[Vern]

EDIT - the point being that I kept starting posts and kept interrupting them to read Vern's message - and then lost my post.  And it wasn't as if Vern had anything to say.  He was showing off.  Very distracting.

You're right; I was just showing off. I thought the little swirly thing was neat.

[Vern]

But I found symmetry in the smaller faster truant - not manifest.  That's the first stable particle.  The photon.  Through some miracle it finds a partner with a precise velocity and mass to compensate for its own lack of velocity and mass.  They're both at either side of the primary field.

I glean from this that the photon consists of a minimum of two zipons that have become dislodged from the primary field. I can visualize little front to back magnets locked together. And if they are flexable, they could bend so that the front locks with the back to make a toroid. Is this the way you visualize it?

[witsend (OP)]

vern - I just don't know.  I can only get them to reach across the primary field.  You're way ahead of me.  I can also get the frequency in a two step dance arrangement.  I'll describe it in the next post.  But the actual symmetrical arrangement of these two is just too difficult for me to imagine.  That's where I need you to 'fill the gap'.  Donovan, my co-author - has got illustrations of the photon.  But I don't know how to get this loaded to the PDF file in the blog.  Maybe next week?

In any event, that level of symmetry is and always will be beyond me.  I would say a toroid would be good.  But why not that 'invisible two dimensional sphere'. Just remember, the next step is the same thing at the next interaction.  So there has to be an 'unfurling'.

Here's how I picture it the photon's interaction. They have a helical orbit on a shared axis.  The one small twists bigger, the one big twists smaller.  The meet at ground zero - the primary field - and they're then repelled into the neutral arms of the field at the junction of those two zipons - jerry's dots.  But at that junction they swap lattices, the big to small and vice versa. 

[witsend (OP)]

I thought the little swirly thing was neat. Vern



That swirly thing was neat.  It was brilliant.  I can't tell you how impressed.  I need something like that to describe these interactions.  I'm hoping against hope you'll oblige.  Maybe one day.  I guess I've still got to get you into these concepts.

EDIT - that's why it was so distracting.  It's just so eloquent and elegant.  I want this whole model described with fractal geometry.  I've written it in my introduction and conclusion.  I'm sure that a simple algorithm could describe the whole thing.

[Vern]

I made a software program that created the neutron model. It is very simple code.
Here is the source code.
Here is the class library for the code.
I don't have the code for a fractal, but have had in the past. If you could find fractal software you might could play with the algorithms and get it to resemble the image you have in mind. 

[Vern]

Here's how I picture it the photon's interaction. They have a helical orbit on a shared axis.  The one small twists bigger, the one big twists smaller.  The meet at ground zero - the primary field - and they're then repelled into the neutral arms of the field at the junction of those two zipons - jerry's dots.  But at that junction they swap lattices, the big to small and vice versa.

I can visualize these dynamics, but can't figure what is the compelling reason for it to be so.

[witsend (OP)]

Vern.  Yet again I have to go out.  I just need to tell you this.  The reason for all this is to take the energy quotient away from the particle and to put it in the field.  Very necessary.  Not only for symmetry but to explain other paradoxes.  In other words, the electromagnetic interaction is actually an interaction between the manifest and the primary field.  I SO want to explain this.  But I first want to show the electron composite and the proton.  You'll be falling asleep at all this, I'm sure.  It's possibly already obvious.  But bear with me.  I'm a plodder of some considerable distinction when it comes to plod, plodding.  I just need to take it in steps.  Bear with me.  We do not all have 2c intellects.

[Vern]

I'll be watching.

[witsend (OP)]

Hi Vern.  Hope your still there.  I'm back.  We went out for a bite.  I've just read through jerryGG38's post more carefully.  Sorry my words lose you.  Please try and understand them.  Better still tell me where I've lost you.  Glad to explain, if I possibly can. It's that eternal barrier between the trained and untrained.  I hoped concepts bridge this.  It seems to work for Vern.

Vern.  Just to recap. The interaction between the 2 zippon composite and the field is proposed as the 'driving force' so to speak of the photon's path which would then radiate outwards in the neutral field of that curved framework of the primary magnetic field.  In effect, all the photon's two composites would then do is systematically swap places with each other.  No real expenditure of energy.  Just a closed system.  The actual electromagnetic interaction comes when it is moved, not courtesy it's own energy but courtesy the the energy from the field that then rejects one half of the photon's composite.

Now I'm not sure if this expains it - but here's the best I can do for a justification - outside of my patterns.  The photon presents two charges on either side of the string.  A plus say, on one side, and a minus say, on the other side.  EDITED - The field only has one justification or charge, being, say a minus.  The result is that the plus and minus cancel out leaving a minus.  A single charge results in a single direction.  And, I've already said that the the only path for the neutral composite of the whole photon would then be between the zipons. So it goes in a straight line through the neutral  part of the primary field in a single direction and a straight path.

