<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.23588">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY
style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space"
bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>Hi Chip,
Richard, John W,<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>I think we
all realised, from Chip’s email if not before, that there’s an issue to be
addressed with regard to a photon’s angular momentum in the overall behaviour of
a photon-formed electron.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>It seems to
me that, whatever photon-based electron model any one of us chooses to put
forward, when that electron is in motion then there will be a component of that
formative photon’s angular momentum in the direction of motion of the electron
(i.e. about any axis in that direction).<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>More than this, my preliminary investigations suggest that it would take
a very creative model indeed to ensure that the rise in that component with
increase in electron speed would be exactly balanced by a drop-off in the
component from the photon’s linear momentum to give the electron a constant
angular momentum.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>[A ‘quick
fix’ would of course be to propose a linearly polarized photon with zero spin –
i.e. 50/50 superposition of left and right circularly polarized elements.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>This, though, is rather a cop-out as it
removes a possible explanation for other electron features, notably charge; it
also doesn’t feel right.]<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>I believe
we’re all agreed that:<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>(a) There’s
more than enough evidence to confirm that the concept of an electron (and likely
also other elementary particles) being formed from a closed-loop photon is
totally valid;<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>(b)
Formation of an electron involves a double-loop per wavelength of the photon, at
least for the static electron.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>All
else aside this is clearly indicated by zitterbewegung.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>I’m guessing
we all also agree on the validity of the so-called Relativistic Energy-Momentum
Relation (whether or not we subscribe to the idea of objective frame
symmetry).<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>There are quite a few
points that can be drawn from that, as I see it.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>Most
importantly, the REMR represents the full momentum of a moving electron (i.e.
momentum of its formative photon) in terms of linear and cyclic components.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Expressed diagrammatically, these three
components form a right-angled triangle that defines the relative directions of
the instantaneous velocity components (linear, cyclic, overall) of that photon
(since these must necessarily follow momentum component
directions).<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>It’s pretty
clear, first of all, that if the linear velocity component is v (as it is) and
the overall velocity is anything other than c (in directions as given by REMR)
then the cyclic velocity component will not be orthogonal to the linear
component (as it must be).<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>From
this I believe that we can confirm that the velocity (at least the mean
velocity) of an electron-forming photon must be c; I think this rules out
certain proposals.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>Secondly,
that velocity triangle gives cyclic velocity component as c/gamma.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Those who subscribe to SR’s objective
frame symmetry would presumably expect the double-loop to complete in a time
gamma tau, where tau is the time for that double-loop for a static electron
(since from the static perspective that double-loop in the moving electron would
have to correspond with the time-dilated interval in the moving frame).<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>I also see the double-loop completing in
that time, since I regard energy flow as the underlying mechanism driving the
passage of time; a slower rate of time-experience (time dilation) is the
consequence, rather than the cause, of that reduced looping
rate.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>Whichever is
the case, a looping rate reduced by a factor gamma and achieved by a flow speed
component also reduced by a factor gamma indicates a constant path-length, i.e.
a constant radius for the cyclic path of the formative photon.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>This appears to be an inescapable
conclusion from consideration of the REMR and time
dilation.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>[For
completeness I should add that SR frame symmetry requires that each double-loop
is also seen as exactly one full single wavelength from within the moving frame;
for me this raises an irreconcilable contradiction in SR.]<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>Back to that
photon spin<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB>==================<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>Clearly
either electron spin increases with speed of the electron’s linear motion – or
it doesn’t.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>If it doesn’t then this
implies some aspect of quantum mechanics that needs further consideration.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Rather more significantly for us, I
believe it also rules out the whole concept of electrons being formed from
looping photons.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>That last
seemingly outrageous statement follows from the tendency towards flat-lining of
the formative photon as an electron tends towards speed c.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Unless we consider that photon to be
other than circularly polarized – which I believe raises serious difficulties
with other aspects of the model – then this means that the electron’s angular
momentum in its direction of motion tends to at least hbar – which is clearly
inconsistent with constancy of electron angular momentum with increasing
speed.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>Rather less
problematic (as I see it) is the notion that the electron’s angular momentum in
its direction of motion increases with its speed.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>I don’t know of any experimental
evidence showing conclusively that this is not the case, if others do then of
course that would be of interest.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>Obviously if
angular momentum does increase then that must be by virtue of its being
transferred from elsewhere.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Since
