The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Photon Theory of Matter  (Read 20188 times)

Offline Mr. Scientist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=profile&
    • View Profile
    • Time Theory
Photon Theory of Matter
« on: 03/10/2009 17:55:42 »
So, i noticed Vern as back, so i wanted to talk about a photon-only universe.

Essentially, are all forms of matter but differential types of trapped energy in the form of photons?

It seems no accident of nature to not assume that photons are the origin of all matter, with the discovery of the antiparticle. A particle when it comes in contact with its antiparticle it can transform back into massless radiation. In fact, all types of antiparticle-particle collisons ultimately resort their intrinsic proponents back to photon energy.

If all matter where to be forms of photon energy, (or trapped light), then it would mean that in the very beginning, the universe did not begin in a quark-soup of ionized particles, but rather an electromagnetic appearance of the fundamental unit of energy; in fact, a massive cloud of these particles would have been a major gravitational influence very early on in the universe, and it wouldn't be until after the inflationary phase of the universe would their gravitational influence be dilluted within the framework of spacetime.

What are peoples thoughts on a photon-only universe?





 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #1 on: 03/10/2009 18:03:28 »
A universe in which the final irreducible constituent of all physical reality is the electromagnetic field rules out many widely held notions. Black holes could not form, for example. There could have been no Big Bang, for another example. It would mean that Einstein's theory of relativity is wrong. In such a construct for the universe, relativity phenomena occurs naturally in flat space-time as H Ziegler said in 1909.

I find the idea fascinating. I have traced it back to Maxwell; some say that even Newton held that view. Also, I have never found any experimental evidence that does not support that view of matter.

If anyone cares to explore this notion there are a few posts about it here in the New Theories forum.
« Last Edit: 03/10/2009 18:29:21 by Vern »
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8667
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #2 on: 03/10/2009 21:05:51 »
"Essentially, are all forms of matter but differential types of trapped energy in the form of photons?"
Since matter has mass and photons don't it follows that matter is not composed of photons.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #3 on: 03/10/2009 21:27:22 »
Well if you place your light bulb beside you I'm sure you will see 'photons'. But what creates them is interactions of matter mediated by 'virtuality' :)
So that 'photonic' universe may exist but I don't think so as all processes creating 'photons' starts as interactions with matter, ah, as far as I know?
---
Although 'virtual photons' don't.
But then, on the other tentacle they're outside Plank scale?
So?
« Last Edit: 03/10/2009 21:28:58 by yor_on »
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #4 on: 03/10/2009 21:33:19 »
As long as we are discussing from the 'inside' of SpaceTime that is?
 

Offline Mr. Scientist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=profile&
    • View Profile
    • Time Theory
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #5 on: 04/10/2009 06:57:25 »
"Essentially, are all forms of matter but differential types of trapped energy in the form of photons?"
Since matter has mass and photons don't it follows that matter is not composed of photons.

Some kind of decay processes does not seem to care for one having mass and the other not. If it where as easy to say that light has no mass, and so light cannot make up mass, seems circular.
Everyday, particles of mass are fluxing into energy, and energy into mass, caring not of what fundamental difference we may ascribe them.
 

Offline Linda_ol

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • [url=http://v-traffic.net/health-insurance/mail-handlers-health-insurance/]mail handlers health insurance[/url]
    • View Profile
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #6 on: 04/10/2009 10:22:55 »
Thank you, ttn, for your criticisms of that silly elementary wave theory.

Id like to throw a few things out there regarding quantum physics, though.

First, quantum mechanics isnt incompatible with relativity.  No matter or information is transmitted faster than the speed of light when a wave function collapses, even if two entangled particles are measured at events outside each others light cones.  No particle is transmitted between the events.  The system as a whole happens to be in one state or another, and as a whole is irreducible to the two separate particles.  Since the outcome of a measurement is random, theres no way to influence the outcome and use it as a sort of code to send information to the other measurer. 

