Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?

  • 272 Replies
  • 112626 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #150 on: 17/11/2011 11:47:42 »
Here is an article discussing in non mathematical terms some properties of gamma-ray bursts:

http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/science/know_l1/bursts.html

It is interesting to note that their spectrum is not a black body distribution and there is no frequency produced below x-ray (correct me if i'm wrong), which is a mystery...
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma-ray_burst
« Last Edit: 21/11/2011 06:47:29 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #151 on: 28/11/2011 08:40:03 »
Anisotropy of the Universe?

See this free article:

http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.0941v4

Uniformity of the Universe was based on very limited data and an already accepted model based on space-time.

If you want to look at my theory from a standing point of view of the String Theory, you must understand that the spatial dimensions would be energy dimensions observed in 3D space in my theory.

Dimensions that do not interact in time would be a kind of dark energy (not to confound with the Dark Energy or negative energy, though there is possible links, i doubt about negative energy)... I think entanglement is how information is conserved. Combined with the speed of light and the fixed angular momentum of massive elementary particles, it generates the 3 dimensions of energy and the uncertainty principle by switching instantly the spin of elementary particles (updated every Planck time?) according to an ordered causality chain containing all the universe.
 
« Last Edit: 19/12/2011 03:03:23 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline terrildactl

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • 10
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #152 on: 28/11/2011 20:42:42 »
I agree with all of what you have said, much can be added to everything. Truth in science is teaching and listening to every entity. I believe that when we can develop different instruments, we will find that the universe is full of field lines emanating from every mass, everywhere. every atom has an energy field emanating from it. Larger mass, larger field lines. we will soon be using the plasma energy in outer space, it is packed full  of energy. All of the EM fields, are producing an electrical output. Theuniverse is a huge capacitor. We will soon learn to detect this energy surrounding everything. Every planet, every star,everything. Yes gravity, and Electromagnetic are two competing forces. I know there are forces we have not even found yet, the chances are very much in my favor. So my answer is yes I agree with you.

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #153 on: 29/11/2011 03:40:46 »
If you read carefully, you will see that i don't expect new forces. And what i call dark energy is not really energy, because it does not exist in the time dimension, only quanta of energy, which are relative to each other, are useful energy. Though the invisible parts might possibly be useful in terms of information.

Here you can find the flaws of the QCD model of the strong nuclear force:

http://www.tau.ac.il/~elicomay/
 
Comay has a model based on magnetic monopoles, interesting, but i don't think it is right. In my opinion, it is a gravitational pole or if you prefer, an inertial pole...
« Last Edit: 05/12/2011 11:42:11 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline terrildactl

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • 10
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #154 on: 30/11/2011 15:40:01 »
Do you think photons can be captured into a mobulous loop? Which would fold itself 180 degrees back upon itself. Or what could happen?

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #155 on: 01/12/2011 03:06:43 »
All elementary particles are photons rotating in a circular orbit. Curvature of light is necessary to produce a new particle from photons.

The proton, made of 3 elementary quarks, is a mould producing Pi mesons. Pi mesons are not made of the same types of quarks than protons are made, contrary to what the standard model says... It is obvious if you look mass-energy and size. My model is very simple. Muons are included in the geometry of both, the proton and the pi mesons.
« Last Edit: 19/12/2011 03:01:22 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #156 on: 15/12/2011 15:36:10 »
Why is there so much heavy elements in these "young" galaxies?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/11/111102092929.htm


Just to show the level of confidence, here is an article about earlier measurements of the anisotropy of the universe. Is it "the axis of evil" or "the axis of truth"?

http://www.astronomy.com/~/link.aspx?_id=001cb59f-d985-4fd7-a01e-c31716287259

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=universal-alignment
« Last Edit: 15/12/2011 16:54:18 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #157 on: 05/01/2012 18:22:24 »
Euclidean space is totally compatible with the cosmological data.

