<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" 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"><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.23588"><BASE href="x-msg://859/"><!--[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:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
color:black;}
..MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@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=blue bgColor=white vLink=purple>
<DIV><FONT color=#000080 size=2 face=Arial>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV class=WordSection1><SPAN style="COLOR: black">
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt" lang=EN-GB>Hi Chip
(et al.),<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt"
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: 10.5pt" lang=EN-GB>Thanks for
your response to my comments.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>I’ve
put my replies to your points within your text, in blue.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt"
lang=EN-GB></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt"
lang=EN-GB>Grahame<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></SPAN></DIV></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=chipakins@gmail.com href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com">Chip Akins</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> Sunday, January 15, 2017 1:04
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [General] Reply to Chip on
particle radius & spin</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB>Hi Dr Grahame Blackwell<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB>You have made some good points. <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB>At one time I thought the electron was composed of a circulating
photon which had its spin altered so that the negative portion of the electric
field lines always point outward.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
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: 10.5pt" lang=EN-GB>It’s my
firm view that all of the features of an electron can be accounted for without
introducing any special unexplained modifications to structure of a photon
(Occam’s razor applies here) – even its cyclic motion, once initiated by
whatever circumstances (and I propose such in my first Kybernetes paper), can
IMO be accounted for by self-interference in its electromagnetic fields.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Likewise the electric ‘charge’ on an
electron is necessarily an artefact of its formative photon’s electromagnetic
charge; John W / Martin vdM and I agree that this requires that photon to be
circularly polarised, I propose (they don’t) that polarisation in the opposite
sense gives a positron structure – I also explain in my papers, books and
recorded presentations how this fully explains cosmic particle/antiparticle
disparity of abundance.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>‘Having
spin altered’ isn’t something I’d go for, for the simple reason that it the
requires explanation, simply deferring the problem of charge rather than
explaining it.</SPAN><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB>I am no longer of that opinion. There are several reasons for the
change of opinion. Just as there are several reasons I changed my opinion
about SR.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB>The energy configuration of the electron is different from that of
a confined photon in several ways. There is no reason to hold onto the full
energy configuration of the photon when modeling the electron, in fact it
leads to difficulties and errors in my opinion. It seems that the laws
which govern the movement of energy in space support a few simple
configurations. The electron’s rest mass/energy comes from the threshold
which space imposed on this specific configuration of
energy.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
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: 10.5pt" lang=EN-GB>I’m not
sure what you’re saying here.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>The
energy content of an electron is, of course, the same as the energy in its
formative photon – conservation of energy requires this.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>There are also various other
considerations supporting this.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>I
fully agree that there are limited configurations of ‘localised energy’ – aka
‘particles’ – and the electron is one of these (again, my texts go into this
in more detail).<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>I’d also agree
that the rest mass of an electron (and also its effective mass at any speed)
is a consequence of its energetic structure – in fact mass is the resistance
to reconfiguring that structure into the helical form of a moving particle;
this is the subject of my first published paper on this subject, it’s also the
basis on which I derive E = mc^2<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>quite independently of SR.</SPAN><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB>Yes. The concept of radius is potentially misleading when
discussing the electron simply because it consists of a set of fields with a
finite focus point. But we are able to calculate the mean transport radius of
the momentum density, which is confined and rotating, and which would yield a
spin angular momentum of ½. If we assume the energy in the electron to display
the same momentum as the energy in the photon of the same energy, then this is
a pretty simple calculation.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
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: 10.5pt" lang=EN-GB>We need
to be very careful here to distinguish between linear & angular
momentum.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>If a model glider is
flying towards me and I throw a baseball at it, the linear momentum of the
baseball can impart a combination of linear and angular momentum to that
glider: it can be pushed onto a different trajectory and also put into a
spin.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt"
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: 10.5pt" lang=EN-GB>At the
formation of an electron from a photon – as in classical e+/e- pair production
– linear momentum is conserved by that pair having the same net linear
momentum as the two formative photons.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>It’s abundantly clear, though, that a static electron does NOT have the
same linear momentum as the photon that it’s formed from would have if it were
moving linearly – the former is zero, the latter is not.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>This is because the net momentum of
