. 

          Measurable "momentum" arises through energy exchange between
scattering entities; specifically, when one of the entity possess the
"inertial property", we call particles. And, Newton correctly postulated
that they tend to stay "inertial", "until acted upon by a force" (an entity
that can "donate" energy to create kinetic motion).

Chandra.

 

From: General
[mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu at lists.natureoflightan
dparticles.org] On Behalf Of Chip Akins
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 9:28 AM
To: 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'
Subject: Re: [General] light and particles group

 

Hi Dr. Grahame Blackwell

 

What I was considering is trying to understand the mechanism for momentum in
the propagation of energy in space. Whether that energy is in the form of
light or confined in particles of matter. For if we can show exactly how it
is that momentum is a fundamental feature of energy, as it moves in space,
we then have specifically identified and understood the source for inertial
mass. 

 

This may help us refine our models.  I think that it will help us understand
Planck's quantization of action and its causes as well.  This research has
already helped me understand how light can have both spin and orbital
angular momentum, and it may well lead to a better grasp of other basic
principles.

 

Other reasons for looking into this in detail, are to better understand the
correct set of wave equations, and spin.  To understand the causes for what
we observe. 

 

I agree that a transfer of energy must implicitly also transfer momentum.
Momentum is a measureable result of energy.  

But to me E=hf means that more energetic waves or particles are smaller. If
that is correct then there is a cause. Probably the simplest explanation is
that space has an inherent opposition to displacement, which creates this
force Fc I have been discussing.  That is nice, simply because this force is
also perfectly suited to cause confinement, not only of waves in space, but
also of elementary fermions. 

 

So if we can explore this possibility further, and create wave equations for
waves which would be caused by the displacement and this opposing force,
complete with momentum and all the other measurables, then we may have
foundations upon which we can model everything.

 

I do not think that wave interference is sufficient to cause confinement. I
have studied waves in great detail and still find that more than
self-interference is required for confinement of waves into soliton
(circularly or spherically confined) solutions. So for me, it seems that
this equal and opposite reaction of space to the displacement caused by
energy is the only logical path to explore.

 

It is my hope (and intuition) that this path will lead to understanding the
mass formation thresholds for electrons so that we might know why the
electron's rest mass is the specific value we measure.

 

 

Chip

 

From: General
[mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com at lists.natureoflightandparticles.
org] On Behalf Of Dr Grahame Blackwell
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 5:40 PM
To: 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'
<general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
<mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org> >
Subject: Re: [General] light and particles group

 

Hi Chip,

 

I got a working copy, thanks.

 

I see that of course you're going into far more intricate details
mathematically than I was looking at.  In this case, it seems to me, the
question becomes: "How is it that a photon travels through space?".  As I've
said, once that's tied down the fact that it carries momentum follows as a
natural consequence.

(To some extent it depends on how one defines momentum.)

 

Thanks again,

Grahame

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

From: Chip Akins <mailto:chipakins at gmail.com>  

To: 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'
<mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>  

Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2017 10:54 PM

Subject: Re: [General] light and particles group

 

Once more.

 

Chip

 

 






_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and
Particles General Discussion List at phys at a-giese.de
<mailto:phys at a-giese.de> 
<a href=
<http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureofligh
tandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1>
"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureofligh
tandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?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/20170124/f3bb5661/attachment.htm>


More information about the General mailing list