<HTML xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:v =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml"><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<STYLE>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</STYLE>
<STYLE><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:blue;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;
text-decoration:none none;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:windowtext;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;
text-decoration:none none;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle23
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:blue;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;
text-decoration:none none;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:892618093;
mso-list-template-ids:1752716136;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:1193419061;
mso-list-template-ids:1468318908;}
@list l1:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level2
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY lang=EN-US dir=ltr link=blue vLink=purple>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 8pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 13pt"><SPAN
style="LINE-HEIGHT: 15pt"><FONT face=Arial>John M:</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 8pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 13pt"><SPAN
style="LINE-HEIGHT: 15pt"><FONT face=Arial>No problem with the “mathematical
radius” which is related to the Compton wavelength, and to a 511keV photon in
some kind of loop configuration. The devil is of course in the detail, and not
everybody agrees on that. But I would urge you to think some more about the
double loop. The crux of this is <EM>what keeps that photon going round and
round?</EM> There’s only one thing there, and the answer has to be
<EM>itself</EM>. Take a look at the depiction of a spinor, or the Moebius strip
associated with <A
href="http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath619/kmath619.htm">Dirac’s belt</A>. A
Moebius strip looks like one loop, but when you focus on the line drawn round it
rather than the paper, you’re looking at a double loop. It’s similar for John
& Martin’s Moebius doughnut:</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 8pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 13pt"><SPAN
style="LINE-HEIGHT: 15pt"><FONT face=Arial><IMG title=Spinor_on_the_circle_pdf
style="BORDER-TOP: 0px; BORDER-RIGHT: 0px; BACKGROUND-IMAGE: none; BORDER-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; DISPLAY: inline; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px"
border=0 alt=Spinor_on_the_circle_pdf
src="cid:982409B5FC1B4DB88268057C3A8DBB9D@HPlaptop" width=334
height=255></FONT><FONT face=Calibri> </FONT></SPAN><SPAN
style="LINE-HEIGHT: 15pt"><FONT face=Arial><IMG title=elektron_paper_2
style="BORDER-TOP: 0px; BORDER-RIGHT: 0px; BACKGROUND-IMAGE: none; BORDER-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; DISPLAY: inline; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px"
border=0 alt=elektron_paper_2
src="cid:3F8BF51965764C339B70A7674951DD45@HPlaptop" width=331
height=248></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 8pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 13pt"><SPAN
style="LINE-HEIGHT: 15pt"><FONT face=Arial>As for calculations, the electron’s
energy is given by its Compton wavelength and E=hc/<SPAN class=nowrap
style="LINE-HEIGHT: normal">λ regardless of the disposition of the photon we
created it from. And the gravitational force depends on how much energy is
there, so that doesn’t count either. IMHO one should always bear in mind that
physics is all about hard scientific evidence, and whilst mathematics is a vital
tool for physics, it isn’t electron diffraction or the Einstein-de Haas effect
or magnetic dipole moment which tell us important facts about the nature of the
electron. One of these is that the electron doesn’t have an electric field or a
magnetic field, it has an <EM>electromagnetic</EM> field. An electron and a
positron with no initial relative motion will attract one another in a linear
fashion, and we talk of electric force. But there is no actual electric field
present. The force is the result of the interaction between <EM>two</EM>
electromagnetic fields with the opposite chirality. Try depicting the electron’s
electromagnetic field. </SPAN></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 8pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 13pt"><SPAN
style="LINE-HEIGHT: 15pt"><FONT face=Arial><SPAN class=nowrap
style="LINE-HEIGHT: normal">As for where the energy is, I’ve never looked into
it. But the energy of a many-paths photon isn’t divided 1/137 and 136/137 above
and below some arbitrary line denoting its path. So if that path is circular, I
don’t see why 1/137ths of the energy is outside the line. As for the
electron’s inertia, well. Photon energy, or momentum if you divide by c, is
resistance to change-in-motion for a wave moving linearly at c. Electron inertia
is just resistance to change-in-motion for a wave going round and round at c.
And we divide by c again to express it as rest mass. See <A
href="http://www.tardyon.de/mirror/hooft/hooft.htm">light is heavy</A>, and
think of the electron as a photon in a box of its own making. When you open one
box with another in electron-positron annihilation, each is a radiating body
that loses mass. All of it. And then it isn’t there any more. That’s why <A
href="https://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/">the inertia of a body
depends upon its energy-content</A>. </SPAN></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 8pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 13pt"><SPAN
style="LINE-HEIGHT: 15pt"><FONT face=Arial>No probs re the virtual photon force
carrier. Virtual photons are field quanta. It’s like you divvy up the electron’s
electromagnetic field into portions and say each is a virtual photon. Then the
electron and proton attract each other, and the resultant hydrogen atom has very
little in the way of an electromagnetic field. So in a way the electron and the
proton have exchanged field. But hydrogen atoms do not twinkle.