See this article: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/0310/0310808v2.pdf

They forgot something very important to account for the validity of an Euclidean space model: the gravitational redshifts of a stationary spacetime. There is no metric expansion of space, only energy expansion in space!!! They should have added the gravitational redshifts to the special relativity redshifts... This will correct the magnitude discrepancies of figure 5.

About gravitational redshift:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshift

« Last Edit: 06/01/2012 00:07:18 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #158 on: 17/01/2012 04:57:42 »
You still don't buy my explanation of the uncertainty principle?

Read this: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/01/120116095529.htm

http://arxiv.org/abs/1201.1833
« Last Edit: 13/05/2013 19:17:09 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #159 on: 24/01/2012 02:01:07 »
Here is "Four Problems for the Standard Model of Cosmology and Their Resolution by Inflation"
http://www.jupiterscientific.org/sciinfo/cosmology/fourproblems.html

The flatness is a proof that space is euclidean. And you can add Dark Energy to the cosmological problems...

Another article about cosmological problems (biased on some points)
http://open-site.org/Science/Physics/Cosmology_Problems_Big_Bang

And evidence of the actual BigBang model (biased in the lack of a more exhaustive look at cosmological problems, denial)
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/astronomy/bigbang.html

« Last Edit: 24/01/2012 02:06:46 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #160 on: 10/02/2012 08:34:54 »
Here is the original article about the Dark Flow by Kashlinsky:
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/pdf/276176main_ApJLetters_20Oct2008.pdf

A recent article against it:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1111.0631v2.pdf
http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2011/12/supernova-research-challenges-cosmic-dark-flow-mystery.ars

First data analysis from the Planck satellite seems to show a real Dark Flow (same as previous link above):
http://www.astronomy.com/~/link.aspx?_id=001cb59f-d985-4fd7-a01e-c31716287259

Other links or comments are welcome!

« Last Edit: 10/02/2012 08:41:24 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline JD7651

  • First timers
  • *
  • 1
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #161 on: 13/02/2012 04:33:26 »
Is this like the Landau theory of the quasiparticle: as n-well is to energy field could this also be gravator-at least in menkowski space-as n-well?

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #162 on: 13/02/2012 21:35:42 »
I don't know much about the Landau theory, my theory defines the ground state of elementary particles. I haven't thought much about vibrational energy but i don't see any contradiction with the existence of quasiparticle, particularly the phonon.

In my theory, everything comes from the expansion of electric charges. All elementary particles are made of two half charges, including the photon, rotating in a circular orbit having an angular momentum of h/2pi. It is the ground state. The electric charges are basically a superfluid unless there is a chaotic pattern of vibrational energy between them. So superfluid forms of matter and supraconductive materials are made of charges vibrating with a non chaotic pattern. For a supraconductor, you just need a vibrational pattern to liberate electrons for conduction so you can get it at a higher temperature than superfluid materials.

About the spin entanglement, both half charges are entangled since their creation with the entire universe. An elementary particle is thus entangled on spin with 50% on its left half charge and 50% with its right half charge. The spinning strings between particles have an infinite torsion rigidity (superfluid) permitting instaneous changes in spins (no time dimension for non-local interaction). There is no energy exchange unless a particle changes its spin by 90 degrees or more (?)...

Space is Euclidean, but the three dimensions we perceive are in fact relative distances between elementary particles connected by strings following the laws of Relativity. Space and time are related by energy, there is no absolute fabric of spacetime. Relativity is a subset of a Quantum unified theory and not the reverse. There is just three dimensions of space but many of energy in space. Time is quantized in Planck time multiplied by 2pi...

Do you have some links about the n-well? I suppose you mean graviton and not gravatar... All forces are mediated by photons...


« Last Edit: 16/02/2012 00:13:30 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #163 on: 15/02/2012 09:02:53 »
Wow!!!

If it has not been already dismissed...