that confined photon is in fact zero in that cyclic state: motion in opposite
directions on opposite sides of the cycle balance out.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>In a moving electron, by contrast,
there IS non-zero momentum: the linear component of momentum in the helical
photon motion precisely matches the linear momentum of the electron.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>That’s the message of the
‘relativistic’ energy-momentum relation</SPAN><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB>I am not sure the idea that the momentum internal to the electron
remains constant when the electron is accelerated is correct. When we
accelerate the electron we add energy to the electron. The energy we add
is added directly to the energy which is already in the electron. The new
momentum term with energy added is still Total Energy/c, so we now have more
momentum, which means the radius must be smaller to yield spin
½.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
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: 10.5pt" lang=EN-GB>As I’ve
just observed above, the energy, and hence momentum, of the photon increases
with increasing electron speed – but (as I said previously) that increase is
fully accounted for by the momentum of the moving electron itself; it doesn’t
ALSO increase the angular momentum (spin) of the electron – you can’t have it
both ways!<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10.5pt"
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: 10.5pt" lang=EN-GB>The
fundamental issue here is conversion of linear momentum of the photon into
angular momentum AND linear momentum of the electron.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>If we allow for the electron diameter
to be unchanged AND the cyclic component of the photon’s linear momentum to
also remain unchanged, then the spin factor for the electron is likewise
unchanged.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>What DOES change in
line with the increased linear momentum of the photon is the linear momentum
of the electron.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>[Note that this
is not a simple scalar addition: the cyclic motion component of the photon is
orthogonal to the linear motion of the electron, so also to the linear-motion
component of the higher-energy photon; it’s a Pythagorean
calculation.]</SPAN><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB>Consider that space only allows electrons to exist at rest at a
specific rest energy. Any electron with more energy than this is moving. In
fact space requires an electron with a specific amount of energy (above the
rest energy) to always move at the same speed. The law of inertia is built
into the particle. The confined propagation pattern of the energy in the
electron is altered from the rest condition by the addition of energy. Once
energy is added the electron must move, it can no longer be at rest. So the
added energy becomes part of the energy in the electron. Which in turn
increases the momentum of the energy in the electron.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
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: 10.5pt" lang=EN-GB>Yes, it
increases the total linear momentum of the electron – but NOT its angular
momentum.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Back to that glider for
a moment: if we threw a second baseball at it as it’s now spinning through the
air and we happen to hit it dead-centre so that we don’t change its rate of
spin, the momentum of that second baseball could be totally converted into
increased LINEAR momentum of the spinning glider.</SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: black" lang=EN-GB><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB>It seems this increase in energy must therefore also do two things.
1) Increase the confinement force due to increased energy. 2) Reduce the
radius to maintain a spin ½ configuration.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
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: 10.5pt" lang=EN-GB>I hope
I’ve made it clear that the radius doesn’t need to reduce in order to remain
at spin-1/2 with increased photon momentum (since that increase is totally
taken up in imparting LINEAR momentum to the electron – in fact, if the radius
were decreased this would have the dual effect of (a) reducing spin below
spin-1/2 and (b) increasing electron velocity disproportionately, in conflict
with the well-verified energy-momentum relation.</SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: black" lang=EN-GB><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB>This issue of the confinement force seems to be of great
importance. For Planck’s rule to hold, E=hv, there must be a force
related to energy. This force is simply the equal and opposite reaction
of space which opposes the displacement which energy causes. Such a force
clearly defines a particle confinement mechanism.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
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: 10.5pt" lang=EN-GB>I’ve
previously proposed that the confinement mechanism is in fact internal
self-interference by the electromagnetic fields of the photon itself.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>If the frequency of that photon
increases then that interference effect will also increase in direct
proportion.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>The nature of that
confinement will also change by virtue of the fact that the photon trajectory
is extended into a helix.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>IMO
these two factors are quite sufficient to deal with the situation.</SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: black" lang=EN-GB><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB>I could continue, but this email would become quite
lengthy.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
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: 10.5pt" lang=EN-GB>We
haven’t yet discussed the impact of the angular momentum of the photon itself,
that’s clearly relevant.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>I’ll be
addressing that issue in my response to Richard’s latest email.</SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: black" lang=EN-GB><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB>Thank you for your thoughts and insight. I have looked at
this issue from so many different perspectives but still find it
fascinating. For now I still feel there are very many indications that
the radius of the electron must contract with velocity. I am not yet able to
see how the pieces could all fit any other way.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB>And no, I do not think there is a photon inside an electron.
