[General] Interference of Photons

Mon Oct 16 07:12:14 PDT 2017

Chip an' All,

A few 'assumptions' in your response below, Chip, that I would regard as verging on dogma rather than science.

It's my understanding that a photon is a packet (quantum) of time-varying waveform electromagnetic energy. Period.  By that definition there's absolutely nothing stopping such a quantum 'chasing its own tail' (or more properly, self-interfering so as to hold a circular path, once so constrained); there's nothing stopping such a localised manifestation of such energy exhibiting the quality of 'charge' as an artefact of its electric and magnetic fields (note that 'charge' is simply an effect, it's not any more defined than that - and that effect MUST travel with the TEM wave, including conforming with interference effects (since interference is de facto for electrons), so it MUST (IMO) be an artefact OF that wave); if we say that a photon does not EXHIBIT charge effects, rather than 'POSSESSING charge' (whatever that may mean), I'd say no, in its rectilinear form it doesn't - but we're discussing a different topology of the same EM quantum; likewise a rectilinear EM quantum doesn't exhibit 1/2 hbar spin - but consider a rock travelling in a straight line then that same rock being whirled around in a circle on the end of a rope...

As for "a photon does not have the capacity to be fully confined in three dimensions" - how do you know that???  This is a statement of belief, not of science.  [Eddington famously said of Chandrasekhar's findings: "I cannot believe that a star would behave in such a manner" - and so held back advances on our understanding of black holes for decades.]

Ok, semantics - but don't let's allow semantics to limit our open-mindedness with regard to truly scientific possibilities.

Best regards,
Grahame
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Chip Akins 
  To: 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion' 
  Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 12:54 PM
  Subject: Re: [General] Interference of Photons

  Hi Grahame

  Yes. Perhaps semantics is getting in the way regarding a photon within an electron.

  It seems that the correct half of what makes a photon would possess a single polarity of electric charge.  That is a portion of my objection to using the term photon for this form of energy.  A photon does not possess a single polarity of charge.  But a photon does not have the capacity to be fully confined in three dimensions and exhibit ½ hbar spin either.

  So to me, so much has to be different from the properties of a photon, that calling this propagating energy within the electron a photon is not really an accurate or clear description.  But if one want to imagine that a photon can have charge, and a photon can be fully confined (not travel in a straight line at c), and can possess ½ hbar spin, then they could still call this thing a photon.  Just doesn’t seem correct to me.

  Chip

  From: General [mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] On Behalf Of Dr Grahame Blackwell
  Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 6:37 AM
  To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>
  Subject: Re: [General] Interference of Photons

  Hi Chip & all,

  Having written of an electron as being a cyclic-photon construct, I have to agree with Chip that there are compelling reasons why a linear photon could not by itself form an electron.  My concept of a 'cyclic photon' is that of an electromagnetic waveform like a linear photon, but constrained by its own electromagnetic field interactions to travel in a cyclic path rather than linearly.  In my parlance this doesn't make it 'not a photon' - it depends on whether one's definition of a photon is necessarily something that travels in a straight line or whether one regards it simply as a packet of electromagnetic energy in the form of a self-propagating time-varying electromagnetic field effect: the latter is my understanding of the term.

  So whilst I don't totally agree with Chip's view that there isn't a photon circulating in (or rather AS) an electron, this is due to our differing views on what constitutes a photon - it appears that we're agreed on what constitutes an electron.  I'm also fully in agreement with Chip (and all experimental evidence that I know of) that two half-photons (of requisite energy) can form an electron.

  Best regards,

  Grahame

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

    From: Chip Akins 

    To: 'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion' 

    Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 12:20 PM

    Subject: Re: [General] Interference of Photons

    Hi John M and Vivian

    First, Vivian. I am and exception apparently, for I do not believe there is a photon circulating inside an electron. To me the evidence indicates that a whole photon cannot become an electron. The whole photon does not possess the properties it takes to be confined to become and electron.  Two half photons could become an electron.

    John M.  One thing I wanted to mention is related to your comment…

    “My model obtains the exact force between two particles at any separation if they had Planck charge rather than charge e.”

    This is because the model of space as a two component tension medium suggested, obtains the exact force between two particles at any separation, and this is precisely the force of the elementary charge.

    So I will take a look at the gravitational force between two electrons using this model and get back to you.

    Chip

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  _______________________________________________
  If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at grahame at starweave.com
  <a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/grahame%40starweave.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/20171016/1198f624/attachment.html>