A hole in the universe???
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn12546-biggest-void-in-space-is-1-billion-light-years-across.html

http://arxiv.org/pdf/0704.0908v2.pdf

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap110321.html

About a week ago, i was thinking that there should be such a hole in the universe...
« Last Edit: 16/02/2012 00:13:07 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #164 on: 01/03/2012 04:39:52 »

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #165 on: 05/03/2012 23:32:59 »
cosmological constant calculation is wrong:

http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-03-weve-cosmological-constant-wrong.html


Black holes as a source of electron-positron pairs production from gamma rays?  (photons and curvature) :o)

http://www.space.com/4837-source-mysterious-antimatter.html

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
« Last Edit: 22/03/2012 23:03:50 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #167 on: 27/04/2012 00:36:58 »
There is no higgs boson... Even if it's not a dark matter particle at around of 125 GeV...

Energy can't have a higher velocity than the speed of light because it is made of light. It is not that i wouldn't like to travel faster... but it is the way it is...

http://phys.org/news/2012-04-elusive-higgs-particle.html

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2012/apr/24/gamma-rays-hint-at-dark-matter

The fireball theory trying to explain gamma ray bursts takes a punch:
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2012/apr/23/cosmic-ray-theory-gets-the-cold-shoulder


« Last Edit: 27/04/2012 04:57:03 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline Ęthelwulf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 358
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #168 on: 27/04/2012 02:31:59 »
There is no higgs boson...

http://phys.org/news/2012-04-elusive-higgs-particle.html

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2012/apr/24/gamma-rays-hint-at-dark-matter

The fireball theory trying to explain gamma ray bursts takes a hit:
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2012/apr/23/cosmic-ray-theory-gets-the-cold-shoulder

There is a situation where certain light rays come from a region with infinite curvature (time-like singularity) in field theories.

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #169 on: 27/04/2012 03:01:01 »
Infinite curvature is a mathematical aberration.

I invite you to read my entire theory and watch this BBC documentary: Who's Afraid of a Big Black Hole (For those who have not seen it).



*

Offline Ęthelwulf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 358
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #170 on: 27/04/2012 03:05:33 »
I have read it all. This is all I have done at this place really for the last few days :P

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #171 on: 27/04/2012 03:34:43 »
There is a few mistakes i have to correct but no one is very important because they have no impact. But, i must say that though i am sure that space and time were there before the BigBang i am not sure about their true nature.  And I don't know much about the rate of expansion but it is due to the decrease in acceleration (or curvature) of our black hole of origin as it grew by eating matter around it. There was certainly some leftovers at the BB. It means that there is no energy cost to space expansion unless you can apply it when you throw a ball (locally). The red shift is due to gravity, relative velocity and; reflection and absorption-emission which are not as fundamental as the first two causes.
« Last Edit: 11/06/2012 06:10:30 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #172 on: 29/04/2012 07:19:05 »
Is it a proof of retro-causality or a proof of an absolute instaneity? If it is instantaneity, then entanglement information is not limited by its entangled quanta of energy like i thought, so it can explain easily the two slit experiment and its other variants. Euclidean space seems to be possible after all... Usable information is still limited by the speed of light though...

http://phys.org/news/2012-04-quantum-physics-mimics-spooky-action.html

http://arxiv.org/abs/1203.4834

*

Offline Bengt

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 53
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #173 on: 29/04/2012 19:42:09 »
All particles consist of nested strings.
Some of these string-nests are stable, others are not. Photons are examples of one of the smaller stable string-nests that we can easily observe. Examples of less stable string nests are the large number of short lived string entanglements that we see immediately after a high speed particle collision.
Dark energy is most likely primary strings floating around in the universe. Dark matter is most likely strings in early stages of entangling and bonding into particle embryos.
The acceleration of the expansion of our part of the universe is probably the result of the partial pressure of energy rich strings and string-nest embryos expanding into less energy-rich parts of the universe, despite local gravity between matter.     

