<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=utf-8" 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><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>Hi Richard (also Chip, John W et
al),</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>Thanks for your response. I see
you say "based on the experimental evidence for this" (i.e. electron spin 1/2 at
all speeds/energies). Are you saying that you know that such evidence
exists? If so, it'd be great to see any references you have for it; if
not, we're back to pure supposition, presumably (based on 'accepted wisdom' -
which I think we're all agreed is far from being any sort of evidence at
all).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>I agree with your observation that
the spin of an electron formed from a conventional photon tends to 1(+) as its
speed tends to c. I don't yet see this as a problem (unless you have those
references as above and they constitute firm proof). I can't see,
though, how your model can maintain spin 1/2 over all speeds of
electron motion. As I see it (based on a velocity triangle for linear and
cyclic components that matches the relationship given by the Relativistic
Energy-Momentum Relation, which determines the relative directions of momentum
components and so also velocity components), the contribution from your spin-1/2
photon's own spin to the electron's spin about its axis of linear motion
will be: v/c x 1/2 = v/(2c) . The contribution from the linear
momentum of the photon in its cyclic motion would thus have to be: 1/2 - v/(2c)
consistently, as v varies. You describe your cyclic-motion spin component
(as I understand it) as: 1/(2gamma^2), which doesn't seem to fit the bill.
How do you get those two elements to fit together to neatly give 1/2 in all
cases? [NB I've left out the hbar throughout in order to reduce clutter - so I'm
talking spin rather than full spin ang. mom. term.] [As an afterthought:
the only other parameter that you may be varying is the speed of that
circulating photon; as I see it that must be c to fit in with observations on
relativistic electrons?]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>Like you, I'd also be very interested
to see John W's model of an electron with spin 1/2 at all electron
speeds/energies. There are issues here that I certainly can't see a way
round at present.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>Best regards to all,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>Grahame</FONT></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> Saturday, July 23, 2016 9:05
PM</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, Chip, John W and all,</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV> I appreciate your persistence with this question about the
calculated spin of electron models at relativistic energies, and also about
the evidence for an experimental value of electron spin of 1/2 at high
energies. The second requires a knowledgeable expert high energy physics
experimenter’s answer, I think, based on the experimental evidence for this.
The first needs to be resolved by people like us who don’t necessarily accept
the idea of a point-like electron with intrinsic spin 1/2, but who want our
electron models to match the experimental evidence about the electron as
closely as possible. I believe that John W said that his latest electron
model has spin 1/2 at all energies. I asked him several e-mails back if he
knows this about his electron model from a spin calculation with his electron
model, or by some symmetry argument. I think we would like to know that this
invariant spin 1/2 result for his relativistic electron model comes from a
calculation if possible. But I don’t see how John W or anyone else can start
with a circling spin 1 photon to get a spin 1/2 resting electron (that part is
OK for a double looping 1 Compton wavelength h/mc photon and I think we
“double-loopers" are agreed about this), and also also get a spin 1/2
relativistic electron model from the same circulating spin 1 photon, for the
reason that we have discussed: more and more of the spin 1 photon’s spin is in
the longitudinal direction for a fast moving electron model as the speed of
the electron increases towards highly relativistic velocities, so how does
this relativistic circulating-spin-1-photon electron model’s spin ever fall
much below 1 hbar at highly relativistic velocities?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV> This is one reason why I think that an electron model has
to be composed of a circling spin 1/2 (and charged) photon from the beginning
(in the resting electron), so that this spin 1/2 of the photon model will
dominate in the electron model at relativistic velocities, while the
contribution to the electron model’s spin in the double-looping resting photon
(which is 1/2 hbar in the resting electron) drops off (as 1/gamma^2) towards
zero at relativistic electron velocities.</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2
face=Arial></FONT> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>