[Bored chemist]

Photons only exist at C. They don't need a "protophoton".

What is the mechanism for photon production then?

And, when your idea predicts something silly like a continuously increasing speed of light, it's time to ditch it.

It does not predict an increasing speed of light anymore, I changed it.

There is errors in the figure: for the electron the filled circle on T_2 must be deleted and two open circles must be added to S_4. For the positron the open circle on T_2 must be deleted and two filled circles must be added to S_4.

Do you not recognise that the diagram makes no sense?

[talanum1 (OP)]

What part of it does not make sense?  The charges are encoded as added or left out events of spacetime. Whatever does the computation reads these.

Interpret the circles as circles in the corresponding Riemann Sphere and stretch the circles (not the small circles) until they all overlap.

[Colin2B]

What is the mechanism for photon transmission then?

It is an electromagnetic wave - a varying electric and magnetic field - which propagates at c in a vacuum. As such it has no rest mass and in accordance with Newtons laws will continue to propagate until something stops it.

[Bored chemist]

What part of it does not make sense? 

Is there anyone reading this who knows what any part of tantalum1's diagram means?

[Bobolink]

Is there anyone reading this who knows what any part of tantalum1's diagram means?

It is hard to get meaning from something meaningless, even though he did arbitrarily throw in the scientific term Riemann Sphere. 

[talanum1 (OP)]

It doesn't make sense if it does not specify a known property or if it is inconsistent with a formula. Please specify what it is inconsistent with.

If space paths are helixes then speed through it determines angular momentum. Therefore the size of the magnetic moment of an electron would be proportional to speed. Is this the case?

[Bored chemist]

It doesn't make sense if it does not specify a known property or if it is inconsistent with a formula. Please specify what it is inconsistent with.

No, it just doesn't make sense.

It is "not even wrong".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong

[talanum1 (OP)]

Can you logically prove it is nonsense?

[Kryptid]

If space paths are helixes then speed through it determines angular momentum. Therefore the size of the magnetic moment of an electron would be proportional to speed. Is this the case?

No. The electron's magnetic moment is a constant: −9.284764 × 10⁻²⁴ J/T

[talanum1 (OP)]

Thank you Kryptid.

[Bored chemist]

Just in case anyone missed the question.

What part of it does not make sense? 

Is there anyone reading this who knows what any part of tantalum1's diagram means?

[talanum1 (OP)]

It is an electromagnetic wave - a varying electric and magnetic field - which propagates at c in a vacuum. As such it has no rest mass and in accordance with Newtons laws will continue to propagate until something stops it.

  But it has no inertia, and inertia is required to keep moving at the same velocity.

  I can keep the forces on the photon and just specify that there is resistive forces due to the permittivity and permeability of space. The forces point in the direction opposing the momentum direction. At the speed of light the four forces cancel.

  This gives a reason why the speed of light is c m/s. It also gives a mechanism for the reduced speed of light in a medium: the resistive forces are larger.

[Bored chemist]

inertia is required to keep moving at the same velocity.

It has momentum.
This discussion would work better if you learned some science.

[Bored chemist]

  This gives a reason why the speed of light is c m/s. It also gives a mechanism for the reduced speed of light in a medium: the resistive forces are larger.

Congratulations. You just worked out what Maxwell's equations told everybody about 150 years ago.

[talanum1 (OP)]

The photon moves according to Newton's Laws. How are Newton's Laws implemented?

The photon must copy itself onto the next spacetime event and destroy the previous copy. It must do so repeatedly.

[Bored chemist]

The photon moves according to Newton's Laws.

Would you like another guess?

The photon must copy itself onto the next spacetime event and destroy the previous copy. It must do so repeatedly.

Or it could just... you know... move.

[Colin2B]

The photon must copy itself onto the next spacetime event and destroy the previous copy. It must do so repeatedly.

It doesn’t copy anything. Does an ocean wave move by copying and destroying?

[talanum1 (OP)]

Does an ocean wave move by copying and destroying?

I got to an answer of "no" after picturing it, but I don't know why.

An object "O" moves if: it is no longer at point x, it is now at point x + delta x, by virtue of having momentum in the x direction. Does this describe a sufficient mechanism for propagating an object?

[Kryptid]

Does this describe a sufficient mechanism for propagating an object?

Yes. If an object is travelling at constant speed, and there are no forces to speed it up or slow it down, then it will continue to travel at that constant speed.