Anyway, to use better jargon, local causation is still possible in theories.  Local hidden variable theories arent.  Non-local hidden variable theories would violate relativity, and are extremely speculative anyway because they assert the existence of unknown properties of a particle for which we have no way to test.  Quantum physics, with its random, non-deterministic results, and its relativistic with local causation version, quantum field theory, work just fine.

Another thing is that classical mechanics, on the observable scale, emerges from quantum mechanics, not the other way around.  Its extremely naive to try to interpret physical entities on a very small scale as being entities on the big scale but shrunk.  I think this is where people have the most trouble with quantum physics.  It doesnt look like what they see, so they reject it.  And the difficulty with which one pictures QM probably messes up some concepts in their heads.

A wave is something that propagates as a wave, can be built from sine/cosine functions, and experiences constructive/destructive interference.  The fundamental particles satisfy this.  They do, in fact, propagate as waves.  And they come in discrete packets of energy--that is, if you have a wave of electromagnetic radiation with frequency f, you can only have E, 2E, 3E, etc. as the energy of that wave.  Each packet of E in the wave is called a photon.  And the packets we observe in real life tend to be localized in space--something localized in space with a set energy.  Its convenient to think of it as a particle.  Though I should also say that since its localized in space, its really made up of waves of multiple frequencies.  But is still only a single packet/particle.  So rather than have a set energy, its A a wave with one such energy, B with another energy, etc., and has those probabilities of interacting with a charged particle as though it definitely had that energy.  And this is what theyre typically called: "particles".

On the large scale, we observe waves that are due to the dynamics of particles.  This is because the conditions needed to result in wave motion are extremely simple and general, and appear in many places throughout nature.  That doesnt mean the wave motion in quantum physics is due to smaller component particles, or ropes, or disturbances in an aether, or anything of the like.  For others here who are still attracted to fringe theories...
« Last Edit: 14/10/2009 15:58:32 by BenV »
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #7 on: 04/10/2009 12:54:30 »
Quote from: Bored chemist
"Essentially, are all forms of matter but differential types of trapped energy in the form of photons?"
Since matter has mass and photons don't it follows that matter is not composed of photons.
That argument does not work. There is huge evidence that photons don't have mass because photons are mass. Within this concept all of the mass of any physical thing is simply the sum of the photons that comprise it.

There is no evidence to the contrary.
« Last Edit: 04/10/2009 13:18:02 by Vern »
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #8 on: 04/10/2009 13:00:16 »
Quote from: yor_on
Although 'virtual photons' don't.
But then, on the other tentacle they're outside Plank scale?
So?
The evidence that matter is comprised of photons is far greater than the evidence that virtual anything exists. There is absolutely no evidence that virtual photons exist. They are part of the magic that Quantum Theory needs so that it can avoid reality.

Quote
So that 'photonic' universe may exist but I don't think so as all processes creating 'photons' starts as interactions with matter, ah, as far as I know?
We could just as easily say that all processes creating matter start with interactions with photons. :)
« Last Edit: 04/10/2009 14:12:37 by Vern »
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #9 on: 04/10/2009 13:14:12 »
Quote from: Linda_ol
First, quantum mechanics isnt incompatible with relativity.  No matter or information is transmitted faster than the speed of light when a wave function collapses, even if two entangled particles are measured at events outside each others light cones.
There is no evidence that entangled particles assume their measured state at the time of observation. That they do is only assumed because Quantum Physics predicts it and Quantum Physics is good at predicting other things. In the real world, entangled particles assume their reality state at the time of their creation. When the state is measured (observed) we can know what that state is.

