<html 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" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=gb2312"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><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;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:windowtext;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;
text-decoration:none none;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'>Hello Everyone, <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'>I have been away on a trip for the last week and have not been able to post my ideas. However, I have followed the discussion and now I want to give some philosophical insights. Everyone is attempting to describe the internal structure of an electron. To achieve this goal requires a paradigm shift away from the current approach to physics. I will illustrate this with an example. A carbon monoxide molecule in a vacuum can only rotate at 115 GHz or integer multiples of this frequency. It is easy to state this in the form of a ¡°law¡± and to write equations relating to this type of physical effects. Clearly we have achieved one level of understanding. However, merely being able to state how molecules behave is not the same as being able to explain the underlying physics of the universe which <b><i>causes</i></b> these laws. For example: What enforces this quantized rotation? Why is there quantized angular momentum? These questions cannot be answered by quoting laws of physics because these questions probe the underlying structure of the universe which create the laws of physics. I predict that the major frontier in physics will be the study of the mechanistic structure of particles, fields and forces. Therefore, your efforts are on the leading edge of this revolution. However, in my opinion you are taking the wrong approach to answering these tough questions. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'>Top-down Versus Bottom-up<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'>I will describe the process that I have used to generate my model of electrons in particular and the universe in general. Then I will contrast that approach with the approach taken by everyone else in this group. The point that I am attempting to make will emerge from the contrasts between these two approaches.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'>The original inspiration for my study was the realization that I was able to prove that a photon confined in a hypothetical 100% reflecting box possesses 8 properties of a fundamental particle. For example, when the box is moving in an inertial frame of reference, the confined photon exhibits the characteristics of de Broglie waves. It also exhibits the correct inertia, kinetic energy, relativistic length contraction, and relativistic time dilation. When the confined photon is in a gravitational field it also exhibits weight. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'>Therefore, I saw a connection between a photon and a fundamental particle such as an electron. However, I never said that an electron was a bound photon propagating at the speed of light around a single or double loop. I always said that the similarity came from the fact that both an electron and a photon were made of the same fundamental component. This gave electrons and photons many similarities, but there are also important differences. In my attempt to find the common basis for photons and particles, I was struck by big idea which was: <u>The universe is only spacetime</u>. Therefore I decided to see if I could ¡°invent¡± a model of the universe which only used the properties of 4 dimensional spacetime. I focused on the fact that QM allows waves to exist in spacetime provided that their spatial displacement does not exceed Planck length and their temporal displacement does on exceed Planck time.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'>I will not go into any more detail on this subject because the reason for mentioning this is to illustrate what I call a ¡°bottom-up¡± approach to explaining the internal structure of particles as well as also explaining all fields and forces in the universe. I start with a basic assumption and attempt to build up to particles, fields and forces. Everyone else in the group uses what I call the ¡°top-down¡± approach which attempts to start with multiple facts and attempt to extrapolate to a basic structure. The problem that I see with this approach is that your explanations of particles use words like charge, photon, electric field, wave, etc. which all are also unknown on the mechanistic structural level. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'>For example, if ¡°wave¡± is mentioned as part of the electron description, I need more details. Are the waves propagating in a medium? What are the properties of the medium? What is the amplitude and energy density of the waves? What is the impedance of the medium? If ¡°electric field¡± is mentioned as part of the wave explanation, I want to know about the structure of the electric field. It is not enough to quote laws because we are now in the realm of underlying structure that causes the laws. If ¡°photons¡± are mentioned, I need to know about the structure of a photon and the structure of the universe that permits photons to exist. Is a photon a quantum of energy propagating through an empty void? What about the wave properties of a photon? Do the waves imply a medium through which the waves propagate? Why is there a universal speed limit? <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'>In other words, I find attempts to explain the internal structure of an electron by using other terms which also need explanation as the equivalent of building castles in the sky. The basic foundation is missing. If you take the bottom-up approach to explaining physics rather than the top-down approach, you automatically start with the foundation and build up from there.