<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=utf-8"><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;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 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;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
{mso-style-name:msonormal;
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.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:"Consolas",serif;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
color:#20188C;
font-weight:normal;
font-style:normal;
text-decoration:none none;}
.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 vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify'>Al, Chip, Albrecht, Hodge, Andrew, and John D.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify'><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify'>My post yesterday made the point that angular momentum comes only in discrete units of ½ ħ. This was defied as “strong quantization” because angular momentum comes only in discrete units. The energy of a photon is defined as “weakly quantized” because even though all the energy of a photon is absorbed as a unit, the energy is not quantized into discrete units like angular momentum. In the future, I will attempt to prove that all examples of quantization in the universe are the result of angular momentum being quantized. This gives particle-like properties to quantized waves.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify'><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify'>I will start by examining the concept of a “field”. What is a field? It appears to be a term describing a ghost-like concept that is never given a conceptually understandable model. Electric fields and magnetic fields have quantifiable energy density, so they must be physical entities which demand testable models. However, what about the 16 other fields of the standard model? Each named particle of the standard model has as associated field. There is an electron field, a muon field, a Higgs field, etc. Each named particle is considered to be an “excitation” of its respective field (reference given in the attached paper). <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify'><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify'>The standard model has 17 overlapping fields existing in the vacuum. This is chaos that screams for simplification. Into this environment, I introduced the observation that gravitational waves (GWs) are propagating in spacetime and they experience spacetime as being a very stiff elastic medium. If it was possible to do a Michaelson Morley experiment using GWs, we would find that GWs propagate at the speed of light as seen from all frames of reference. In other words, spacetime exhibits the property of being a propagation medium with the relativistic properties postulated by Einstein. It is generally thought that Einstein rejected the concept that the vacuum had a physical content often called the ether or aether. However, only from about 1905 to 1916 did he hold this view. Here is a part of the attached paper where I give some Einstein quotes.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify'><span style='font-size:10.5pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify;text-autospace:none'><span style='color:#333399'>“Einstein intuitively knew there was a physical component of space<span style='background:white'>. From 1916 until his death he</span> used the terms: “relativistic ether”, “physical space” and “total field” to express this concept. [29]<span style='background:white'> Here are two representative quotes.</span> In 1934 he said “Physical space and the ether are different terms for the same thing; fields are physical states of space”.<span style='background:white'> [30]</span> In 1950 Einstein wrote an article for <i>Scientific American</i> where he said, “According to general relativity, the concept of space detached from any physical content does not exist.” [31].</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#333399;background:white'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify;text-autospace:none'><span style='color:#333399'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify'><span style='color:#333399'>Today, most physicists hold the opposite view and believe space has no “physical content”. However, it is proposed that failure to recognize the physical presence of vacuum energy (VE) ignores the largest component of the universe and removes a key element required to conceptually understand the cause of many of the laws of physics.”<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='text-align:justify'><span style='color:#333399'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal>The attached GW paper contains important concepts required to understand the photon model. This paper is currently “under review” by one of The Royal Society journals. In this paper I analyzed the experimentally observed properties of the GW designated GW150914. These LIGO observations generated the GW amplitude, frequency, and intensity. Combining these measured properties with speed of light propagation allowed me to calculate the properties of spacetime encountered by this GW. From this analysis, I obtain equations for the energy density encountered by GWs of any frequency as they propagate through spacetime. This energy density corresponds to the energy density predicted for the vacuum by quantum field theory when extrapolated to Planck frequency. The model proposed and tested in this paper is that the vacuum of spacetime is Planck length vacuum fluctuations oscillating at Planck frequency. This sea of quantum mechanical harmonic oscillators forms the universal field that fills the vacuum of spacetime. All other fields are proposed to be multiple resonances of this single universal field. I show how these fluctuations generate the correct energy of virtual particles, generate the energy density of black holes and generate the Friedmann equation for the critical energy density of the universe. In future posts I will show how this model of vacuum energy leads to testable models of electric fields, charged particles, and photons.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>John M.<span style='color:#20188C'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#20188C'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'> General [mailto:general-bounces+john=macken.com@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>af.kracklauer@web.de<br><b>Sent:</b> Friday, February 03, 2017 10:19 AM<br><b>To:</b> phys@a-giese.de; general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org<br><b>Cc:</b> general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [General] Photon Structure<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'>Hi Albrecht:<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'>Well, I have lots of problems; rather formal logic reveals lots of problems of which I am aware of some of them. To start the 'photon' creation event offers no way of checking what is actually created. Your claim is that the balance between bremstrahlung from the electrons and pair creation implies that the transfer had to happen by means of packaged E&M energy. But, it could just be a coincidence that the measured energy levels matched (within whatever tolerance your setup was subject to) while lots of off-beam energy was also involved in a way which was not (could not) be measured. Or, it could have been the the bremstrahlung was effectivy "needle raadition" (a classical solution to Max's Eqs.); etc. etc. In the end, (or beginning) whatever E&M interaction was involved cannot be observed except by means of the photo electric effect, and that process hides as much as it reveals.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'>DeBroglie's ideas as he presented them suffer from a lack of molel for the source of pilot waves. An SED interpretation as a residue of outgoing radiation from all other charges in the universe renders the story credible, however. See my old Found. of Phys. Lett article.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'>ciao, Al<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><div style='border:none;border-left:solid #C3D9E5 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 8.0pt;margin-left:7.5pt;margin-top:7.5pt;margin-right:3.75pt;margin-bottom:3.75pt;word-wrap: break-word;-webkit-nbsp-mode: space;-webkit-line-break: after-white-space' name=quote><div style='margin-bottom:7.5pt'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'>Gesendet:</span></b><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'> Freitag, 03. Februar 2017 um 17:48 Uhr<br><b>Von:</b> "Albrecht Giese" <<a href="mailto:genmail@a-giese.de">genmail@a-giese.de</a>><br><b>An:</b> <a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a><br><b>Betreff:</b> Re: [General] Photon Structure<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div name=quoted-content><div><p style='background:white'><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Hi Al, hi John Hodge,</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p style='background:white'><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>The question of a photon as a corpuscle can be answered in a positive sense. There are measurements which give us constraints.