increase in velocity must be caused by an input of energy – a real or virtual
photon – then the most obvious course is to consider a </SPAN><?xml:namespace
prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
/><st1:City><st1:place><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB>Compton</SPAN></st1:place></st1:City><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB> scattering
event that increases the velocity of the electron.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>It’s known
that in general </SPAN><st1:City><st1:place><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB>Compton</SPAN></st1:place></st1:City><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB> scattering
leads to a change in polarisation state of the scattered photon.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>From what little I’ve seen, such changes
have been calculated from theory and confirmed in principle by experiment; that
theory doesn’t generally include the notion of an electron’s angular momentum
varying with speed, as far as I know.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>That (likely) omission would make negligible difference in all but the
most extreme case: increase of electron speed from sub-relativistic to highly
relativistic in a single step – since the change in scattered-photon spin would
correspond to the change in v/c for the electron.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>To
summarise: The concept of an electron formed from a circularly-polarised photon
looping at constant radius for all speeds of the electron appears to be
consistent with all experimental evidence, other than maybe definitive evidence
on electron radius at speed* (unless electrons moving at high speed have been
shown, and not just inferred, to have spin ½); this observation is based on the
assumption that no evidence exists of photon polarisation state changes in
high-energy Compton scattering events with sufficient powers of discrimination
(i.e. accuracy) to definitively show that no angular momentum has been passed
from the photon to the electron, other than that accounted for by a change in
direction of motion of the electron.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>* I have yet
to look at this.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>Of course
this is just my view, based on my understanding of available scientific
data.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>I’d be interested to hear
other views on these observations<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>[Richard, I
hope it’s clear from the above why I have reservations over your proposed
v=sqrt(2)c spin-1/2 photon model of the electron.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>In particular I can’t see how that model
can be reconciled with the Relativistic Energy-Momentum Relation in terms of
correspondence of directions for components of momentum and
velocity.]<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" lang=EN-GB>Regards to
all,<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"
lang=EN-GB>Grahame<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000080 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=richgauthier@gmail.com href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com">Richard
Gauthier</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><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 style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, July 08, 2016 6:13 AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [General] double photon
cycle, subjective v objective realities</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Hello Grahame,</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV> Unfortunately the situation is not so simple. Neither of
our published electron models includes a specific photon model with its own
spin, where this photon model moves along the helical trajectory described in
our models. If that photon moving along the helical trajectory has a spin that
is is independent of the energy of the photon (which is the nature of photons)
then as the photon's trajectory in the your double-loop constant helical
radius electron model gets more and more straight with increasing electron
speed, then the spin of this circulating photon adds more and more to the spin
1/2 of your electron model produced by its circling transverse component of
momentum mc at constant radius R. The result is that a circulating spin 1
photon along your constant radius R helical trajectory would give your
electron model a total spin of one and a half units of spin hbar at highly
relativistic velocities. A circulating spin 1/2 photon traveling along your
constant radius R trajectory would give your electron model a total spin of
1/2 + 1/2 = 1 unit of hbar of spin at highly relativistic velocities. It
is only if the radius R of the photon’s helical trajectory decreases with
increasing velocity to become insignificant (compared to R in a resting
electron) at relativistic velocities that the spin of the electron model at
relativistic velocities will equal only the spin of the photon composing the
electron model. Ideally the helically circulating photon model of the electron
will have longitudinal spin component 1/2 hbar at all velocities of the
electron model from very slow velocities to very highly relativistic
velocities. </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV> I have an unpublished internally superluminal (v=c sqrt(2)
) helically circulating spin-1/2 photon model whose spin remains 1/2 at all
energies, which may be suitable for modeling the electron. I described this
photon model in this email list in the past. The radius of my published
spin-1/2 charged-photon electron model’s photon trajectory decreases as
1/gamma^2 with increasing electron velocity, so this does not produce the
complication described above when the helical radius of the photon’s
trajectory is a constant R at all electron velocities.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV> Richard</DIV><BR>
<DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>On Jul 7, 2016, at 1:00 AM, Dr Grahame Blackwell <<A
href="mailto:grahame@starweave.com">grahame@starweave.com</A>>
wrote:</DIV><BR class=Apple-interchange-newline>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>Thanks Richard,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>That's precisely what I've been trying to
say, without in any way resting on any generally-accepted results that might
be regarded as consequences of SR (and so open to question).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>If we agree that the transverse momentum
component of the electron is a direct consequence of the rotational
component of its formative photon (as I hope we do!) then that rotational
component is acting at radius R of the electron at that time from its
centre. Angular momentum is given by linear tangential momentum
multiplied by radius - so angular momentum of the electron is mcR.
