[General] light and particles group; Pilot Wave unnecessary
Chip Akins
chipakins at gmail.com
Wed Jan 25 05:54:10 PST 2017
Hi Albrecht
Well now I better understand your model. You explained it quite succinctly
to Chandra in in email below.
Thank you.
Now it seems that you and I have come to some similar conclusions.
My thought is that a “dipole” is caused by energy which results in a
differential displacement of space. This differential displacement of space
is met with an equal and opposite reaction from space which is the force Fc
we have discussed.
My current concept is that the energy in the electron may be a specific
configuration of a differential displacement of space which would cause a
situation quite similar in many ways to what you describe.
However, instead of calling the structure of the electron two massless
particles, I prefer to call the electron a tri-pole arrangement. Two
“electrically negative” regions with an “electrically positive” region
in the center.
My electron model has a radius of r = (h c)/(4pi E).
The equations for confinement force for the electron and photon are
different in a specific way.
Photon force of confinement required to produce E=hv and spin 1 ħ.
Electron force of confinement required to produce spin ½ ħ.
Rather than explore all the possible scenarios in this limited space, we
will now just do the math regarding confinement for the scenario suggested.
The electron topological energy arrangement suggested would have a
differential displacement region we will call “electrically negative” on
either side of a region in the center we will call “electrically
positive”. The distance from the center of the electron (the center of the
“electrically positive” region) to the center of one of the electrically
negative displacement regions is re, the mean energy transport radius of
the electron.
The sum of the attractive force Fc’ between the positive region in the
center and the negative regions circulating at the radius re is
Where re is 1.930778172914310E-13m, E is the energy of the electron, and
(Planck “charge”).
The repulsive force Fc’’ which must exist between the two negative
regions is:
Then obviously the net force
It seems that once we get past the words and view the concepts we are
coming to at least some of the same conclusions.
Warm Regards
Chip
From: General [mailto:general-
bounces+chipakins=gmail.com at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] On Behalf
Of Albrecht
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 8:04 PM
To: Roychoudhuri, Chandra <chandra.roychoudhuri at uconn.edu>; phys at a-
giese.de; Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <general at lists.
natureoflightandparticles.org>
Subject: Re: [General] light and particles group; Pilot Wave unnecessary
Hi Chandra,
I think I have to explain here again the basics.
In my model, there are two sub-particles (I have called them Basic
Particles) which are multipoles build by charges of the strong force. The
multipoles are built in a way that they have a potential minimum at a
certain distance. This distance defines the diameter of the particle. That
is it. Both basic particles do not have a mass and they orbit each other at
the speed of light. In this way they cause the relativistic dilation. The
inertial mass is caused by the fact that they are forced to have a distance
to each other. Every constellation which has internally a distance has
inertia. This is a very fundamental physical fact which cannot be negated.
The binding field extends to any direction which means that this field
surrounds the particle. As it is a multipole field it has a limited range.
And as both basic particles are orbiting, this field is an alternating
field. If the whole elementary particle is in motion then this alternating
field accompanies the particle. This field fulfils the function of de
Broglie's pilot wave. It is a simple set up which does not cause any
difficult complications.
The orbital motion is the cause of the spin of a particle. The constancy of
the spin is a consequence of this set up, also not complicated. All
particle properties follow from calculations which are simple (not repeated
here but on my web site) and they are solely based on classical physics.The
results are very precise for the known particles like the leptons and
quarks.
I shall stop this introduction here (and remind you that I have represented
it in Mexico and and San Diego every time and I am a bit shocked that so
little has reached the community). I present this model here in Germany
every year on physical conferences since 2001 and my auditory is growing
from year to year, meanwhile I am filling the greater lecture halls at
these occasions. My web site about the topic "origin of mass" is
internationally the number one in all major search engines since 15 years,
no physical institute in the world could ever compete with it. So it is
quite confusing for me that particularly in this group I seems difficult to
reach the members.
Of course I am willing to answer any questions but should stop here for the
moment.
Best regards
Albrecht
Am 25.01.2017 um 00:21 schrieb Roychoudhuri, Chandra:
Hi Albrecht: Greetings,
All of our thoughts and models are evolving. Nobody has a definite model,
as yet, at least not me.
However, I strongly disagree with the de Broglie “Pilot Wave” concept. It
demands extra unnecessary complexities. If this model is to be a REAL
physical one, then we would need a separate physical pilot wave, guiding
the physical “particle”. Built out of what? This pilot wave expands with
time making the localization of the particle impossible after a very long
time!
In the tension filed oscillating model, only the tension filed is the
physical field; the localized oscillation represent the physical particle,
emergent as a complex excited state of the field. The oscillator does not
expand its shape with time. Otherwise free electrons and protons could not
have been tracked in long-path accelerators. Indeterminacy is limited only
by our limited capability to assign the right initial conditions, as in the
LHC or in other accelerators. Nature does not suffer from “Uncertainty
Principle”, like human math does!
The grand MISTAKE of old times was the assumption that, exp[iwt] =
exp[i2.pi.ft] = exp.[i2.pi.(E/h)t], as in Schrodinger’s equation, was
thought to represent a “plane wave”! Unfortunately, the expression
represents any harmonic oscillator - it could be a pendulum, or an LCR
circuit, and hence it can also represent a localized a harmonic oscillator
of a tension filed, albeit complex in spatial structure. This is a
conceptually simpler model without the need for any well-trained “Pilot”,
while keeping Schrodinger very happy since “f” is the internal harmonic
frequency of the new “model” particle! De Broglie would also have been
happy with this model since he also struggled for the rest of his life to
make it more realistic! We do have a more realistic concept; albeit, not
the final, detailed model.
Chandra.
From: General [mailto:general-
bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org]O
n Behalf Of Albrecht
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 5:34 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
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.natureoflightandparticles.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-
natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1>
"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-
natureoflightandparticles.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/20170125/85752509/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 788 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20170125/85752509/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 1193 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20170125/85752509/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 1528 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20170125/85752509/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 659 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20170125/85752509/attachment-0003.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 1453 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20170125/85752509/attachment-0004.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 961 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20170125/85752509/attachment-0005.png>
More information about the General
mailing list