</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p style='background:white'><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>One is the experiment of my thesis done in a high energy laboratory. We have created photons by stopping electrons. These photons made a flight of about 3 meters through the air and were then detected by pair production in a thin layer of metal. The energy of the pair could be precisely measured. It reflected the energy used in the creation process. So, there was an object flying from the source to the (pair-)detector which carried a well defined energy. And notice that the pair production process cannot collect EM energy until a certain amount is achieved. No, it is one single event going on with one object. This object is conventionally called "photon". </span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p style='background:white'><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Next question for the particle wave problem: How can this corpuscle "photon" cause interference patterns? The answer is not difficult if we follow the original idea of de Broglie: This corpuscle "photon" is accompanied by an alternating field which causes the interference. And how is this field created? I think there is no other way then to assume that the photon has a pair of electric charges inside. This pair is in permanent motion and causes the alternating field; and causes so during the motion of the photon a wave. </span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p style='background:white'><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Any problems with this?</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p style='background:white'><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Albrecht</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='background:white'><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='background:white'><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Am 03.02.2017 um 06:22 schrieb Hodge John:</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><pre style='background:white'>Experiment has rejected wave models of light.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'>Know? By a simulation that posits the structure that agrees with experiment such as photon diffraction and interference.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMAjKk6k6-k" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMAjKk6k6-k</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <a href="http://intellectualarchive.com/?link=item&id=1603" target="_blank">http://intellectualarchive.com/?link=item&id=1603</a> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'>Hodge<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'>--------------------------------------------<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'>On Thu, 2/2/17, <a href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_blank">af.kracklauer@web.de</a> <a href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_blank"><af.kracklauer@web.de></a> wrote:<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> Subject: Re: [General] Photon Structure<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> To: <a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank">general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> Cc: "'Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion'" <a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank"><general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org></a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> Date: Thursday, February 2, 2017, 6:58 PM<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> Challenge<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> for those seeking to fathom the structure of<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> "photons": How will a candidate theory of the<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> photon structure ever be verified? This is a problem<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> insofar as the best that can be done is to consider the<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> result of measurement, which will then be an intrinsic part<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> of the result. It is utterly IMPOSSIBLE to observe what<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> went on behind the measurement----thus it can never be<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> known! Therefore, photons are hypothetical entities built<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> on the result of interacting by means of E&M (something)<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> using "photo electrons", which are countably<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> discrete giving the impression that, whatever made them flow<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> was also discrete---an unjustified jump in logic!<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 02. Februar 2017 um 20:33<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> Uhr<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> Von: "John Macken"<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <a href="mailto:john@macken.com" target="_blank"><john@macken.com></a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> An: "'ANDREW WORSLEY'"<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <a href="mailto:member@aworsley.fsnet.co.uk" target="_blank"><member@aworsley.fsnet.co.uk></a>, "'Nature of<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> Light and Particles - General Discussion'"<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <a href="mailto:general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org" target="_blank"><general@lists.natureoflightandparticles.org></a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> Betreff: Re: [General] Photon Structure<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> Andrew, Richard, Chip and John<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> D.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> The discussion has turned to<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> whether photons possess discrete packages of energy or are<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> quantized waves with no concentration of energy in a small<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> volume. My position is: Photons are quantized waves<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> propagating in the quantum mechanical vacuum energy of<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> spacetime. <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> This is too big a subject to<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> be covered in one post, so I will lay out the background<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> information in this post, then build on this in other<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> posts. To explain my position I will first quote from my<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> paper titled Energetic Spacetime: The New Aether.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> “Photons are usually described<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> as possessing “wave-particle duality”. However, this<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> phrase is just a name given to something that we do not<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> understand. The essence of a wave is that it is an<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> oscillating disturbance with a definable wavelength and<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> distributed over a substantial volume. A wave transfers<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> liner momentum and some waves are capable of transferring<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> angular momentum. Any wave disturbs the medium through which<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> it is propagating such that energy is being converted<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> between different forms.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> The essence of a particle is<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> that it is a single unit that differs from its surroundings.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> A fundamental particle is usually assumed to be energy<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> concentrated at a point with no internal structure. A point<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> particle or even a Planck length vibrating string is<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> incapable of possessing ħ of angular momentum as a<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> conceptually understandable physical rotation. The implied<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> infinite energy density of a point particle also defies a<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> physical explanation. Saying a photon has “wave-particle<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> duality” is like saying that it has “top-bottom<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> duality”. These are contradictory properties which cannot<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> be equal partners. A photon must either be a particle that<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> somehow exhibits wave properties or a wave that is somehow<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> quantized so that it exhibits particle properties.”