# The Naked Scientists Forum

### Author Topic: Vern - The Photon Flux Theory  (Read 11030 times)

#### Mr. Scientist

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 1451
• Thanked: 2 times
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« on: 20/04/2009 02:43:04 »
Now with me retracting one of the derivations i made from planck calculations (purely by a bad mistake i noticed), i am finally coming to gather the theory together quite well from understanding it. What might interest you is that i have some kind of geometrical relationship which i can't help but feel is very similar to the geometry of shell theory, and, with your interest of the photons acting in shell formations, i thought you would be interested with this theory which has now been modified; ignore most of the talk between myself and another member at the beginning, but the math is displayed on the second page.

Obviously, however, more work is required. I need to see how this theory could tie in with yours geometrically from shell theorem math.

Take care

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #1 on: 20/04/2009 14:18:06 »
Now, i believe that my theory does and can answer for the Heirarchy Problem. The problem very simply put, is why do certain particles have different masses? In a ''photon-only universe'' as i have been describing slowly in this work, where ''matter seems to be'' just different frequencies of trapped light, so it would mean that their wavelengths are inversely proportional not only to their current energy, but also the type of particle created. Since we can already do this using high energy photons in labs, it should be no surprise that as experimentational methods increase in the world, that such a theory as to testing photon collisions for particle production will become more accurate.

If we assume from my paper that the lowest energy two photons can exhibit matterialistic properties as the square of the energy of a single gamma photon, then the property of energy and possible matter-creation can be put into a summation method. I calculate it as:

I think you could tie this into the Square-Of-The-Shells rule easily. The different types of particles can be composites of several shells. The reason for the composites is that only one frequency of photon can produce a stable particle. Other frequencies can be stable only when composited with other shells. The single frequency for stability is tied to the fine structure constant being a constant. If multiple frequencies could be stable, we would expect multiple fine structure constants.

C Source code for the calculator
Output of the program:
« Last Edit: 20/04/2009 14:22:22 by Vern »

#### Mr. Scientist

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 1451
• Thanked: 2 times
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #2 on: 20/04/2009 16:53:56 »
Now, i believe that my theory does and can answer for the Heirarchy Problem. The problem very simply put, is why do certain particles have different masses? In a ''photon-only universe'' as i have been describing slowly in this work, where ''matter seems to be'' just different frequencies of trapped light, so it would mean that their wavelengths are inversely proportional not only to their current energy, but also the type of particle created. Since we can already do this using high energy photons in labs, it should be no surprise that as experimentational methods increase in the world, that such a theory as to testing photon collisions for particle production will become more accurate.

If we assume from my paper that the lowest energy two photons can exhibit matterialistic properties as the square of the energy of a single gamma photon, then the property of energy and possible matter-creation can be put into a summation method. I calculate it as:

I think you could tie this into the Square-Of-The-Shells rule easily. The different types of particles can be composites of several shells. The reason for the composites is that only one frequency of photon can produce a stable particle. Other frequencies can be stable only when composited with other shells. The single frequency for stability is tied to the fine structure constant being a constant. If multiple frequencies could be stable, we would expect multiple fine structure constants.

C Source code for the calculator
Output of the program:

You may need to teach me about your sqaure of shell rule.

:)

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #3 on: 20/04/2009 18:19:02 »
There's nothing much about it to teach. The rule simply states: Starting with the mass of the outer shell of a neutron which is the difference in mass of a proton and neutron, each successive shell mass and electric charge is the square of the next shell out.

So if we number the shells from outer to inner s1 is the outer and s4 is the inner, then the mass and charge of s2 = s1 * s1. s3 = s2 * s2. s4 = s3 * s3. This in terms of the electron normalized as one unit of mass and one unit of charge.

Then proton mass = s2 + s3 + s4. Neutron mass = proton mass + s1. The strong nuclear interaction = the charge of s2 + s2 + s3 + s3. There is a predicted possible stronger interaction of s1 + s1 + s2 + s2.
« Last Edit: 28/04/2009 15:56:15 by Vern »

#### Mr. Scientist

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 1451
• Thanked: 2 times
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #4 on: 20/04/2009 18:35:30 »
There's nothing much about it to teach. The rule simply states: Starting with the mass of the outer shell of a neutron which is the difference in mass of a proton and neutron, each successive shell mass and electric charge is the square of the next shell out.

So if we number the shells from outer to inner s1 is the outer and s4 is the inner, then the mass and charge of s2 = s1 * s1. s3 = s2 * s2. s4 = s3 * s3. This in terms of the electron normalized as one unit.

I think i understand now. I just had difficulties picturing it. That's all :)

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #5 on: 20/04/2009 18:54:42 »
The relationships between the shell masses and the match up with the charge values with the strong nuclear interaction was too much of a coincidence to have no meaning. Then there is the strange dynamic of the strong nuclear interaction that the strength increases at first as protons undergo fission. This matches up exactly with the notion that the interaction comes from the s2 and s1 shells  inside the two s3 shells.