 

Offline Ron Hughes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 363
    • View Profile
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #10 on: 04/10/2009 18:00:17 »
The inflationary period is a theory. It is an absolute requirement for QM. QM requires the BB to be a soup of quasi-phantom particles because a BB of pure radiation destroys their standard model. The proof that the BB could have been pure radiation occurred at the Standford linear accelerator in 1997. They collided two beams of radiation that turned four photons into an electron and an anti-electron. The assumption that gravity did not exist during the first stage of the BB is based on another assumption that we understand gravity. As far I know, no one knows the mechanics of how gravity works. I have an idea that explains gravity based on changing frames of reference but that would be for another thread.
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #11 on: 04/10/2009 19:08:48 »
Quote from: Ron Hughes
The inflationary period is a theory. It is an absolute requirement for QM. QM requires the BB to be a soup of quasi-phantom particles because a BB of pure radiation destroys their standard model.
I don't understand how QM theory even requires that the universe was created out of a Big Bang event. As far as I know the theory works just as well for a steady state universe. QM theory does break down in a photon-only universe. Gone are quarks, gluon's, W, Z, and the like. They are not needed. And no, none of them have been observed; just as the Higgs will never be observed. :) We have become very proficient in explaining how unobservable particles must have produced a set of observable particles. 

We can easily show a mechanism that creates gravitational force in a photon-only universe.

Quote from: the link
A photon moving through radiated fields (photon flux) of other photons must then reach its positive and negative amplitude limits taking into account the existing photon flux. Because of this each photon's point of maximum amplitude is offset toward increasing field strength of the photon flux. That is the cause of gravity. It cannot possibly be otherwise.
« Last Edit: 04/10/2009 19:27:00 by Vern »
 

Offline lightarrow

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4586
  • Thanked: 7 times
    • View Profile
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #12 on: 04/10/2009 19:23:27 »
"Essentially, are all forms of matter but differential types of trapped energy in the form of photons?"
Since matter has mass and photons don't it follows that matter is not composed of photons.
It's not so simple, even if the idea that all forms of energy is photons is speculation.
A photon has certainly zero mass; two photons...it depends! If they don't travel exactly in the same direction, the system of the two has mass! See:
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=7762.0
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=19617.0

Furthermore, if you confine photons inside a box, the system of confined photons has mass.
« Last Edit: 04/10/2009 19:29:59 by lightarrow »
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #13 on: 04/10/2009 19:34:02 »
Quote from: lightarrow
A photon has certainly zero mass; two photons...it depends! If they don't travel exactly in the same direction,
If two electrons separated by some distance continuously pass a single photon back and forth for some period of time, doesn't that photon contribute to the mass of the system during that time?

Edit: Assuming that the two electrons are considered as a system. This would be the same as a mirrored box IMHO. :)
« Last Edit: 04/10/2009 21:39:33 by Vern »
 

Offline The Craftsman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #14 on: 04/10/2009 20:50:41 »
"Case Seventeen: Electrons show their wave structure. Electrons exhibit a wave structure that is well known. This structure is exactly as it would necessarily be if the electron were composed of one photon trapped in a pattern."  excerpt from link by Linda_ol

Just an example but...
the photon is fundamental
the string is fundamental

It kind of seems like we're tripping sideways into an alternate explanation/rendition of string theory here.

 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #15 on: 04/10/2009 21:38:23 »
Quote from: The Craftsman
It kind of seems like we're tripping sideways into an alternate explanation/rendition of string theory here.
I don't think so. I see no resemblance between the notion of a universe comprised only of photons and a universe comprised only of fundamental strings. All the string theories I have studied require multiple dimensions. These are completely unnecessary in the various photon-only hypotheses. 
« Last Edit: 04/10/2009 22:49:19 by Vern »
 

Offline The Craftsman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #16 on: 04/10/2009 21:52:57 »
Fair enough.  I was looking at it from the view of fundamental composition, so the similarities are superficial.  But alas I am unfamiliar with the photon-only proposition, if you have any links with maths, or analysis that's derivative or comparative to the standard model that would be helpful.  I'm here to learn after all.
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #17 on: 04/10/2009 22:26:35 »
I would never presume that I might teach anything. :) I am also here to learn. When I first started investigating the photon-only universe concept, my greatest surprise was that I could not find any experimental evidence that refuted the concept. The concept is so restrictive that if it is not real there should be easy-to-find evidence to show that it is not real.