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #174 on: 02/05/2012 03:29:04 »
A very interesting point of view of a philosopher with a very good physics background about the interpretation made by the standard model's advocates. Specially interesting near the end, talking about time reversal symmetry which obviously is in disagreement with the entropic principle...

http://bigthink.com/ideas/18091

Sorry Ben, but i have to read your theory to see what changes you have made since last year, because i had found a basic flaw in your last year version that couldn't explain the motion of celestial bodies...

*

Offline Pmb

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1838
  • Physicist
    • View Profile
    • New England Science Constortium
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #175 on: 02/05/2012 19:59:48 »
A quantum of light (a photon), may possess an infinitesimal energy and always travel at C in vacuum.
Why do you say infinitesimal energy? It is quite possible to have a photon with a finite energy.
Matter can be convert into light and light into Matter.
That needs more explaination than what you gave here. Under certain certain circmstances matter can be convert into light and under certain certain circmstances light can be changed into matter. You can't simply take an electron and change it into "energy"? Mostly because that's not quite physical description. If you are given a proton and an anti-proton then you can change it into two photons which has a particular energy and matter distribution.
Light is a very simple electromagnetic wave. It seems evident that light is the basic building block of everything.
That is not true. It's a very common misunderstanding based on a common misconception.

For those who would say that the electromagnetic force is not fundamental, i would reply that how can it be if a photon may have an infinitesimal energy?
A photon cannot have an infinitesimal energy. In fact nothing can.
I know it sounds too easy to be true and it turns everything upside down but it is logical and beautiful...
It doesn't sound too easy to be true since I don't seem that it's at all possible.

If a photon wave enter a highly curved spacetime region, it could catch its tail:the wave could close on itself.
You are operating on the misunderstanding that a photon has a spatial extention, it does not.
It would stop moving at the speed of light according to outside observers, it would appear to them as a particle and it would even create a gravitational field... You just need curving spacetime and light... Every type of particles and forces
General Relativity predicts that a photon of zero spatial extention will have a speed with is different to the valid c (where c is the speed of light in special relativity = 3.00x10^8 m/s). But the photon itself can curve spacetime to any desireable value. All one has to do is change the frame of reference and the speed is changed and this the curvature changes.
I have been thinking about this for many days now and i don't see any contradiction with existing proved theory that could deny this theory.
The contradiction is quite different than what your personal theory states. But this is probably due to your misundering of certain concepts in physics.

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #176 on: 02/05/2012 23:43:55 »
My theory evolved from the start, so there is no point to criticize the beginning.

Read it all and think before making any comment. The latest conclusions supersede the earliest ones.

By infinitesimal, i just meant there is no minimum limit to the energy of photons, not that it is not finite. Later, i have changed my mind...

You have no proof that everything is not made of light. All the universe is one wave of light, but you have to read my theory to understand what i mean by light...

How much you wanna bet?

You think i misunderstand some concepts of physics but i think you are more than i am... We obviously all are...

You are supposing GR is 100% right, which is obviously not. It is not a complete theory and you must understand than it has been extended by interpretations that are in no way proved but still integrated in the "official" knowledge of physics.

The problem is that if you know well the standard model and have accepted it, you will have difficulties to accept mine. If your mind is virgin and you look at the facts, not the standard interpretations, just the experimental facts, then it seems a better overall interpretation. You have to look at what has been really proved. W and Z bosons: no ; Spacetime: no ; unification of Strong and electromagnetic force: no ; space expansion: no ; acceleration of expansion: no ; gluon: no ; etc... Most people think it is all true, but the fact is there is only circumstantial proofs and often circular arguments... The nature of the Strong force is totally unknown...
« Last Edit: 03/05/2012 00:57:52 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #177 on: 06/05/2012 06:17:27 »
One of the conundrum about the standard model of black holes is that time stop at the event horizon for an outside observer. So an outside observer will see an object being ripped and then standing still or smeared at the EH forever (until evaporation). The object is supposed to see nothing special (beyond being possibly ripped apart) and continue toward the singularity.

