<html dir="ltr">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<style id="owaParaStyle" type="text/css">P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;}</style>
</head>
<body ocsi="0" fpstyle="1">
<div style="direction: ltr;font-family: Tahoma;color: #000000;font-size: 10pt;">Hiya Richard and everyone,<br>
<br>
I'm afraid the professor may have a point. This is related to what I was saying in an earlier email about the nature of charge and the relationship to gauge and to mass. Do you remember what she asked exactly?<br>
<br>
To have a "charge" you need to go to a Coulomb-type gauge, related to the charge in that specific frame. This charge has a (radial) field associated with it in this frame which, itself, has an energy density (and since it is pinned to that frame a rest-mass
density). You are positing an oscillation backwards and forwards at lightspeed (or greater) of this charge. This, neccessarily, takes one past infinite gamma. If one then wishes to keep special relativity, this is not physically possible. To be fair, as I
said before, this problem is also there in the Dirac model.<br>
<br>
This has a big problem with all Yang-Mills type theories (pretty much all of QFT then) and is a well-known problem in HEP and field theory circles. This problem has remained intractable for more than half a century since no one had managed (anyone know any
different?), until my 2014 paper, to write down a covariant wavefunction for the photon, with which to construct an everywhere lightspeed solution without this problem.<br>
<br>
At a simpler level one needs a model, such as the old WvdM model, where the photon remains rest-massles and chargeless - and charge the arises from the re-configuration of the field inside a double-loop topology. The ac photon field is then "rectified" in Andrews
parlance, to be outward or inwards directed by virtue of the confinement mechanism (postulated in that paper- ascribed to the new "pivot" term in my new theory). There is no internal charge. Charge emerges as a consequence of the kind of confinement.<br>
<br>
Don't worry too much ... these are known problems and I (think I) know how to fix them.<br>
<br>
Regards, John W.<br>
<div style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #000000; font-size: 16px">
<hr tabindex="-1">
<div style="direction: ltr;" id="divRpF395199"><font face="Tahoma" color="#000000" size="2"><b>From:</b> General [general-bounces+john.williamson=glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] on behalf of Richard Gauthier [richgauthier@gmail.com]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, April 17, 2015 4:47 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] Position<br>
</font><br>
</div>
<div></div>
<div>
<div class="" style="word-wrap:break-word">Chandra, Andrew and others,
<div class=""> My presentation at APS in Baltimore on Tuesday went well in that in 10 minutes I presented the material as planned. The session had about 10 attendees, and was moderated by a professor of theoretical high energy physics from SLAC (This was
very good). My powerpoint for the session is attached below.</div>
<div class=""></div>
</div>
<div class="" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class=""></div>
<div class="">The moderator asked a question indicating that she had misunderstood (perhaps because of the way I expressed it) a main idea in my electron model. She thought that because I proposed that the electron is a circulating charged photon, that this
implies that gamma for the electron model is infinite, making the model absurd. But in the model, while the circulating charged photon’s velocity is c along its helical path, it is the charged photon's longitudinal component velocity v that corresponds to
v of the electron. The experimentally measured velocity v of the electron is always less than c, so gamma in the model is normal and not infinite. I didn’t have time to clarify this to her after my talk so I will try to do so by email. I hope no one in this
group has the professor’s misunderstanding of my model on this point.</div>
<div class=""> Richard<br class="">
<div class=""> <br class="">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Apr 16, 2015, at 10:54 PM, Richard Gauthier <<a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" class="" target="_blank">richgauthier@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="x_Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<div class="" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="">Andrew,</div>
<div class="">Thanks for your questions.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">1 As far as I know, a light beam of normal (uncharged, spin 1 hbar) photons is not bent in a strong electric or magnetic field. The proposed circulating charged photon (spin 1/2 hbar and charge -e for an electron) that models an electron would
of course bend in both an electric field and a magnetic field (unless the electric and magnetic forces cancelled each other). </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">2. As far as I know, mass is always associated with a charged particle. In the case of a circulating charged photon, its mass is the energy that the circulating charged photon has when its longitudinal velocity (called the electron’s velocity)
is at or near zero, i.e. m=Erest/c^2= 0.511 Mev/c^2 .</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">3. The circulating charged photon model of a relativistic electron does not incorporate a specific model of the charged photon, so different charged photon models could have different charge distributions. I doubt that the transluminal energy
quantum associated with a photon or an electron in my models of the photon and the electron is point-like since the transluminal energy quantum for a photon or an electron can pass through a double-slit like an extended wave. The charged photon’s electric
charge is associated with the helical movement of the charged photon at light-speed along its helical trajectory, while an uncharged spin 1 hbar photon travels linearly at light-speed, unless either the electron or photon is being diffracted by a slit or double
slit for example in which case their motions are not yet defined. In my transluminal energy quantum model of the uncharged spin 1 hbar photon, the photon is itself composed of a helically circulating transluminal energy quantum, which is uncharged. In the