<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> Skipping forward in this<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> paper, the question of quantization is addressed. This is<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> an important concept because a wave can appear to have<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> particle-like properties if the wave is quantized. The<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> following is a section titled “Strong Quantization” from<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> the paper Energetic Spacetime: The New<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> Aether.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> “It is often said that photons<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> possess quantized energy of E = ħω. However,<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> we will examine the limits of this quantization. Suppose<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> that we make an analogy to the equivalence principle having<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> a “strong” and a “weak” definition. Similarly, the<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> proposal is made that there is a “strong” and “weak”<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> definition of quantization. A strong definition of<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> quantization would imply that only integer multiples of the<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> fundamental unit are allowed. For example, if energy met the<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> strong definition of quantization, then energy would only<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> came in discrete units such as integer multiples of 1 eV.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> Photons would only come in discrete frequencies which would<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> be integer multiples of the universal fundamental frequency<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> associated with the universal unit of quantized energy.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> Obviously energy and frequency are not quantized according<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> to the “strong” definition. Instead, a photon’s energy<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> is only weakly quantized. All of a photon’s energy is<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> transferred when it is absorbed, but a photon can possess<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> any energy up to Planck energy. The same photon has<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> different energy when viewed from different frames of<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> reference.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> Compare this to angular momentum<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> which meets the definition of strong quantization. Angular<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> momentum only comes in discrete units. All angular momentum<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> in the universe only comes in integer multiples of ½ ħ.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> This is obvious with fermions and bosons, but a more<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> revealing example can be made using a carbon monoxide<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> molecule (CO) isolated in a vacuum. An isolated CO molecule<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> can only possess integer multiples of ħ angular<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> momentum. This translates into the CO molecule only being<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> able to rotate at discrete frequencies which are integer<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> multiples of its fundamental rotational frequency of 115<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> GHz. This meets the definition of strong quantization. For<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> another example, take a photon that is part of the cosmic<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> microwave background. Over the age of the universe this<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> photon has lost most of its energy. However, the photon has<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> kept 100% of its angular momentum. Angular momentum has<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> strong quantization; energy has weak quantization.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> It is proposed that all<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> quantization in the universe is ultimately traceable to<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> angular momentum being strongly quantized. When a photon is<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> absorbed by an atom, it transfers 100% of its angular<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> momentum to the atom. All the photon’s energy is also<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> transferred to the atom, but that is just a byproduct of<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> transferring its ħ unit of quantized angular<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> momentum. The amount of energy transferred from the photon<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> to the atom depends on the frame of reference of the atom.<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> However, the angular momentum transferred is independent of<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> the frame of reference.”<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> In future posts I will develop<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> this idea and show that the particle-like properties of a<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> photon can be explained by a wave that possesses quantized<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> angular momentum. <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> John M. <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> _______________________________________________ If you no<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> Light and Particles General Discussion List at<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <a href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de" target="_blank">af.kracklauer@web.de</a> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> Click here to unsubscribe <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> _______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> If you no longer wish to receive communication<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> List at <a href="mailto:jchodge@frontier.com" target="_blank">jchodge@frontier.com</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <a href=<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/jchodge%40frontier.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/jchodge%40frontier.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>><o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> Click here to unsubscribe<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> </a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'> <o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'>If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a href="mailto:phys@a-giese.de" target="_blank">phys@a-giese.de</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'><a href=<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank">"http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/phys%40a-giese.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"</a>><o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'>Click here to unsubscribe<o:p></o:p></pre><pre style='background:white'></a><o:p></o:p></pre></blockquote><p class=MsoNormal style='background:white'><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'><br><br> <o:p></o:p></span></p><div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center;background:white'><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'><hr size=1 width="99%" noshade style='color:#909090' align=center></span></div><table class=MsoNormalTable border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0 style='border-collapse:collapse'><tr><td style='padding:0in 11.25pt 0in 6.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal><a href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus" target="_blank"><span style='text-decoration:none'><img border=0 id="_x0000_i1026" src="http://static.avast.com/emails/avast-mail-stamp.png" alt="Avast logo"></span></a><o:p></o:p></p></td><td style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'><p><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#3D4D5A'>Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft.<br><a href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus" target="_blank">www.avast.com</a><o:p></o:p></span></p></td></tr></table><p class=MsoNormal style='background:white'><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif'><br>_______________________________________________ If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at <a href="mailto:af.kracklauer@web.de">af.kracklauer@web.de</a> <a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/af.kracklauer%40web.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1" target="_blank">Click here to unsubscribe </a><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></body></html>