My first question is what happen to space contraction for the object? Isn't it supposed to be totally contracted? Gravitational potential and relative velocity have similar effects on time dilation and space contraction, and they are supposed to be real, contrary to the newtownian doppler effect, which is apparent (it is not affecting the properties of particles relatively speaking)...

The origin of gravity being unknown in Physics, the simplest solution is that matter stays stuck at the event horizon and this is where gravity comes from and is being generated. This is the limit...

The rest mass being a newtonian solution, if a black hole keeps only the rest mass, couldn't its solution be newtonian (half the schwarzschild radius)? It is strikingly equal to multiple Planck wavelengths having each the Planck mass; the total mass corresponding to the mass of the black hole having a ring shape...

If there is an absolute instantaneity like entanglement might show, taking account of the time travelled by light including relativistic corrections, what you see is what you get and matter is really kept at the event horizon... If you could see the event horizon...


« Last Edit: 27/06/2016 00:50:46 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #178 on: 08/05/2012 05:17:28 »
If there is no timerate seen by an observer, there is no timerate for all observers who have one...

This is how it must be in Quantum Gravity. It just answers too many questions to be a mere coincidence.

You need to take some from Relativity and give some to Quantum Theory to get the answer. And the answer is in Black Rings... This is where GR meets QM and where it is unified into one force: The Strong Force!!!

No need for inflation, everything was connected into one ring. It explains why space is flat and why there was a Bigbang!!!

*

Offline BlueHorizon

  • First timers
  • *
  • 3
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #179 on: 29/05/2012 23:37:57 »
Is it a proof of retro-causality or a proof of an absolute instaneity? If it is instantaneity, then entanglement information is not limited by its entangled quanta of energy like i thought, so it can explain easily the two slit experiment and its other variants. Euclidean space seems to be possible after all... Usable information is still limited by the speed of light though...

newbielink:http://phys.org/news/2012-04-quantum-physics-mimics-spooky-action.html [nonactive]

newbielink:http://arxiv.org/abs/1203.4834 [nonactive]

CPT ArkAngel
I have been reading your model with great interest (I have sometimes wondered in similar vein but Physics is just a speculative hobby for me and I don't have the advanced Maths/Physics 'tools" to do more than that).

Is it possible to explain in layperson's terms how your model may better explain the double slit experiment (especially the one particle at a time variation).
I would like to say something sensible and thought provoking to a Physics group I tutor at the local highschool).

From the articles you referenced above I now understand that "entanglement theory" is the current explanation of "action at a distance" which seems to be involved here.
Would your model explain this differently? (Let's ignore the additional curiosity of  "the influence of future actions on past events" - that is still doing my head in. Unless of course you can explain that clearly as well!)

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #180 on: 30/05/2012 04:02:31 »
Retrocausality is not necessary because it takes time for light to move, but you have to accept the possibility that the relativistic space-time is not the complete reality of space and time. Space-time is apparent for energy interactions, but there is more than energy in the universe to account for entanglement.

Then, any elementary particle, including the photon, will always interact as a particle and not a wave. It is the paths of the particles that suggest a wave form. The interference pattern is produced by multiple dot particles on the screen. This is the basis for the realistic interpretation of De Broglie-Bohm Pilot Wave Theory. I understand that the problem with this theory is that it does not explain faster than light phenomenon.

The standard explanation for it is a probabilistic mathematical model with no true underlying mechanism.

From my point of view:

Using the basic extended relativistic principle that a photon does not experience time in its velocity direction, the photon have to exist everywhere along its path at every instant (Planck time or rotation period?). Only its elementary energy quantum exists at relativistic space-time coordinates (relative to other elementary particles). All elementary particles of the universe are made of electric charges and are all entangled at different levels. (Maybe some Alien beings found a way to disentangle particles but it is only a funny speculation  :o) )

The spin is the perpendicular directional vector to the rotational direction of the charge (there is another parameter for the velocity direction vs rotational direction). In the standard model, the spin is not a well defined classical parameter because of constant changes of direction due to its multiple level of entanglement and that neutrinos and photons are not supposed to be made of charges. So, in the standard model, it is, again, a probabilistic mathematical model with no underlying defined reality.