</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 8pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 13pt"><FONT
face=Arial><SPAN style="LINE-HEIGHT: 15pt">Regards</SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 8pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 13pt"><FONT
face=Arial><SPAN style="LINE-HEIGHT: 15pt">John D</SPAN><SPAN
style="LINE-HEIGHT: 15pt"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000"></DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt tahoma">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=john@macken.com
href="mailto:john@macken.com">John Macken</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Monday, April 13, 2015 6:32 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">'Nature of Light and
Particles - General Discussion'</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: [General] Electron Size in a
Collision</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 8pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 106%"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 106%">Hello John D and
Chip,<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 8pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 106%"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 106%"><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 8pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 106%"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 106%">As I look at your discussion of “RMS
radius” and “transport radius”, I want to reiterate the concept that the
electron has what I call a “mathematical radius” which is to be used in all
calculations involving a particular model of an electron. In my case, I
can show that I get the electron’s correct energy, gravitational force,
electrostatic force and approximately the correct angular momentum when I enter
the electron’s reduced Compton wavelength <I><S>λ</S></I><SUB>c</SUB> = ħ/mc
into equations. Others in the group claim a radius half this size and they use
this double loop radius in angular momentum calculations.
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 8pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 106%"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 106%"><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 8pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 106%"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 106%">It is true that in my model, some of
the electron’s energy is outside this radius. Specifically, the electron’s
electric and magnetic fields possess energy density and these are external to
radius <I><S>λ</S></I><SUB>c</SUB>. However, this is analogous to using
the center of mass in a calculation. All the mass does not reside at a
point, but this is still a useful concept. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 8pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 106%"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 106%"><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 8pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 106%"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 106%">When I calculate the energy in the
electric field and magnetic field outside this <I><S>λ</S></I><SUB>c</SUB>
radius, the external energy turns out to be 1/137 times (α times) the
electron’s total energy. I have analyzed whether the energy in the
electron’s electric field creates problems for the electron’s total
inertia. Since a part of the electron’s energy is external to
<I><S>λ</S><SUB>c</SUB></I>, would a rapid acceleration of an electron imply the
wrong inertia? I got two answers. First, it takes time to accurately
measure the electron’s inertia (uncertainty principle). If this
distributed external energy makes its contribution to the total inertia delayed
by the at the speed of light communication, then the calculation shows that this
is undetectable. Second, accelerating an electron, especially in an
oscillation, can indeed leave some of the energy in the electric field
behind. This “abandoned energy” works out to exactly correspond to the
energy radiated in electromagnetic radiation from an accelerated electron.
This radiated energy does not reduce the electron’s total energy because energy
was supplied to the electron to accelerate it. The radiated energy is
replaced and the electron has its original energy when the acceleration
stops.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 8pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 106%"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 106%">On another point, my last two posts
had problems. First one title came out “Attack on Virtual <SPAN
style="COLOR: #c00000">Phonon</SPAN> Force Carrier” I was in a hurry and the
word “Phonon” was generated by an automatic spelling correction when I made a
typing mistake. It obviously should have been “Photon”. Secondly, I
sent out an “apology”, but I later discovered that what went out to others did
not contain the mysterious attachments that showed up on my screen.
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 8pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 106%"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; LINE-HEIGHT: 106%"><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt">John M.</SPAN><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></B></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></B> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif'>From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif'> General
[mailto:general-bounces+john=macken.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org]
<B>On Behalf Of </B>Chip Akins<BR><B>Sent:</B> Monday, April 13, 2015 5:24
AM<BR><B>To:</B> 'Nature of Light and Particles - General
Discussion'<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [General] Electron Size in a
Collision<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p></o:p> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Hi John D<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Regarding references to the
electron radius.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Andrew pointed out why it is
useful to find some basis for calculating a radius.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Probably the easiest way to
address this issue is to refer to the RMS radius, the radius which defines the
root mean squared value of the energy for example. But when taking a photon
which has a longitudinal axis, and wrapping it around to make a confined photon
version of an electron, we need to specify where the <I>transport</I> radius for
the photon is, (which is the curved equivalent to the longitudinal axis of the
free photon). It just gives us a means to express the construction. Of
course the fields extend on into space. But if we want to help to define an
electron’s topology we need to find some specific means to do so. We also
need to know the region of highest energy concentration. These are the principal
reasons we refer to the electron “radius” in the various models. But I agree
that understanding the reaction radius of an electron, which has by its nature,
a distributed field, is a much more complicated mater when doing scattering
experiments.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Chip<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </P>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-TOP: #e1e1e1 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in">
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif'>From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif'> General [</SPAN><A
href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif'>mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</SPAN></A><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif'>] <B>On Behalf Of
</B>John Duffield<BR><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, April 12, 2015 1:09 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re:
[General] Electron Size in a Collision<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p></o:p> </P>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>All:<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>I’ve just come back from
a weekend away, and I’m afraid I can’t address all the points in all the emails
I’ve got. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>But as regards the
electron size, can I say that an electromagnetic wave is a field variation that
doesn’t have any edge, and when we wind it round with a twist to create an
electron, what we have is a standing field. That doesn’t have any edge either.