circulating-charged-photon model of a relativistic electron, the circulating charged photon must have spin-1/2 hbar at least at relativistic velocities because the electron has spin 1/2 hbar at relativistic velocities, as well as at lower velocities .The
energy quantum appears point like (or very small) when a photon or electron is detected, in which case we say that we detected a photon or an electron, when what we actually detected is the photon's or electron’s transluminal energy quantum. The variability
of the position and momentum of the helically-moving transluminal energy quantum in the photon model exactly matches the minimum requirement of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle: delta x times delta p = hbar/2 (as shown in my "transluminal energy quantum
models of the photon and the electron” article.) Perhaps it is the variable motion of the energy quantum generating a particle that requires the Heisenberg uncertainty principle that applies to that particle.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""> Richard</div>
<br class="">
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Apr 16, 2015, at 12:34 PM, Andrew Meulenberg <<a href="mailto:mules333@gmail.com" class="" target="_blank">mules333@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div>
<br class="x_Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">
<div class="" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="">Richard,<br class="">
<br class="">
</div>
<div class="">I have begun to incorporate the various positions; but, I have a few questions on your model:<br class="">
</div>
<div class=""></div>
<div class="">
<ol class="">
<li class="">Have you ever found any evidence of a light beam bending in a strong electric or magnetic field? (I have speculated on every photon as being both fermionic and well as bosonic, so there could be a basis for the spin 1/2 component.)<br class="">
</li><li class="">Do you have any evidence for a charge not having mass?</li><li class="">How is the charge spatially distributed within the photon?</li></ol>
<p class="">Andrew<br class="">
</p>
</div>
<div class="">__________________________________-<br class="">
<br class="">
Chandra, Andrew and others,</div>
<div class=""> Here’s my current position paper on my charged photon model of the electron, and the energy quantum, with an attached Word file of the same:</div>
</div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal" style="text-align:center" align="center"><b class=""><span class="" style="font-size:14pt">Richard Gauthier’s position on photon models of the electron, and the transluminal energy quantum
</span></b></p>
<div class=""> <br class="x_webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal"><b class="">Two types of non-pointlike electron models</b></p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal"><b class=""> </b></p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal">For those who have not accepted the ideal that the electron is pointlike with intrinsic spin (as accepted in the standard model), two distinct loop models with variations have been proposed. The first is a single-loop model where the
electron’s charge or its mass or momentum or a photon or photon-like object moves circularly at light-speed around a loop of circumference one Compton wavelength h/mc and radius R1= hbar/mc. The second is a double-loop model that has the charge or mass or
momentum or a photon or photon-like object moving at light-speed around a double loop whose total length is also one Compton wavelength but whose radius is R2=hbar/2mc . Several models of the photon have been combined with these basic or generic single or
double-loop models to produce more elaborate models of the electron.</p>
<div class=""> <br class="x_webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal">One main advantage of the single-loop model is that the calculated magnitude of the magnetic moment due to a circulating light-speed electron charge is the Bohr magneton ehbar/2m (the experimental value of the electron’s magnetic moment
is slightly more than this.) But the calculated spin (z-component) of this model from the circulating momentum mc of the photon of Compton wavelength h/mc is Sz=R1 x p = (hbar/mc) x mc = hbar which is twice the spin of the electron. The experimental value
of the spin ½ hbar of the electron has then to be found from some further hypothesis about the single-loop electron model.</p>
<div class=""> <br class="x_webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal">One main advantage of the double-loop model is that the calculated spin (z-component) is Sz=R2 x p = (hbar/2mc) x mc = hbar/2 which is the correct electron spin (z-component). But the magnitude of the magnetic moment of this model is
found to be ½ Bohr magneton. The experimental value of the electron’s magnetic moment (slightly more than 1 Bohr magneton) has then to be calculated or approximated from some further hypothesis about the double-loop model. The double-loop model also contains
the zitterbewegung frequency fzitt=(2mc^2)/h of the electron found from the Dirac equation.</p>
<div class=""> <br class="x_webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal">Both the single-loop and double-loop models have generally been described for a resting (v=0) electron. Some models have included motion v>0 of the electron to try to account for the experimental value of the de Broglie wavelength Ldb=h/(gamma
m v) of a moving electron, and the experimental value of the very small (around or less than 10^-18m) of relativistic electrons found in high energy electron scattering experiments.</p>
<div class=""> <br class="x_webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal"><b class="">Gauthier’s charged photon model of the electron</b></p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal"><b class=""> </b></p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal">My approach has been to model the electron relativistically as a helically circulating double-looping photon. The photon carries the electron’s charge and has spin ½ hbar, the same as that of an electron, rather than spin hbar of an uncharged
photon. By equating the moving electron’s relativistic energy E=gamma mc^2 with the photon’s energy E=hf, the charged photon is found to have frequency f=(gamma mc^2)/h and a wavelength L= h/(gamma mc). While this frequency f was used by deBroglie to derive
the electron’s deBroglie wavelength, the wavelength L=h/(gamma mc) of a hypothesized photon corresponding to a relativistic electron has never previously been reported or utilized to my knowledge, neither by de Broglie nor by others (including other electron
modelers.)</p>
<div class=""> <br class="x_webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal">The charged photon in the above model has these three photon characteristics: 1) its energy E=hf, 2) its momentum p=h/L, 3) its speed of light c=fL. In addition it has 4) the electron’s charge, 5) a light-speed helical motion and 6)
a spin ½ hbar. In addition the radius of the helix for a resting electron (where the helix becomes a circle) is hbar/2mc . When these first 3 characteristics and the resting electron radius are combined with the helical motion of characteristic 5, a unique
helical trajectory (except for right or left turning) is found for the charged photon model of the electron. Some of its characteristics are:</p>
<div class=""> <br class="x_webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="">1)<span class="" style="font-size:7pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span>Its radius for a resting electron is R2 = hbar/2mc</p>
<p class="">2)<span class="" style="font-size:7pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span>The radius of the charged photon’s helical trajectory decreases with increasing electron speed as R= R2/(gamma^2)</p>
<p class="">3)<span class="" style="font-size:7pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span>The longitudinal component of the charged photon’s helical speed c is the speed v of the electron being modeled. The forward angle theta of the circulating helix is given by cos (theta) = v/c.</p>
<p class="">4)<span class="" style="font-size:7pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span>The electron’s momentum p=gamma mv is the longitudinal component of the circulating photon’s momentum P=gamma mc.</p>
<p class="">5)<span class="" style="font-size:7pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span>The pitch of the charged photon’s helical trajectory is maximum for v= c/sqrt(2) and gamma = sqrt(2), where theta = 45 degrees. The maximum helical pitch here is pi Ro, and decreases towards zero as v->0 and as v->c.</p>
<p class="">6)<span class="" style="font-size:7pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span>The longitudinal component of the charged photon’s wave vector K corresponding the circulating charged photon’s relativistic wavelength L=h/(gamma mc) generates the de Broglie wavelength of the electron h/(gamma mv)</p>
<p class="">7)<span class="" style="font-size:7pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span>The transverse component of the circulating photon’s momentum is ptrans=mc. At v=0, this transverse momentum when combined with the circulating photon’s helical radius hbar/2mc gives the electron’s spin Sz= + or – hbar/2</p>
<p class="">8)<span class="" style="font-size:7pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span>Since the electron has spin ½ hbar at highly relativistic velocities, the spin of the circulating charged photon must also be ½ hbar, since in the charged photon model of the electron it is the charged photon’s spin at highly relativistic velocities
that gives the electron model its spin ½ hbar at these velocities. The contribution of the helical radius R of the charged photon’s axis to the electron model’s spin Sz is R x mc = hbar/(2mc gamma^2) x mc = hbar/(2gamma^2) which is hbar/2 when v=0 but decreases
towards zero at highly relativistic velocities. The charged photon’s spin ½ hbar remains constant at highly relativistic velocities and therefore gives the electron model its spin ½ hbar at these highly relativistic velocities.</p>
<div class=""> <br class="x_webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal">An objection to the charged photon model that has been repeatedly raised is that an electron has spin ½ hbar and is a fermion while a photon has spin 1 hbar and is a boson, so an electron cannot be a charged photon. But if a circulating
photon carrying the electron’s charge has spin ½ hbar it is not a boson but a fermion. In other words, photons may be of two types: uncharged with spin 1 hbar (boson) and charged with spin ½ hbar (fermion).
</p>
<div class=""> <br class="x_webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal"><b class="">Gauthier’s transluminal energy quantum model of the photon and a spin ½ photon model</b></p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal"><b class=""> </b></p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal">A spin ½ hbar photon model is needed that satisfies this requirement of the charged photon model of the electron. One such model is obtained by modifying Gauthier’s transluminal energy quantum model of the photon, which has spin 1 hbar
and is described in another publication (“Transluminal energy quantum models of the photon and the electron”). Suffice it to say here that when the transluminal energy quantum photon model’s helical radius of Lambda/2pi is changed to Lambda/4pi, the photon’s
spin is reduced from hbar to hbar/2 and the photon obtained becomes a candidate for the spin ½ hbar photon that is required for the charged photon model of the electron.</p>
<div class=""> <br class="x_webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
<p class="x_MsoNormal">The general concept of the transluminal energy quantum as a fundamental quantum particle is that electrons and photons as well as other fundamental particles may be composed of these energy quanta with different characteristics that produce
gluons, quarks, neutrinos, muons and tau particles, W and Z particles and the Higgs boson, and possibly dark matter particles as well. A quark may be a circulating charged gluon in a similar way that an electron may be a circulating charged photon. This last
paragraph is meant to be suggestive of the possible power of the concept of the transluminal energy quantum for structuring oscillating energy into various physical particles with their characteristics, but more theoretical as well as experimental research
is needed here.</p>
<div class=""> <br class="x_webkit-block-placeholder">
</div>
April 8, 2015</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at
<a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" class="" target="_blank">richgauthier@gmail.com</a><br class="">
<a href="<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" class="" target="_blank">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a>"><br class="">
Click here to unsubscribe<br class="">
</a><br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>