Since mc is constant, R must also be constant if angular momentum is
invariant (which I believe we agree it is).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>Just one further point: Richard, you refer
to m as the electron's invariant mass. If we regard mass as that
quality of an object that resists acceleration (and so is proportional to
the instantaneous force required to induce an instantaneous acceleration),
then my research indicates that the mass is<SPAN
class=Apple-converted-space> </SPAN><EM>not</EM><SPAN
class=Apple-converted-space> </SPAN>invariant - though it will appear
so from measurements taken within the electron's moving frame. My
analysis shows that objective mass varies with speed and the
relationship E = mc^2 is applicable only for an objectively static
object/particle. The m referred to above, as I see it, is the
objective rest-mass of the electron (i.e. its mass when objectively static),
which corresponds to the energy required to maintain the
formative structure of the electron (as opposed to that required to
maintain its linear motion). This is of course constant.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>Best regards,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>Grahame</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: rgb(0,0,128) 2px solid; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"
type="cite">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message -----<SPAN
class=Apple-converted-space> </SPAN></DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(228,228,228); FONT: 10pt arial"><B>From:</B><SPAN
class=Apple-converted-space> </SPAN><A title=richgauthier@gmail.com
href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com">Richard Gauthier</A></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B><SPAN
class=Apple-converted-space> </SPAN><A
title=general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">Nature of Light
and Particles - General Discussion</A></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B><SPAN
class=Apple-converted-space> </SPAN>Thursday, July 07, 2016 6:42
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B><SPAN
class=Apple-converted-space> </SPAN>Re: [General] double photon
cycle, subjective v objective realities</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Chip and Grahame,</DIV>
<DIV> Lets be specific to the electron to avoid unnecessary
vagueness. The moving electron (composed of a circulating photon) has a
constant transverse internal momentum component mc and a longitudinal
external momentum component p=gamma mv. These two momenta add vectorially
(by the Pythagorean theorem) to give P^2 = p^2 + (mc)^2 where
P=E/c is the momentum P=gamma mc of the helically circulating photon of
energy E = gamma mc^2 that is the total energy of the linearly moving
electron, modeled by the helically moving photon. This relationship is
equivalent to the relativistic energy-momentum equation for a moving
electron: E^2 = (pc)^2 + m^2 c^4 which, substituting E=Pc, gives
(Pc)^2 = (pc)^2 + (mc^2) c^2 .. Dividing by c^2 gives P^2 = p^2 +
(mc)^2 as given above. So as the electron speeds up, the transverse
momentum component mc of the electron’s total (internal plus external)
momentum P remains constant even for a highly relativistic electron. The
electron’s constant transverse internal momentum component mc corresponds
to (and leads to a derivation of) the electron’s invariant mass m.</DIV>
<DIV> Richard</DIV><BR>
<DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>On Jul 6, 2016, at 10:18 AM, Dr Grahame Blackwell <<A
href="mailto:grahame@starweave.com">grahame@starweave.com</A>>
wrote:</DIV><BR class=Apple-interchange-newline>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>Yes Chip,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>Certainly the momentum of the confined
wave increases - but that increased momentum should not ALL be reckoned
as ANGULAR momentum of the electron.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>We know that a component of the momentum
of that photon is linear - it's the linear momentum of the electron in
motion. There is another component of that photon that's
orthogonal to that, i.e. in the direction of the cyclic motion of the
photon. As the linear velocity of the electron increases, the
linear component of the photon momentum increases - however the
orthogonal, cyclic, component of that photon momentum does NOT increase,
since the 'pitch angle' of the helical motion of that photon increases
with linear electron velocity, and so also with photon frequency,
so as to precisely cancel out the effect of that increased frequency in
the resolved-component cyclic direction.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>The angular momentum of the electron,
dictated by the angular momentum contribution of the photon, does NOT
depend on the FULL momentum of the photon - it ONLY depends on that
component of the photon that acts cyclically, i.e. the component that's
orthogonal to the linear motion of the photon. That component
remains constant (as long as the radius of the photon cycle remains
constant).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>For example, if an electron is
travelling with linear speed 0.6c then its formative photon is
travelling in a helical path which, if we were to flatten it out (as
in relativistic energy-momentum relation) we'd find that formative
photon having a linear motion component of 0.6c and cyclic speed
component of 0.8c. This means that the ANGULAR momentum imparted
by the photon will only be 0.8 of that which it would give if it were
travelling fully cyclically at speed c (as for a static particle).
Since the frequency of the photon will be increased by a gamma factor of
1/0.8 for such motion, the decreased (0.8) contribution of momentum for
increased (1/0.8) frequency will be exactly what it was for the static
particle.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>I hope that helps make things
clearer.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>Best regards,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>Grahame</FONT></DIV>
<DIV
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><FONT
color=#000080 size=2
face=Arial></FONT> </DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><SPAN
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; DISPLAY: inline !important; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; FLOAT: none; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px">_______________________________________________</SPAN><BR
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><SPAN
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; DISPLAY: inline !important; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; FLOAT: none; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px">If
you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and
Particles General Discussion List at<SPAN
class=Apple-converted-space> </SPAN></SPAN><A
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"
href="mailto:richgauthier@gmail.com">richgauthier@gmail.com</A><BR
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><SPAN
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; DISPLAY: inline !important; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; FLOAT: none; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><a
href="</SPAN><A
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1">http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/richgauthier%40gmail.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1</A><SPAN
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; DISPLAY: inline !important; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; FLOAT: none; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px">"></SPAN><BR
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><SPAN
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; DISPLAY: inline !important; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; FLOAT: none; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px">Click
here to unsubscribe</SPAN><BR
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><SPAN
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; DISPLAY: inline !important; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; FLOAT: none; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"></a></SPAN><BR
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px; FONT: 12px Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>If you no longer
wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General
Discussion List at grahame@starweave.com<BR><a
href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/grahame%40starweave.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"><BR>Click
here to unsubscribe<BR></a><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>