The problem is this.  Back to the boundary constraints and that machine.  If the field is moving the particle, and if the field has a constant velocity, as I've proposed, then this primary field can do something that that machine can't do.  It can calculate the frequency of the photon and adjust the strength of it's throw so to speak, so that it invariably moves the photon at a constant speed regardless of it's frequency.  This is patently absurd.  The more so as the photon can move through an almost infinite range of frequencies.  BTW is there an upper or lower limit?

What I've proposed is this.  The time that it takes for the slow and fast truant to reach the zeniths of their orbit relates to the zipon's time frame.  In other words, let's say the frequency of the photon is 50 zipon moments big.  So.  In relation to the time frame of the field, it would take 25 zipon moments for both truants to reach that zenith.  Another 25 zipon moments to decay back into the field.  And then another interaction and - off they go again.  Then it doesn't matter what its frequency.  Anything as small as a fraction of a zipon moment all the way up to a million million zipon moments, the photon will always then be constrained to light speed - exactly half the speed of the zipons in the field.

Is this interaction that much different to your's?  In effect you're dealing with the manifest truant. There's nothing to preclude an invisible anchoring quark, as I've referred to it.  And - to all intents and purposes the photon would always then move as, indeed they do.  The difference being that it's frequency would be marked by a 'flicker' as it disappears from view when it decays and interacts with the field. 

This post is way too long.  I feel you wincing - right across the Atlantic.  
EDIT - actually I've just looked at it.  It's not too bad.

[Vern]

This is patently absurd.  The more so as the photon can move through an almost infinite range of frequencies.  BTW is there an upper or lower limit?

As far as anyone knows there is no low limit or high limit for the frequency of the electromagnetic field.

I read through your dynamic of zipons becoming photons a couple of times; I think I get the picture. To me the photon is the most elemental constituent of all physical reality. It doesn't matter to the concept how the photon is constructed; if it behaves like the photons we know about it fits within my concept.

I'm trying to fit together how you make a proton. The image in your Blog is neat. Is this your concept of a proton construct?

[witsend (OP)]

Yes.  But look at the PDF file. It's at the end of the magnetic field blog.  It's got more illustrations.  Donovan drew the charge of each truant at the 'equator' so to speak.  It may have been better balanced if the equator was along the north south axis.  But it makes no difference.  The proton - in my model has a constant interaction with all three truants - so charge and mass vary.  becomes hugely complex with the neutron. interaction.

[Vern]

We're in the middle of a tornado watch; one is on the ground a few miles away; going the other direction. I may loose power any minute.

I'll search through the Blog.

[witsend (OP)]

WOW.  You live in TORNEDO ALLEY? That's so amazing.  I hope you're safe.  Have you got a basement?  GOSH.  I've always been so intrigued with this.  I keep vidoes of tornedo chasers.

Take care.  If we lose touch I'll understand.  Hope you're safe.

[Vern]

So far so good; two tornadoes came through; one was about 10 miles south, the other about 5 miles north. It seems to be calming down now; I hope it is not the calm before ... []

I searched the Blog but the only graphics I found was the circuit.

[witsend (OP)]

I've been giggling again.  WHAT ARE YOU DOING???  THIS IS AN UNMENTIONABLE.  Glad you're safe.  Still giggling.  It's there.  I'm sure.  I saw it myself some time back.  AT THE END OF THE BLOG.

EDIT  [] [] [] [] [] [:I] []

[Vern]

When I click on the link at the bottom it wants me to sign up for an account. I don't think I want to join up.

[witsend (OP)]

You're impossible.  I've had the best laugh I've had in ages.  I just hope that trawlers wont get the wrong idea about me while they're stealing my brilliant ideas. 

[Vern]

It looks like we survived the storm; the all clear just sounded. I'll see if I can paste a shot from my TV signal. Looks like I have to fix the date on my digital camera. It thinks it is 2006.

[witsend (OP)]

Couldn't make out the alley.  Is it the red area - tornedos in lilac?  Have you got a basement?  How much warning do you get.  And is your house wood or brick?

[Vern]

They depict tornados on this TV newscast with little yellowish curls; one is near England and one is near Cotton Plant. The one that came close is the one at Cotton Plant.

We live in a brick house and have a fraidy hole but we seldom use it. The TV news tracks them pretty good, but when you lose power you are in the dark; in more ways than one. []

Fixed my camera date. Storm is heading toward Memphis now.