The electron isn’t some tiny thing at the centre of this field, it <EM><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif'>is</SPAN></EM> this field. Talking
about the size of the electron whilst referring to the Compton wavelength or
dividing this by 4</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>π
</SPAN><SPAN style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>is IMHO a
mistake. It’s something like saying hurricane Katrina was 5km across because
that’s the size of the eye of the storm. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>Regards<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>John
D<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma",sans-serif; COLOR: black'> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="BACKGROUND: whitesmoke"><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>
</SPAN><A title=chipakins@gmail.com href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com"><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma",sans-serif'>Chip
Akins</SPAN></A><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="BACKGROUND: whitesmoke"><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>Sent:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma",sans-serif; COLOR: black'> Friday,
April 10, 2015 8:14 PM<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="BACKGROUND: whitesmoke"><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>To:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>
</SPAN><A title=general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma",sans-serif'>'Nature of Light and
Particles - General Discussion'</SPAN></A><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="BACKGROUND: whitesmoke"><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>Subject:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma",sans-serif; COLOR: black'> Re:
[General] Electron Size in a Collision<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Hi John M<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Trying to understand your electron
model in the relativistic sense.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Analyzing this has raised a
question.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Let’s say you are traveling with
an electron at a relativistic velocity in the “z” direction. You don’t
know it, but traveling at a relativistic velocity, your time has slowed,
relative to an observer. You still measure the speed of light to be the
same in all directions, using your time reference, but your time is slower, and
time does not slow in just one spatial direction. So with a slower time and the
speed of light constant, does your distance (length, width, etc.) shrink in all
directions, as viewed from an external observer? It seems required since your
time is slower and you measure the same speed of light in all directions using
that time reference.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Of course the acceleration of a
particle imparting energy, increasing its frequency on the one hand, and the
same velocity slowing its time on the other hand is what led de Broglie, in
part, to his harmony of phases.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-TOP: #e1e1e1 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in">
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>
General [</SPAN><A
href="mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif'>mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</SPAN></A><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>] <B>On
Behalf Of </B>John Macken<BR><B>Sent:</B> Friday, April 10, 2015 1:48
AM<BR><B>To:</B> 'Nature of Light and Particles - General
Discussion'<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [General] Electron Size in a
Collision<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: black">Andrew,<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: black">I appreciate you
enumerating the different definitions of electron radius. However, I find
all of the definitions as being “hollow” in the sense that one unknown (the
electron structure) is defined using other unknowns such as the electron’s
“electrostatic potential” or its “rest mass energy”. While “rest mass” can
be quantified; it does not imply any specific internal structure. I realize that
these terms are all that are available to you, but I am proposing that it is
possible to define the properties of an electron using the properties of
spacetime. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"> </SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: black"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: black">I am going to
attempt to explain this concept with an example. Suppose that one person
is attempting to describe gravitational waves by waving their arms, drawing sine
waves and talking vaguely about curved spacetime. Compare that to an explanation
which starts with the impedance of spacetime and proceeds with a quantifiable
description of wave amplitude, frequency, energy density, polarization of
spacetime and quadrupole emission patterns. The second case is more
tangible because the explanation is given referencing a known fundamental medium
– spacetime. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"> </SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: black"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: black">The “foundation”
paper starts by describing the quantum mechanical properties of the “spacetime
field”. Then it proceeds to show how particles, fields and forces are all
just different manifestations of 4 dimensional spacetime field. This is
not arm waving. The impedance of spacetime is defined and the quantum mechanical
properties of spacetime are examined. This leads to predictions about the
wave structure of spacetime and equations are developed for wave amplitude and
properties.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"> </SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: black"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: black">This might seem
far removed from the radius of an electron, but surprisingly this emerges.