I think the energy of an electron can be released and become a photon. But you
can’t change the configuration of the energy of a photon, convert it to an
electron, and have it still be a photon.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
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: 10.5pt" lang=EN-GB>I
wouldn’t disagree with you on that – mainly because it depends on how one uses
the terminology.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>It’s certainly
true that the energetic configuration of an electron is quite different from
that of a free-flying photon.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>[I
note that Chandra also doesn’t consider an electron to be a photonic
structure, so you’re in good company!]<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>But if one defines a photon simply as a packet of energy configured as
a transverse electromagnetic waveform, and allows for the possibility of that
waveform to be distorted by non-linear interference effects (as arguably it is
in diffraction, refraction and even gravitational lensing), then an electron
is simply another configuration of a photon defined in those
terms.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"
lang=EN-GB>Thoughts?<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal></SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Chip<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #e1e1e1 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt">
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri',sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 11pt">From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri',sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 11pt"> General
[mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org]
<B>On Behalf Of </B>Dr Grahame Blackwell<BR><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, January 14,
2017 5:41 PM<BR><B>To:</B> Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion
<general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org><BR><B>Subject:</B>
[General] Reply to Chip on particle radius &
spin<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Chip et
al.,</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">With
reference to your notes below on particle radius and spin: theyre's more to
say on the whole radius thing, which I will hopefully add shortly, but I feel
I should respond to your notes since I said "a few days" almost a week
ago.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">It's
been noted by others and myself before that a photon-formed electron will have
spin (/ angular momentum) by virtue of (a) the momentum of the photon
acting cyclically, and (b) the angular momentum of the photon itself.
One apparent anomaly is that, as the speed of the electron increases towards
c, the formative photon becomes increasingly linear, being fully linear at
that limiting speed (which can of course only be theoretical, a limiting state
never reached); this creates the apparent anomaly that, in the limit, the
electron will have at least the full spin-1 of its formative photon.
Even at much lesser electron speeds the photon's own spin component must be a
consideration.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">The only
possiblility by which this could be nullified (since I think we're all agreed
that a static electron will have spin-1/2 just by virtue of the photon's
linear momentum) is that the formation of the electron must surely cancel
out that photon spin component, either by the cyclic motion of the photon
acting in the opposite sense or by a rotation (spinning motion), in the
opposite sense, of the electron itself. This has to be left for further
thought (I have some thoughts on it) - but it clearly doesn't add to the
spin of the electron which, as agreed, is 1/2 just from photon linear
momentum.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Back to
that momentum-induced spin: the static electron has spin-1/2 due to photon
linear momentum. As the electron moves, progressively faster, the
momentum of that photon increases due to increasing electron speed (and so
increasing photon frequency). BUT - and this is the absolutely crucial
point - the motion of that photon is now helical, a combination of cyclic and
linear. ONLY the cyclic component of that photon momentum will
contribute to electron spin (/ angular momentum) - the linear component
manifests as the linear momentum of the electron itself, gamma m v (where m is
rest-mass); that cyclic component is Eo/c - WHATEVER the speed of the electron
- this is quite apparent from the 'relativistic' energy-momentum
relation. In other words, in order to maintain that spin-1/2 for the
electron, the radius of the electron also has to be kept constant, as the
cyclic linear-momentum component of the formative photon is similarly
constant. If the radius of the electron is reduced then its angular
momentum (/ spin) will be reduced in direct proportion. This analysis
totally supports the view that electron diameter remains invariant (which is
also supported by other considerations - more on that
later).</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">[In
brief: to regard the full increased momentum of the higher-frequency photon as
contributing to electron angular momentum is an
over-simplification.]</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">As
Albrecht and others have observed in recent posts, experimental evidence
interpreted as electron diameter is at best an indication of cross-section of
effective consequences; diameter inferred from such experimental readings
cannot be taken as a definitive statement of particle size - there is clearly
a lot of 'wiggle room' (literally!) in this. The observations above on
invariant electron spin would appear to be rather more precisely
definitive.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">With
regard to the 'relativistic' effective total mass of the moving particle, I'd
wholly agree that this is gamma m (where m is again rest-mass) - but we don't
