<div dir="ltr"><div>Dear John,<br><br></div>We need to get this group together for a week or more of discussions. I have so much to learn. Each answer produces more questions. I am afraid not to ask them because they may not come up again and I will have lost an opportunity for obtaining important information.<br><ol><li>the 'quarter turn' would probably require a whole lecture to bring me up to speed. It may relate to 'up' and 'down' in QM being orthogonal rather than along the same axis.</li><li>I agree with "integer wavelengths
to minimise energy." However, is this true for the case of the 'untwisted' circularly-polarized photon?</li><li>Aligning superposed spin axes of in-phase photons should increase the field energies and therefore the total energy?</li></ol><p>This is much more interesting than writing papers or creating exam questions. However, we do have those obligations.</p><p></p><p>Andrew</p><p>__________________<br></p><div><div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 6:35 AM, John Williamson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:John.Williamson@glasgow.ac.uk" target="_blank">John.Williamson@glasgow.ac.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Tahoma;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-size:10pt">Hi Andrew,<br>
<br>
No. The twist comes form the base equations - its not a "knob" but a consequence of the underlying thing the differential equations are describing. Each differential is a (precise) quarter turn in some space. Further, you need to join at integer wavelengths
to minimise energy. Higher twist objects (2 - 3 ans so on) also need to minimise energy. Physically this means aligning spin axes. there are actually only so many real dimensions to go round (despite the idiocies of string theory).<br>
<br>
Regards, John.<br>
<div style="font-family:Times New Roman;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-size:16px">
<hr>
<div style="direction:ltr"><font face="Tahoma" color="#000000" size="2"><b>From:</b> General [general-bounces+john.williamson=<a href="mailto:glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank">glasgow.ac.uk@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a>] on behalf of Andrew Meulenberg [<a href="mailto:mules333@gmail.com" target="_blank">mules333@gmail.com</a>]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, June 23, 2015 11:28 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Nick Bailey; Anthony Booth; Manohar .; Ariane Mandray; David Mathes<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] Axes plots<br>
</font><br>
</div><div><div class="h5">
<div></div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>Dear John W. and all,<br>
<br>
</div>
If you start with a circularly-polarized photon, give it one full twist per wavelength (to 'unwind' it), and then close it at any point, could you not create the out-going
<b>E</b>-field that we attribute to the electron or positron? However, since there is no reason to join the twisted photon only at integer wavelengths, then the electron would not have fixed properties. The only thing fixed would be the amount of twist per
wavelength. What causes the photon twist in any of the models and, if the above model is correct, why don't we have particles with a continuum of charge (and spin?) values?<br>
<br>
</div>
Andrew<br>
<div>
<div>__________________________________<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 12:19 AM, John Williamson <span dir="ltr">
<<a href="mailto:John.Williamson@glasgow.ac.uk" target="_blank">John.Williamson@glasgow.ac.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Tahoma;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-size:10pt">Here are some using a set of axes, as in the POS paper circulated earlier<br>
<br>
Torfieldrock just shows three views of a positron. <br>
<br>
Torfieldsinglemin0.4 is just a simple double loop. Not too busy.<br>
<br>
Trockrevert is similar to the first, but with a glass torus.<br>
<br>
Cheers, John.<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at
<a href="mailto:mules333@gmail.com" target="_blank">mules333@gmail.com</a><br>
<a href="<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a>"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></div></div>
</div>
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a href="mailto:mules333@gmail.com">mules333@gmail.com</a><br>
<a href="<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/mules333%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</a>"><br>
Click here to unsubscribe<br>
</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></div>