The last necessary ingredient is that relative motion of massive particles is a relative photon form and it is necessary to a wave form of the path. It depends on the level of entanglement with local and moving particles with respect to apparatus of the experiment (collapse of the wave function). This is why there is time dilation (photon form)...

This is all the basic ingredients needed for a realistic model. The problem is that the experiments are made of a huge amount of trials and errors which is a big fudge factor. I don't have one model but many, and no one is complete. I will try to give you my best shot next weekend.

« Last Edit: 31/05/2012 01:25:44 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #181 on: 03/06/2012 23:21:21 »
I looked at wikipedia links that i have posted a while ago about the pilot-wave theory and much information has been added since then. I found that my theory is almost identical to it. All your answers should be there. Bohm interpretation is that there is a wave guiding particles along their trajectories. This wave is deterministic and is probably a faster than light result of the entire universe. This wave passes by both slits, but the particle passes by only one of the slit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilot_wave
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohm_interpretation
http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/kenny/papers/bell.html

How my theory explains the seemingly retrocausality in prof Zeilinger's experiment is that all detectors states are already fixed prior to the beginning of the experiment and that even if you force entanglement of the two photons at Victor's detector, the photons at Alice and Bob are still entangled with Victor's photons, just one level lower (at least), making Alice and Bob being entangled at a measurable level by a parents to children near relation.
« Last Edit: 27/06/2016 01:49:04 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline BlueHorizon

  • First timers
  • *
  • 3
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #182 on: 07/06/2012 03:10:07 »
Thanks

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #183 on: 07/06/2012 06:18:36 »
Here is one of my answer from another discussion that might interest you.

"Energy can only be exchanged locally but not necessarily information as 2 spin entangled particles stay entangled as long as there is no exchange of energy of the spin of one (or maybe both) of the two particles with a third one locally... The spin entanglement seems to be quantized not only in its absolute value but in terms of changes in angle vs energy exchange too.

Euclidean space means preferred directions in the universe. Recent observations tend to show exactly that but people keep trying to find a solution in Minkowski spacetime..."

http://www.astronomy.com/en/sitecore/content/Home/News-Observing/News/2010/09/Fundamental%20constant%20might%20change%20across%20space.aspx

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2012/03/is-our-solar-system-a-region-of-the-universe-just-right-for-life.html#more

Some must see documentaries:

Through the Wormhole "How the Universe Works"

BBC: "What Happened before the Big Bang?" and "Is Everything We Know about the Universe Wrong?"
« Last Edit: 13/05/2013 19:31:56 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #184 on: 11/06/2012 06:05:40 »

Path vs momentum and position...

About neutrinos:

http://phys.org/news/2012-06-underground-neutrino-properties-unveils-results.html

... and dark matter:

But have annihilations of neutrinos and anti-neutrinos been observed? Neutrinos being true neutral particles, they might have no annihilation mechanism... In my opinion, neutrinos are their own anti-particles and they are probably the missing dark matter in a cold form (slowed down mainly by black holes). Supernovae produce a huge amount of them and there was, possibly, remnants from a pre-bigbang universe...

After all, the only difference between a neutrino and its counter part is its helicity, left-handed vs right-handed...

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #185 on: 19/07/2012 02:23:54 »
Neutrinos and the weak force

In the Standard Model of particles, particles interactions and their decay modes are explained by forces which are mediated by exchanges of particles. These particles mediate the quantum states of the interacting real energy quanta. There is no geometry involved as particles are supposed to move in a random and non geometrical discontinuous pattern following a wave function. The pilot wave theory, on the other hand, drives us toward a possible model.

How i understand it is that the SM is missing one thing: GEOMETRY of elementary particles.