The radius is found to be equal to the electron’s reduced Compton
wavelength</SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Cambria Math",serif; COLOR: black'>
<I><S>λ</S></I><SUB>c</SUB> = ħ/mc ≈ 3.86x10<SUP>‑13</SUP> m. Furthermore, this
number is supported because it is central in all the calculations of the forces
that an electron can produce. Equations 12 to 23 in the “foundation” paper
depend on the radius of the electron being equal to its reduced Compton
wavelength <I><S>λ</S></I><SUB>c</SUB>. You will see that the magnitude of the
electron’s gravitational force and electrostatic force are fundamentally tied to
the electron’s mathematical radius being: <I><S>λ</S></I><SUB>c</SUB> = ħ/mc ≈
3.86x10<SUP>‑13</SUP> m. I encourage you to read the
paper.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"> </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Cambria Math",serif; COLOR: black'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Cambria Math",serif; COLOR: black'>John
M. </SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; COLOR: black"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"> </SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: blue"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"> </SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: blue"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"> </SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: blue"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>
General [</SPAN><A
href="mailto:general-bounces+john=macken.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org"><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif'>mailto:general-bounces+john=macken.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</SPAN></A><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>] <B>On
Behalf Of </B>Andrew Meulenberg<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, April 09, 2015 8:33
PM<BR><B>To:</B> Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion; Andrew
Meulenberg<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [General] Electron Size in a
Collision<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 12pt"><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Dear
John M.,<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">I haven't had time yet to read
your works. I need to, before I comment on your story below. However, you have
raised a topic that is generally ignored, or improperly treated - the size of an
electron. Could you define what you mean by that? I use 3 possible definitions
for different applications.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<OL type=1>
<LI class=MsoNormal
style="COLOR: black; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo3">QM
says that the bound electron size is that of the probability distribution of
its orbit (in terms of the Bohr radius). I accept this as a time average that
is used in screening (and in other) calculations. <o:p></o:p>
<LI class=MsoNormal
style="COLOR: black; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo3">Compton
wavelength gives a radius (~ 386 fm?) that I assume includes ~99% of its
electrostatic potential in free space. This is important in looking at the EM
(and in other?) interactions. This does not include the AC EM potential added
by relativistic motion. <o:p></o:p>
<LI class=MsoNormal
style="COLOR: black; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo3">Classical
radius (~2.8fm) gives the energy density distribution (i.e., ~99% of its rest
mass energy is within this radius?). This is critical in nuclear interactions
involving electrons (and perhaps in the anomalous solution of the Dirac
equations).<o:p></o:p></LI></OL>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 12pt"><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Could
you counter, or comment on, these definitions? They have a major impact on the
discussion of the photonic-electron concept. If you have already covered this
topic in one of your papers, could you 'point' it out to
us.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 12pt"><SPAN
style="COLOR: black">Thx,<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Andrew<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 12pt"><SPAN
style="COLOR: black">________________________________<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 10:41 PM,
John Macken <</SPAN><A href="mailto:john@macken.com"
target=_blank>john@macken.com</A><SPAN style="COLOR: black">>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-TOP: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 6pt; MARGIN: 5pt 0in 5pt 4.8pt; BORDER-LEFT: #cccccc 1pt solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in">
<DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="mso-margin-top-alt: auto"><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Cambria Math",serif; COLOR: black'>Vivian and
All,</SPAN><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="mso-margin-top-alt: auto"><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Cambria Math",serif; COLOR: black'> </SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto"><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Cambria Math",serif; COLOR: black'>We all agree that
collision experiments indicate that the size of an electron is smaller than
the resolution of the collision experiment. Since some experiments have
been done at about 50 GeV, this means that the electron appears to be smaller
than about 10<SUP>-18</SUP> m. We have different models of an electron and
they have different explanations for how an electron can appear to be a point
particle. In a previous post you say, “</SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: #a50021">I prefer the answers given by John W, Richard G, myself
and others that the radius of an electron decreases with its energy, giving it
a point like property as it travels at sufficiently high velocity.</SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: black">” I will address this point. You seem to be
saying that a fundamental particle </SPAN><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Cambria Math",serif; COLOR: black'>changes its radius in
X, Y and Z dimensions as it propagates. As I recall, the radius
decreases with 1/γ in one model and 1/γ<SUP>2</SUP> in another model.