« Last Edit: 20/04/2009 18:56:37 by Vern »

#### Mr. Scientist

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 1451
• Thanked: 2 times
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #6 on: 20/04/2009 22:39:35 »
The relationships between the shell masses and the match up with the charge values with the strong nuclear interaction was too much of a coincidence to have no meaning. Then there is the strange dynamic of the strong nuclear interaction that the strength increases at first as protons undergo fission. This matches up exactly with the notion that the interaction comes from the s2 and s1 shells  inside the two s3 shells.

I think i'm following. Have you ever made or published a paper on your theory?

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #7 on: 21/04/2009 13:22:35 »
The notion is too controversial to be published. I keep a web site that explains the concept, and I explain it to anyone willing to listen.

#### DeepestBlue

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 17
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #8 on: 21/04/2009 13:54:40 »
Vern, are there predictions that your model proposes which are different outcomes from those predicted in other models?

I like the ideas within your model...(as far as a dim Architect can) but I'm aware that a scientific theory should be able to predict outcomes which can then be tested in experiment, hopefully predictions which conflict with those of previous theories.

By the way thanks for your views on the other posts, they are greatly appreciated!

#### allien

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 15
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #9 on: 22/04/2009 11:29:56 »

Quote
So if we number the shells from outer to inner s1 is the outer and s4  is the inner, then the mass and charge of s2 = s1 * s1. s3 = s2 * s2. s4 = s3 * s3.

in my theory with your notation, s1 is at the center. I prefer to define it latice -orbital instead of shell.

For proton;
s1  1 * 1,293 MeV(center)
s2  8 * 1,293
s3  32 * 1,293
s4  72 * 1,293
s5  128 * 1,293
s6  200 * 1,293
s7  284 * 1,293 (outher)

For Neutron;(center empty)
s1  8 * 1,293 MeV
s2  32 * 1,293
s3  72 * 1,293
s4  128 * 1,293
s5  200 * 1,293
s6  286 * 1,293 (outher)

Did you make shell design of sub atomic particles as well? It seems difficult unless the inner shell loose integrity.
Maybe best definition is lattice-shell for my theory[B)]
« Last Edit: 22/04/2009 11:31:54 by allien »

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #10 on: 23/04/2009 16:36:01 »
Vern, are there predictions that your model proposes which are different outcomes from those predicted in other models?

I like the ideas within your model...(as far as a dim Architect can) but I'm aware that a scientific theory should be able to predict outcomes which can then be tested in experiment, hopefully predictions which conflict with those of previous theories.

By the way thanks for your views on the other posts, they are greatly appreciated!
The major premise of the Photonic universe speculation is: The final irreducible constituent of all physical reality is the electromagnetic field.
Self consistent theories that can be produced within this construct are very limited. Flat space-time is required in order to produce relativity phenomena, for example.

My own contributions to this notion list a few testable concepts. The main one is the prediction that electric charge will develop from the bent path of a photon.

« Last Edit: 23/04/2009 16:40:42 by Vern »

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #11 on: 23/04/2009 16:39:08 »
Quote from: allien
Did you make shell design of sub atomic particles as well? It seems difficult unless the inner shell loose integrity.
Maybe best definition is lattice-shell for my theory blackeye
The shells are the sub-atomic particles. The interesting thing about the shell structure is that it clearly shows the dynamics of the strong nuclear interaction, and the source of the force.

#### common_sense_seeker

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 213
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #12 on: 28/04/2009 11:26:33 »
I've just read your webpage and think it is quite impressive: Is it possible for you to draw some pictures of exactly what you mean? How do you visualise a photon for example? What geometric shape and dynamics does it have? Presumably you don't need a kind of 'aether' for your wave propagation? Could you solve the conundrum of Young's slits for example? If you could create a graphics simulation program showing the formation of the diffraction patterns, then you would have some concrete proof of your ideas. Is this something that may be possible?
« Last Edit: 28/04/2009 12:47:10 by common_sense_seeker »

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #13 on: 28/04/2009 15:43:53 »
Well, I have some graphic schematics of a photon. It looks like the classic photon schematics. The particle-wave duality thing was never a problem for me. This photon travels through space as a wave of electric and magnetic potential force. The only time the potential force is realized is when it energizes a single electron. The electric and magnetic potential surrounding the photon's points of maximum electric and magnetic amplitude determine the photon's path through space. When the fields are symmetrical, which is usually the case, the photon moves in a straight line.

Lorentz had this pretty much figured out. He started his Lorentz Aether theory with the idea that the seat of the electric and magnetic field is the empty space. I used that idea to consider adjacent points in empty space reacting to the electric and magnetic change in neighbouring points. Then apply Maxwell's equations to model the change and it produces single photons propagating through space at the speed of light.

Here are some schematic models that I have.

« Last Edit: 28/04/2009 15:50:43 by Vern »

#### common_sense_seeker

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 213
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #14 on: 29/04/2009 14:22:11 »
There's nothing that can beat a graphics which actually shows a single electron approaching a slit and then disintegrating and interfering to form a diffraction pattern which directly corresponds to the real-life experiment.
« Last Edit: 29/04/2009 17:20:02 by common_sense_seeker »

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #15 on: 29/04/2009 15:04:05 »
When you consider that it is the fields surrounding a photon that determine its direction of travel, and it is the central point that determines the most probable place where it interacts with an electron, then all the double slit problems are solved.