There is no weak charge, only electric and mass charges, the mass charge being a potential charge having the Planck mass. The weak and nuclear forces are mediated by a photon between two charges, exchanging a '+' for a '-' half charge. The photon have an inertial mass in its velocity direction (longitudinal) and a gravitational mass in its transverse component (perpendicular to the velocity). Instability means excess or missing energy, this is why there is the weak force.

The neutrino's geometry depends on its relative speed, at near the speed of light, they are almost flat in their velocity direction. At rest, they would simply be spherical.

A spherical neutrino might not have a geometry for interacting weakly.

It is important to note that a for massive elementary particles, like the electron and the neutrinos, shorter longitudinal length means higher inertial mass in the axis of velocity. Invariable or rest mass is constant. For photons, the longitudinal length is zero, it doesn't mean infinite mass but zero gravitational mass and an inertial mass proportional to its frequency because its speed is constant. No gravitational mass, not in the time dimension (at least for the photon's longitudinal existance).

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2010/august/sun-082310.html
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/08/27/follow-up-on-the-solar-neutrinos-radioactive-decay-story/

The neutrinos, having a smeared neutral charge due to the Uncertainty Principle, pass through matter and interact gravitationally with ordinary matter, which permit nuclear and weak interactions because these two forces are in fact produced by electromagnetic and gravitational forces at short ranges.

The solar flares are created inside the sun. The neutrinos are coming out before the observed flares because they don't interact much with matter contrary to the photons. The delay is an indication of how deep inside the sun the reaction is coming from...


What is the spin value for the photon?

According to Gauge Theory, it has a spin of 1. I never found any direct measurement of it, thus it is theoretical. A priori, in my theory, it should have a half spin (1/2), though it is possibly a spin 1 particle if it has two full charges or if the two dimensional photon spin doubles its spin to a full potential of spin 1...? Why the photon would rotate at half the Schwarzschild radius for a black ring?


Next is why there is no frame dragging for a black ring? I will let you think about this for a while. Let just say that the black ring is a superfluid... So what is frame dragging?  :o)

 
« Last Edit: 24/07/2012 04:11:28 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #186 on: 24/07/2012 02:19:12 »
How to detect dark neutrinos having low relative velocities if it is not weakly interacting?

By observing neutrino oscillations. Neutrino oscillations are created by interactions with dark neutrinos, possibly. In this case, it should be reversible according to the laws of Relativity. Energy oscillating between known neutrinos and dark neutrinos.

I tell you vacuum energy is too convenient to be good, this is one wave of expanding charges. These were all entangled with the strong force in a huge black ring before the BigBang... ;)
« Last Edit: 13/05/2013 19:34:37 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #187 on: 16/08/2012 00:57:00 »
"If the theory corresponds to the facts, radiation conveys inertia between the emitting and absorbing bodies."
Albert Einstein, 1905

http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf

No graviton, no gravitational wave...

Space being Euclidean doesn't mean there is an absolute reference frame, it means there is a preferred frame of reference regarding our big bang, because the expansion is kinetic. Our big bang is still relative to other black rings in a seemingly infinite Universe. Don't forget that the actual standard model is based on a singularity...

Wake up people!!!

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #188 on: 04/09/2012 23:59:05 »
I have searched an article like this one but i never found one until today... Generalized maths for many types of black rings!

What no one seems to catch is that the charge is the compact fifth dimension.


http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/0608012v2.pdf

A few weeks ago, i read an article stating that Kaluza-Klein theories were rejected mainly because they didn't have a spherical solution, only 2D solutions including ring solutions...!
« Last Edit: 05/09/2012 00:49:53 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #189 on: 07/09/2012 05:09:02 »
Best evidence for a black ring at the center of the MilkyWay from the Planck satellite!!!

A very good name indeed, for this satellite... And it is only the beginning. Wait for its CMB measurements, it will be an earthquake of 10 on the richter scale! But be patient...

http://arxiv.org/abs/1208.5483


*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #190 on: 24/09/2012 01:08:42 »
Dirac didn't believe in his own theory. Maybe you should listen to him if you don't want to listen to me...  :o)

It is a very entertaining and interesting presentation on Dirac by physicist and biographer Graham Farmelo.

http://keentalks.com/paul-dirac-mathematical-beauty/

http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/events/strings02/dirac/speach.html



*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #192 on: 05/12/2012 05:47:10 »
There is no time in space, only where there is matter, there is time.