Also as I recall the decrease in radius is accompanied by an increase in the
electron’s Compton frequency in some models. Perhaps I do not understand
this concept correctly, but the change in radius and frequency appears to
violate the covariance of physical laws. All frames of reference should
have the same physical laws. Here is the problem. In order for the
laws of physics to be the same in all frames of reference, Lorentz
transformations have to hold between different frames of reference. The
changes you propose do not correspond to Lorentz transformations.
</SPAN><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto"><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Cambria Math",serif; COLOR: black'>Suppose that we
designate the Z axis as the direction of propagation between two frames of
reference. Then the expectation is that an observer in frame A would perceive
that an electron in frame B retains its original radius in the X and Y
dimensions while the Z axis dimension decreases by r = r<SUB>o</SUB>/γ.
Also, the rate of time in frame B appears to slows down by 1/γ as seen from
frame A. The Compton frequency can be considered a clock beat.
Therefore the observer in frame A should perceive that the electron’s Compton
frequency in frame B has slowed down rather than speed up. If the
changes you propose take place, then an observer in frame B would perceive
that an electron has different properties than the properties observed in
frame A. This would be a violation of the basic assumption of invariance
in spacial relativity.</SPAN><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto"><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Cambria Math",serif; COLOR: black'>Perhaps, the most
important point is that the changes that you propose do not even achieve the
goal of making the electron appear to be a point particle in a
collision. Here is the reasoning. Suppose that we have two
electrons accelerated to 50 GeV and propagating in opposite directions in an
accelerator. I am in the acceleration frame of reference and the
electrons will collide in front of me. If the collision is head-on, both
electrons momentarily are stopped in my frame of reference at the moment of
closest approach. Therefore at that moment neither electron is moving
relative to me. They might have been small when they were moving, but
when they have stopped in the collision, in your model they should have their
original radius equal which you believe to be ½ the reduced Compton
wavelength. Since the scattering is taking place in my frame of
reference, the scattering should indicate this full size.</SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto"><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Cambria Math",serif; COLOR: black'>Contrast that to my
model. I say that the electron appears to be the same size and have the
same Compton frequency when viewed as a “stationary” electron in any frame of
reference. This means that Lorentz transformations hold between frames.
An electron in frame B retains the same radius in the X and Y dimensions but
appears to shrink in the Z direction. Also the Compton frequency appears
slower when observed from frame A. </SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto"><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Cambria Math",serif; COLOR: black'>However, the important
point is not the size during propagation, but the size during collision.
In my model, the size of each electron physically decreases when the two
electrons collide and momentarily are stopped in my frame of reference.
The kinetic energy carried by each electron has been converted to the internal
energy of the waves that make up the two electrons. At the moment of
collision, the wave amplitude increases and wave frequency increases.
The Compton wavelength decreases, therefore <B>the radius decreases</B> when
the colliding electrons are momentarily stopped. If the collision is at
50 GeV then γ = 100,000 and the radius decreases by this factor. The
calculations are done in the “foundation” paper, in section 4.5, titled Point
Particle Test. This section of the paper concludes that the reason that
electrons appear to be point particles is that “It is a classic case of the
experiment distorting the property being measured and invalidating the
measurement”. </SPAN><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto"><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Cambria Math",serif; COLOR: black'>I also have other
arguments supporting my electron size and characteristics, but this is enough
for one post.</SPAN><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto"><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Cambria Math",serif; COLOR: black'> </SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal
style="mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto"><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Cambria Math",serif; COLOR: black'>John M.</SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 12pt"><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>If
you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and
Particles General Discussion List at </SPAN><A
href="mailto:mules333@gmail.com">mules333@gmail.com</A><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><BR><a href="</SPAN><A
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"
target=_blank>http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</A><SPAN
style="COLOR: black">"><BR>Click here to
unsubscribe<BR></a><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: center" align=center><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>
<HR align=center SIZE=2 width="100%">
</SPAN></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>_______________________________________________<BR>If
you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and
Particles General Discussion List at </SPAN><A
href="mailto:johnduffield@btconnect.com"><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif'>johnduffield@btconnect.com</SPAN></A><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'><BR><a
href="</SPAN><A
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/johnduffield%40btconnect.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif'>http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/johnduffield%40btconnect.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</SPAN></A><SPAN
style='FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri",sans-serif; COLOR: black'>"><BR>Click here to
unsubscribe<BR></a><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
_______________________________________________<BR>If you no longer wish to
receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion
List at johnduffield@btconnect.com<BR><a
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/johnduffield%40btconnect.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"><BR>Click
here to unsubscribe<BR></a><BR></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>