An electron reacts the same because it is composed of a single photon spinning in a pattern at the speed of light. It need not disintegrate; its photon fields still determine the direction of its travel, and its points of maximum amplitude still determine its place of most probable interaction.

Edit: Here are two graphics that I just did this morning. The first one is two neutrons drawn to scale except for s3 and s4, the innermost shells. Both are smaller than one pixel at this scale. The electron is the single largest circle. It is shown superimposed over a neutron.

The second graphic below is a neutron, proton, and an electron. The electron is shown superimposed over the proton. They are to scale except for shells 3 and 4.
« Last Edit: 29/04/2009 16:47:41 by Vern »

#### common_sense_seeker

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 213
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #16 on: 29/04/2009 17:27:43 »
Vern;

I had an idea to solve the paradox of Young's slits; simply imagine a structure of a spinning helix approaching the gap. The problem is that a quantum theory of gravity is needed to maintain the structure. This is what I think is the problem with your explanation; it doesn't mention the formation of structure which can provide a reaction force. Geometric shapes which are dynamic and interacting should be all you need in solving the conundrum, in my opinion.

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #17 on: 29/04/2009 19:19:03 »
I don't understand your objection. The electron as shown, would be a structure maintained by its electric field and resonance. It could be considered a helix if it moves flat wise, which it would probably tend to do. The fields of both the electron and a photon would go through both slits, while the points would go through one of them. The portion of the field that goes through the other slit interferes with the fields that go with the points.

So I still don't see a problem with the slit experiment given this construct of matter.

#### common_sense_seeker

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 213
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #18 on: 30/04/2009 12:22:21 »
Thinking about it a bit more, wouldn't you need to model the dynamics of the atom w.r.t the metal structure which edges the slit? It is the wave interaction of the outer electron orbits of the slit edge with the incoming wave/particle which needs to be modelled. Do you understand what I mean?

btw I seem to remember that a single electron can approach a single slit and appear to interfere with itself. Is this something that you can model?
« Last Edit: 30/04/2009 13:21:37 by common_sense_seeker »

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #19 on: 30/04/2009 19:52:51 »
The two half cycles of the electron are spinning around the circumference at the speed of light. Atoms at the edge of the slit would affect the electron's path depending upon the dynamics of its spin as it went through. I haven't attempted to model those dynamics, but I can see how they could make some points of impact more probable than others.

#### common_sense_seeker

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 213
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #20 on: 01/05/2009 10:44:25 »
I know of another engineer who believes in the 'only EM waves' idea; Xavier Borg of Blaze Labs Research. How do you explain the effect of gravitational attraction using EM waves, incidentally?

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #21 on: 01/05/2009 13:10:18 »
Gravity results from the saturation property of photons. The force fields that drive a photon through space are those of electric and magnetic change. As a photon propagates through the fields of other photons its positive and negative half cycles reach saturation along its line of travel. The fields of other photons contribute toward saturation amplitude. So the line of travel must curve slightly toward increasing field strength. This is because the photon reaches saturation at an offset toward increasing field strength.

The basic idea is that the electric and magnetic amplitude of a photon's central points (positive and negative half cycles) is the maximum possible that space can support. The fields diminish in amplitude away from the points but they extend out through space to infinity.

Dr. Robert Kemp is also an advocate of an electromagnetic theory of matter. He is presently with Hughes Aircraft.
« Last Edit: 01/05/2009 13:13:57 by Vern »

#### common_sense_seeker

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 213
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #22 on: 02/05/2009 11:58:53 »
I only wish you success Vern. Personally, I tend to think in terms of gravitons and that both the electric and magnetic fields can be explained with a 'spinning helix' analogy of a force carrying particle. The scale of the gravity particle is still much smaller than we are currently familiar with though, which makes everything seem very complicated. (http://wiki.blazelabs.com/wiki/index.php?title=Kinetic_Theories_of_Gravitation)
« Last Edit: 02/05/2009 12:00:25 by common_sense_seeker »

#### Vern

• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 2072
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #23 on: 02/05/2009 14:08:19 »
I can think in terms of the particle zoo where different kinds of particles are allowed and each can have their own properties. That is the easy way. There are no constraints that force conclusions. In fact that is the way that I started trying to understand nature.

Then I discovered that there is a very simple proposition that can reasonably explain every observable in the universe. It is that every point in space reacts to electric and magnetic change of every adjacent point in space. I found that every reality in the universe can be derived from that simple premise.

Maxwell's equations pretty much describe the reactions of adjacent points in space but they need a modification to show that the points go to saturation amplitude. With that addition Maxwell's equations predict all of the observed quantum phenomena.
« Last Edit: 02/05/2009 14:17:18 by Vern »

#### common_sense_seeker

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 213
##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #24 on: 05/05/2009 15:02:17 »
Do you agree with Einstein's imagery of a space-time curvature to explain the theory of gravity?

#### The Naked Scientists Forum

##### Vern - The Photon Flux Theory
« Reply #24 on: 05/05/2009 15:02:17 »