[General] Superluminal electron model

Mon Jul 2 16:00:30 PDT 2018

Hello all,
 Two days ago John Duffield commented in Academia.edu <http://academia.edu/> about the proposed superluminal half-photon model of the electron with toroidal topology:
I don't think it's superluminal, Richard. Or a half photon. But I do think it's a toroidal photon as per Williamson and van der Mark's 1997 paper http://www.cybsoc.org/electron.pdf <http://www.cybsoc.org/electron.pdf> .
I replied:
  Hi John,
      I understand that you are partial to the 1997 Williamson/van der Mark electron model described in their article "Is the electron a photon with toroidal topology?", which is also at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273418514_Is_the_electron_a_photon_with_toroidal_topology <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273418514_Is_the_electron_a_photon_with_toroidal_topology> . But please take a look at my internally superluminal double-helix photon article at https://www.academia.edu/36771264/Entangled_Double-Helix_Superluminal_Photon_Model_Defined_by_Fine_Structure_Constant_Has_Inertial_Mass_M_E_c_2 <https://www.academia.edu/36771264/Entangled_Double-Helix_Superluminal_Photon_Model_Defined_by_Fine_Structure_Constant_Has_Inertial_Mass_M_E_c_2>  . You may see from this why an electron could conceivably be formed from a hypothesized superluminal half-photon. Just take one wavelength (equal to 1/2 a Compton wavelength) of one charged internally superluminal half-photon from the double-helix model of energy E=2mc^2 and curl it up in a SINGLE loop to form a superluminal spin-1/2 half-photon electron model, naturally having toroidal topology as any curled up helical trajectory would have.
      Richard