need to go via spin considerations to get to that, it's implicit in the raised
frequency of that formative photon, in line with E = mc^2 {which again is not
at all dependent on SR - but that's another
story].</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Best
regards,</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Grahame</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">----- Original
Message ----- <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<DIV>
<P style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4" class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"> <A
title=grahame@starweave.com href="mailto:grahame@starweave.com">Dr Grahame
Blackwell</A> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">To:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"> <A
title=general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">Nature of Light and
Particles - General Discussion</A> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Sent:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"> Sunday, January 08,
2017 10:10 PM<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Subject:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"> Re: [General] On
particle radius<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Hi
Chip,</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Many
thanks indeed for your succinct and well-presented case ('succinct' is clearly
a useful word in this discussion - as well as a good
strategy!).</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">I need
to go through this carefully and thoroughly and see how it relates to my own
understanding of the situation. As we're all agreed, we all have things
to learn from each other and (here I DO agree with Vivian's metaphor) each
have some aspect of the elephant (in the room?) to contribute. I'm
really looking forward to considering what you've said below and hopefully
assimilating it into a fuller understanding on my own part of the issues that
need to be taken into consideration.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">I'll
come back to you when I've processed it thoroughly (may take a few days) and
have some thoughts to offer.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Thanks
again,</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Grahame</SPAN><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: navy 1.5pt solid; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; MARGIN: 5pt 0in 5pt 3.75pt; PADDING-LEFT: 4pt; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 0in">
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">----- Original
Message ----- <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4" class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"> <A
title=chipakins@gmail.com href="mailto:chipakins@gmail.com">Chip Akins</A>
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">To:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"> <A
title=general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">'Nature of Light
and Particles - General Discussion'</A> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Sent:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"> Sunday, January
08, 2017 9:22 PM<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Subject:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial',sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"> Re: [General] On
particle radius<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black" lang=EN-GB>Hi Dr Graham
Blackwell<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">I like the way you clearly and
succinctly write.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Let me explain some of the
reasons why I feel the radius of the electron decreases with
velocity.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">In order to accelerate the
electron at rest, we must apply energy (force through
distance).<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">The only way to apply energy
to the electron, when we get down to the basis, is to add energy to its
existing confined wave structure. Planck’s rule suggests that this
confined wave structure with energy added has a wavelength which is (h c)/E.
If this is the case and the momentum of this wave remains p=E/c, then in
order to be a spin ½ hbar particle, it seems the electron must have a radius
which is r = (h c)/(4 pi E). Where E is the new total energy with velocity
throughout this paragraph.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Then when we calculate the
mass of this particle from its confined momentum (as Richard has pointed
out) we get the expected relativistic (total) mass of the moving particle. m
= E/(r w c) = E/c^2= E Eo Uo. Which is exactly equivalent to m = y m. [where
w = c/r (angular frequency)].<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">This is the only scenario I
have found where all of the expected parameters are accommodated, and I have
searched extensively for other possibilities.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">We also note that the
scattering cross-section of an electron at relativistic velocities is very
small, and agrees with these assumptions quite well.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">In order for the electron
radius to remain the same size with velocity I think we have to ignore
things which seem quite important, and these specific things appear to be
required in order to tie several of the pieces of the puzzle together. It
seems the picture is just not complete unless the radius of the electron is
reduced with velocity.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: black">Thoughts?<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: black">Chip<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: black"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></P></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV style="TEXT-ALIGN: center" class=MsoNormal align=center>
<HR align=center SIZE=2 width="100%">
</DIV></DIV>
<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>