Time and space are in the relativity of energy quanta. Gravity is included in time and space. The vacuum is not empty but his wavy content obeys to an instantaneous causality.

Cold (or slow) neutrinos are so large compared to other elementary particles that they can't interact with them. Thus they appear flat because of there huge relative size(s), even though they are extremely circular at a low speed.

Energy is in the curvature...

Hawking-Unruh radiation is the elementary particles themselves. It is all around us, we are made of it... :o)

What is strange, is our sense of time...
« Last Edit: 05/12/2012 06:19:47 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #193 on: 10/01/2013 04:19:55 »
Entanglement between all elementary particles is certainly involved in the process of the separation of the three dimensions of space and the separation of the forces...

Our black ring of origin was possibly entangled with other black rings, so these black rings, expanding or not, may participate or even be necessary in the separation of the dimensions and forces...


« Last Edit: 10/01/2013 06:25:53 by CPT ArkAngel »


*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #195 on: 11/01/2013 03:09:09 »
A clock from a rock using Compton frequency:

http://phys.org/news/2013-01-clock-physicists.html

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #196 on: 11/01/2013 04:11:01 »
Pete, in this same page, i describe how i see the photon now, it is two dimensional. I refined the model all along.

Now, from my point of view it is reconciliating QM and Relativity. Not the usual GR but a modified version of it, using only special Relativity and the gravitational source, the mass that forms from matterwave produced by the charges (planck length point charge). The photon has charges with total=0 and a gravitational mass only in its transverse components, there is no problem because it is special relativity. I did not describe it yet, but a glimpse, because i need answers, experimental ones.

Take care!

And be patient reading my theory...
« Last Edit: 11/01/2013 04:13:28 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #197 on: 11/01/2013 04:32:06 »
The source of gravity and inertia coupled with entanglement is the missing link between QM and Relativity and Electromagnetism.

But the entanglement part cannot be fully described yet, so it is a major problem...

And i can tell you that experiments will show higher and higher numbers of particles coherently entangled in systems until acceptance that all the elementary particles of the universe are actually entangled.

« Last Edit: 11/01/2013 04:37:11 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #198 on: 12/01/2013 10:04:46 »
about matter waves:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_wave

What is very interesting when you look at the relativistic equation of the frequency with v=0, E=hf=m0c^2; there is no wave to be measured, which is in agreement with my theory: At rest, all the wave is shearing entirely in its own frame, creating m0. Kinetic energy is a form of opened photon wave which is added to the rest frame.

In the case of a particle like the electron, the circular wave at rest forms a circle which produces gravity in the 3 dimensions. This is the zero timeline of the charges.

Non homogeneity in the universe:
http://phys.org/news/2013-01-astronomers-largest-universe.html

How many times in your life have you heard that there is no center to the universe?

This is difficult to break...
 
« Last Edit: 12/01/2013 10:13:13 by CPT ArkAngel »

*

Offline CPT ArkAngel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 601
    • View Profile
Re: Could the photon be the sole elementary particle?
« Reply #199 on: 14/01/2013 23:44:16 »
There is no center to the universe but there is one for our BigBang.


About frame dragging:

A black ring will certainly have a precession due to gravity potential changes in its surrounding. It will induce a precession in the accretion disk, if present.

The rotational velocity of a spherical body changes its center of mass into a ring shape for a moving observer due to relativity of mass. (beware, there is a difference, by definition, between the center of mass and the highest point of gravity potential).

Differences in gravity potential produce differences in time rate. 

 
(A hypernova may possibly create a black ring from multiple photons at once and not from a single photon near the center of the star.)
« Last Edit: 15/01/2013 00:50:54 by CPT ArkAngel »