> On Jun 30, 2018, at 4:05 PM, richgauthier at gmail.com wrote:
> 
> Hello David, John and all,
> 
>    I’ve uploaded the internally superluminal electron model’s equations to https://www.academia.edu/36949016/Is_the_electron_a_superluminal_half-photon_with_toroidal_topology <https://www.academia.edu/36949016/Is_the_electron_a_superluminal_half-photon_with_toroidal_topology> for your future reference. I think the title is kind of “catchy”, while acknowledging two pioneers in the field. The double-helix photon model is at https://www.academia.edu/36771264/Entangled_Double-Helix_Superluminal_Photon_Model_Defined_by_Fine_Structure_Constant_Has_Inertial_Mass_M_E_c_2 <https://www.academia.edu/36771264/Entangled_Double-Helix_Superluminal_Photon_Model_Defined_by_Fine_Structure_Constant_Has_Inertial_Mass_M_E_c_2> . I think of the double-helix photon model and the electron model as a kind of package of models which I hope will be self-consistent, presumably like John’s models of the electron and the photon in his new paper.
> 
>    Dirac insisted in his Nobel Prize lecture that electrons really travel at c (the eigenvalues for electron velocity come out +c and -c from the Dirac equation) but apparently travel at less than c due to their small amplitude and high frequency of internal vibration (at the zitterbewegung frequency f=2mc^2/h). But I wonder if anyone really believed him. Though the double-helix photon model is internally superluminal, it travels longitudinally at c, and its calculated inertial mass E/c^2 also travels forward at c. No problems with faster-than-light here. The photon model's invariant mass is zero, like the actual photon’s invariant mass.) The electron model, though internally superluminal, travels forward (longitudinally) always with an average velocity less than c.
> 
>    So  the superluminality of an energy quantum composing a particle may not be such a problem as some make it out to be. I don’t know that Einstein ever put any “restrictions” on theoretical internal velocities within a moving particle, whether a photon or a particle with mass. The unwillingness of Lorentz and other physicists to explain an electron’s spin and magnetic moment by internal faster-than-light motion because of Einstein’s restriction, caused leading physicists to finally say that an electron is point like and its spin is “intrinsic”, ie unexplainable.
> 
>       Richard
> 
>> On Jun 29, 2018, at 5:35 AM, richgauthier at gmail.com <mailto:richgauthier at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hello all,
>>    Here are the equations for the superluminal half-photon electron model. I am using the program Graphing Calculator at https://www.pacifict.com <https://www.pacifict.com/> to graph them.
>> Clearly the equations themselves are not copyrighted. Oreste, what do you think?
>>             Richard
>> 
>> <PastedGraphic-3.tiff>
>> 
>>> On Jun 27, 2018, at 11:08 PM, John Williamson <John.Williamson at glasgow.ac.uk <mailto:John.Williamson at glasgow.ac.uk>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Here you go David, a few answers ...
>>> From: General [general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org <mailto:general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>] on behalf of davidmathes8 at yahoo.com <mailto:davidmathes8 at yahoo.com> [davidmathes8 at yahoo.com <mailto:davidmathes8 at yahoo.com>]
>>> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2018 3:19 AM
>>> To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion
>>> Cc: Oreste Caroppo; martin Mark van der
>>> Subject: Re: [General] Superluminal electron model
>>> 
>>> Richard,
>>> 
>>> A few questions...
>>> 
>>> 0. How many electron models are there now? Is there a diagram or mapping showing how all the zitterbewegung models are related?
>>> 
>>> Mu: Lots!
>>> 
>>> 1. Within your model, does the new electron embody the Majorna characteristic that the particle is it's own antiparticle, in particular, does it explain how both matter and antimatter are within it?  
>>> 
>>> No - the electron is not, and has never been, its own antiparticle. That is the positron.
>>> 
>>> 2.  Can the new electron be described using the mathematical formalism of Dirac, Majorna and Weyl?
>>> 
>>> No, Dirac is strictly (and famously) lightspeed. Hence the "zitterbewegung" at all.
>>> 
>>> 3.  What is the mechanism for creating a local FTL environment to permit FTL photons or quanta?
>>> Superluminal wave velocities within the electron "shell" are possible using the definition of 
>>> c = SQRT(permittivity * permittivity) by simply decreasing either permittivity or permeability...or both.
>>> 
>>> NRI papers have been fashionable, but I do not think Richard uses them
>>> 
>>> 4.  How does this new electron model - or any other electron model for that matter - sustain a shell barrier?
>>> 
>>> Why would it need to? If one proposes a shell that is simply another thing one has to explain. Electrons are necessarily "boxless" or how would they inter-act?
>>>  
>>> 5. Are the superluminal versions of other electron models? That is, how widespread is this conjecture?
>>> 
>>> Yes - Superluminal charge though, is, I think this is the major weakness of Richards model, as it messes up mass in relativity. Not good!
>>> 
>>> 6. Does the new electron model  explain charge? That is, is charge considered invariant within the "shell"?
>>> 
>>> Charge invariance is inconsistent with FTL - as outlined above.
>>> 
>>> 7. 
>>> 
>>> IMHO, this new electron model looks like a Majorna particle. In fact, there seems to be a mapping between Dirac, Majorna and Weyl (DMW) particles to the ring toroid, horn toroid and the spindle toroid. One could take this one step further which would link the math of DMW to the geometry of circulating photons or quanta with variations including subliminal models and superluminal models. And there are various electron models, notably Williamson/van der Mark, that address charge.
>>> 
>>> 8. Does this model address stochastic electrodynamics where Zitterbewegung is explained as an interaction of a classical particle? Does this model fit within Collective Electrodynamics <https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/collective-electrodynamics> (Carver Meade)
>>> 
>>> No .. Carver Meade uses lightspeed. Also he starts from Plank's constant as a given, an uses this as the starting basis (excellent!) for much of the rest of his thesis.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 9. Does the new electron model - a zbw model -  have sufficient linkage to the confirmed conjectures of Dirac, Majorna and Weyl fermions?
>>> 
>>> Regards, John.
>>> 
>>> While I like the geometric approach based on experimental evidence, linking the matrix math of Dirac, Majorna and Weyl particles  to zitterbewegung models is essential to wider acceptance. 
>>> 
>>> Notes:
>>> Most of the time, we use Dirac electrons which up until 2015 were the only confirmed prediction. The Weyl fermion was predicted in 1929 and confirmed in 2015. The Majorna fermion was predicted 1937 and confirmed in 2017.
>>> 
>>> Notably, zitterbewegung was predicted by Schroedinger in 1930 and confirmed using BEC in 2013.
>>> 
>>> ref:
>>> 
>>> [1006.1718] Dirac, Majorana and Weyl fermions <https://arxiv.org/abs/1006.1718>
>>> 
>>> Condensed-matter physics: Weyl particles discovered (2015) <https://www.nature.com/articles/525293e>
>>> 
>>> Evidence for a particle that is its own antiparticle (2017)| Stanford News <https://news.stanford.edu/2017/07/20/evidence-particle-antiparticle/> 
>>> 
>>> This New Proof of Majorana Fermions Is Going to Be Massive For Quantum Devices <https://www.sciencealert.com/this-new-proof-of-majorana-fermions-is-going-to-be-massive-for-quantum-devices>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wednesday, June 27, 2018, 5:50:16 PM PDT, richgauthier at gmail.com <mailto:richgauthier at gmail.com> <richgauthier at gmail.com <mailto:richgauthier at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hello all,
>>>    I thought some of you might like to see a new electron model, composed of a superluminal spin-1/2 charged half-photon. 
>>> 
>>> In the stationary electron model the superluminal energy quantum moves along the surface of a horn torus, with an internal frequency equal to the zitterbewegung frequency f=2mc^2/h. The relativistic electron model contracts with increasing gamma. The electron model’s closed helix's radius is R=hbar/2mc as in several  electron models.
>>> 
>>>  I’ve started writing a short paper about the (new electron) model. The working title: “Is the electron a superluminal half-photon with toroidal topology?” The electron model is formed from one wavelength of the helical trajectory of one of the two half-photons composing a double-helix photon energetically capable of producing an electron-positron pair in e-p pair production, i.e. with photon energy E=2mc^2 and photon frequency equal to the electron’s zitterbewegung frequency f=2mc^2/h. The helical radius of this half-photon is R = Lcompton/4pi = hbar/2mc. The circulating superrluminal particle is actually a point-like particle. The resting electron model's energy Eo will be one-half of the originating photon’s minimum energy of 2mc^2, and therefore Eo=mc^2.
>>>    Comments or questions?
>>>         Richard 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at davidmathes8 at yahoo.com <mailto:davidmathes8 at yahoo.com>
>>> <a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/davidmathes8%40yahoo.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1 <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/davidmathes8%40yahoo.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 richgauthier at gmail.com <mailto:richgauthier at gmail.com>
>>> <a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1 <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.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/20180702/a610202e/attachment.html>