Just do a Google search for Photonic Universe, photon theory of everything, and combinations of that phrase and you will be rewarded with many photon-only hypothesises.

As far as I can determine, the photon-only universe concept began with Maxwell. My own small contribution to the notion is the target of the link. The Square-Of-The-Shells rule is the most satisfying for me. It shows how the nuclear interactions are electromagnetic processes.
 

Offline lightarrow

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4586
  • Thanked: 7 times
    • View Profile
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #18 on: 05/10/2009 12:10:41 »
Quote from: lightarrow
A photon has certainly zero mass; two photons...it depends! If they don't travel exactly in the same direction,
If two electrons separated by some distance continuously pass a single photon back and forth for some period of time, doesn't that photon contribute to the mass of the system during that time?

Edit: Assuming that the two electrons are considered as a system. This would be the same as a mirrored box IMHO. :)
IMHO too. :)
 

Offline Mr. Scientist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=profile&
    • View Profile
    • Time Theory
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #19 on: 05/10/2009 14:25:29 »
I would never presume that I might teach anything. :) I am also here to learn. When I first started investigating the photon-only universe concept, my greatest surprise was that I could not find any experimental evidence that refuted the concept. The concept is so restrictive that if it is not real there should be easy-to-find evidence to show that it is not real.

Just do a Google search for Photonic Universe, photon theory of everything, and combinations of that phrase and you will be rewarded with many photon-only hypothesises.

As far as I can determine, the photon-only universe concept began with Maxwell. My own small contribution to the notion is the target of the link. The Square-Of-The-Shells rule is the most satisfying for me. It shows how the nuclear interactions are electromagnetic processes.

But the neutrino causes problems no?
 

Offline Ron Hughes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 363
    • View Profile
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #20 on: 05/10/2009 14:47:58 »
The beam collision I spoke of above is meaningless?
 

Offline Mr. Scientist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=profile&
    • View Profile
    • Time Theory
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #21 on: 05/10/2009 14:56:50 »
The beam collision I spoke of above is meaningless?

Ill have a look.
 

Offline Mr. Scientist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1451
  • Thanked: 2 times
  • http://www.facebook.com/#/profile.php?ref=profile&
    • View Profile
    • Time Theory
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #22 on: 05/10/2009 15:00:16 »
The inflationary period is a theory. It is an absolute requirement for QM. QM requires the BB to be a soup of quasi-phantom particles because a BB of pure radiation destroys their standard model. The proof that the BB could have been pure radiation occurred at the Standford linear accelerator in 1997. They collided two beams of radiation that turned four photons into an electron and an anti-electron. The assumption that gravity did not exist during the first stage of the BB is based on another assumption that we understand gravity. As far I know, no one knows the mechanics of how gravity works. I have an idea that explains gravity based on changing frames of reference but that would be for another thread.

Seems true enough. I was already aware of the first observation of photons creating matter at the acadamy in 1997. However, gravity would have run the show in the beginning, despite what you say - just not in the conventional form. It's called quantum gravity, and this is in fact a unification of all the four fundemental forces. It seems that the universe arose from a ''gravitational singularity'' - the only solutions that make some kind of sense so far from relativistic mathematics.
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #23 on: 05/10/2009 17:23:25 »
Quote from: Mr. Scientist
But the neutrino causes problems no?
Yes; a particle made of a photon trapped in a repeating pattern would have an electrical charge. Only by sandwiching the shells can we make a neutral particle.

I speculate that neutrinos might be spin polarized photons if they exist.
 

Offline Vern

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2072
    • View Profile
    • Photonics
Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #24 on: 05/10/2009 17:26:18 »
The beam collision I spoke of above is meaningless?
No; not meaningless; it proves your point. If the universe arose out of a Big Bang, the first stuff to exist could have been pure radiation just as you speculated.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Photon Theory of Matter
« Reply #24 on: 05/10/2009 17:26:18 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums