<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class="">Andrew and others,</div><div class=""> I am proposing that an electron IS a helically circulating charged photon. A muon and a tau can also be helically circulating charged photons with different rest energies than the electron. These circulating charged photons (i.e. the electron and also the positron) would be derived for example from the energy of a higher energy photon during pair production in the vicinity of an atomic nucleus. The circulating charged photon of an electron or positron is proposed to have spin 1/2 hbar instead of spin 1 hbar of an uncharged photon (I would like to hear if John W and Martin, Vivian, and Chip agree or disagree on this point about the spin of the circulating double-looped photon being 1/2 hbar due to the electron having this spin at relativistic velocities. This is an important point for both single and double-looped photon models of the electron.) The circulating charged photon has the properties c=f lambda, p=h/lambda and E=hf of an uncharged photon. Its helical circulation and its electric charge are closely related. The general double-loop relativistic charged photon model of an electron does not include a specific model of a charged photon. Various charged photon models can be proposed that would fit the relativistic electron model. I am not proposing a strange type of photon that in special circumstances becomes an electron, but rather ordinary photons or other normal high energy particles that produce circulating charged photons (electrons and positrons) during electron-positron pair production.</div><div class=""> Richard</div><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Apr 17, 2015, at 9:10 AM, Andrew Meulenberg <<a href="mailto:mules333@gmail.com" class="">mules333@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class=""><div class="">Dear Richard,<br class=""><br class=""></div>In looking at your presentation, I was concerned about what the charged photon was supposed to be. Is it an electron? I refer to the photonic electron as general model for an electron that is derived from all or a portion of a photon and still retains much of the photon's characteristics. Are you referring to a specific model of a similar creature? Or, are you refering to a strange photon of a type that, under special circumstances, becomes an electron?<br class=""><br class=""></div>Andrew<br class=""><div class=""><div class=""><div class="">___________________________________________-<br class=""><br class="">On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 9:17 PM, Richard Gauthier <span dir="ltr" class=""><<a href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com" target="_blank" class="">richgauthier@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br class=""><div style="word-wrap:break-word" class="">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><br class=""><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> Richard<br class=""></div></div></div></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="">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="">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=""></body></html>