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'>Proposed Charge Conversion Constant<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'>I am going to stop my philosophical thoughts and switch to describing the physics produced by this approach. Previously I mentioned that my approach agreed with zero point energy, QED and QCD in requiring the vacuum to have tremendous energy density. I was challenged on this point and this challenge motivated me to recently develop additional proofs that support this conclusion. That will be the subject of a post in the future. For now I want to briefly mention about my proposed new constant of nature that I have named the ¡°charge conversion constant </span><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif'>¦Ç</span><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'>¡±. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><!--[if gte msEquation 12]><m:oMath><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif'><m:r>¦Ç</m:r><m:r>¡Ô</m:r></span></i><m:rad><m:radPr><m:degHide m:val="on"/><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif;font-style:italic'><m:ctrlPr></m:ctrlPr></span></m:radPr><m:deg></m:deg><m:e><m:f><m:fPr><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif;font-style:italic'><m:ctrlPr></m:ctrlPr></span></m:fPr><m:num><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif'><m:r>G</m:r></span></i></m:num><m:den><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif'><m:r>4</m:r><m:r>¦Ð</m:r></span></i><m:sSub><m:sSubPr><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif;font-style:italic'><m:ctrlPr></m:ctrlPr></span></m:sSubPr><m:e><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif'><m:r>¦Å</m:r></span></i></m:e><m:sub><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif'><m:r>o</m:r></span></i></m:sub></m:sSub><m:sSup><m:sSupPr><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif;font-style:italic'><m:ctrlPr></m:ctrlPr></span></m:sSupPr><m:e><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif'><m:r>c</m:r></span></i></m:e><m:sup><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif'><m:r>4</m:r></span></i></m:sup></m:sSup></m:den></m:f></m:e></m:rad><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif'><m:r>=</m:r></span></i><m:f><m:fPr><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif;font-style:italic'><m:ctrlPr></m:ctrlPr></span></m:fPr><m:num><m:sSub><m:sSubPr><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif;font-style:italic'><m:ctrlPr></m:ctrlPr></span></m:sSubPr><m:e><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif'><m:r>L</m:r></span></i></m:e><m:sub><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif'><m:r>p</m:r></span></i></m:sub></m:sSub></m:num><m:den><m:sSub><m:sSubPr><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif;font-style:italic'><m:ctrlPr></m:ctrlPr></span></m:sSubPr><m:e><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif'><m:r>q</m:r></span></i></m:e><m:sub><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif'><m:r>p</m:r></span></i></m:sub></m:sSub></m:den></m:f><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif'><m:r> ¡Ö8.61¡Á</m:r></span></i><m:sSup><m:sSupPr><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif;font-style:italic'><m:ctrlPr></m:ctrlPr></span></m:sSupPr><m:e><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif'><m:r>10</m:r></span></i></m:e><m:sup><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif'><m:r>-</m:r><m:r>18</m:r></span></i></m:sup></m:sSup><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif'><m:r> </m:r></span></i></m:oMath><![endif]--><![if !msEquation]><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;position:relative;top:12.0pt;mso-text-raise:-12.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><img width=336 height=57 id="_x0000_i1025" src="cid:image003.png@01D08269.3F9FF950"></span><![endif]><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'>meter/coulomb</span><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'>This constant is derived and explained in the attached ¡°foundation¡± paper (see pages 238 to 243). This paper was peer reviewed and published this month by Springer. The reason for mentioning this is that this constant pertains to all models which incorporate a photon or discuss electric field or charged particles. This constant is an example of the tangible results that are possible when I start from the bottom-up with the assumption of waves in spacetime being responsible for everything including photons, electric fields and charged particles. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'>The units of this are meter/coulomb. The ¡°meter¡± length term is not static ruler length, but a polarized distortion of spacetime with units of length. When this constant is used to convert the Coulomb force constant 1/4¦Ð¦Å<sub>o</sub> to a property of spacetime, the Coulomb force constant converts to Planck force c<sup>4</sup>/G ¡Ö 1.2x10<sup>44</sup> N. This makes sense in all calculations involving the Coulomb law. Also the impedance of free space Z<sub>o</sub> ¡Ö 377 </span><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif'>¦¸</span><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> converts to the impedance of spacetime c<sup>3</sup>/G as explained in the paper. This has profound implications for any photon model because it says that photons experience the same impedance as gravitational waves. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'>We know that gravitational waves are transverse waves that propagate at the speed of light and propagate in the medium of spacetime. Therefore, photons also propagate in the medium of spacetime. This allows me to characterize the wave properties produced by photons. I can specify amplitude, energy density and the limitations on the maximum energy density imposed by the physical properties of spacetime. All of this is explained in the paper and in more detail in my book. However, my website will be down for about the next 2 days, so the book is not currently available. I challenge anyone to find a defect in the contention that photons propagate in the medium of spacetime and that the charge conversion constant always gives reasonable results. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'>John M.</span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></body></html>