0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
E=mc2 is a popular, powerful formula that needs a deterministic explanation.
How is mass simply converted to energy and vice versa.
Postulate that there is no conversion.
The energy is simply trapped and localized.
Understanding how energy can be trapped in a location begins to describe the connection between the fundamental laws of the universe.
Photons are energy in the form of electromagnetic waves.
All energy from gammas rays to radio waves are simply photons of different wavelengths. If we could break down these waves in a single quanta or unit, you would have a single photon.
The first major assumption of Space Compression Spring Theory is that space has structure and photons are traveling compressions of space.
What on Earth is a deterministic explanation?
It isn't. I.e. mass cannot be converted into energy and energy cannot be converted into mass. For a detailed explanation of why you can read the following article on the subject at:Does nature convert mass into energy? by Ralph Baierlein, Am. J. Phys., 75(4), Apr. (2007)Download from: http://home.comcast.net/~peter.m.brown/ref/baierlein.pdf
Photons are not energy. Photons have energy. There's a big difference. It'd be wise to listen to Alan Guth on this point. Watch him explain it at my companies website at:http://www.newenglandphysics.org/Science_Literature/Journal_Articles/DSC_0004.MOV
What is that supposed to mean? Are you trying to say that if it was possible then you could make a single quanta of EM energy then it'd be a single photon? Sure. That'd be true, by definition!
Which contradicts Maxwell's theory of electromagnetism. What evidence do you have that Maxwell's theory is wrong?
Space Compression Spring Theory predicts that when a particle decays into two photons traveling in opposite directions, the photons are not on the same linear opposite path. My theory predicts an parallel offset equal to the diameter of the photon orbit.
What is a photon orbit in a particle decay scenario?
The Speed of Light:E=mc2 is a popular, powerful formula that needs a deterministic explanation. How is mass simply converted to energy and vice versa. Postulate that there is no conversion. The energy is simply trapped and localized. Understanding how energy can be trapped in a location begins to describe the connection between the fundamental laws of the universe. Photons are energy in the form of electromagnetic waves. All energy from gammas rays to radio waves are simply photons of different wavelengths. If we could break down these waves in a single quanta or unit, you would have a single photon. The first major assumption of Space Compression Spring Theory is that space has structure and photons are traveling compressions of space. Picture space as a super phase structure that could be modeled as a three dimensional web of points connected by infinitely small springs. Basically a spring matrix of hypercubes. Space is compressible (and decompressible). Photons travel through space in the form of energy. A photon traveling through space has a compression in the front and a decompression trailing similar to a longitudinal wave on a spring, but will have physical effects three dimensionally on the space around it. Picture the photon as a car with a front and back seat. The positive charge would be pointing out the top of the sunroof over the front seats. A negative charge would be pointing out the bottom of the rear axle underneath the back seats. A positive magnetic field would extend out from the front passenger side door and a negative magnetic field would extend out the rear driverís side door. The compression area is the front seats and the decompression occurs in the back seats.The speed of photons has been measured as a constant in nature, but space compressions will have an effect on the propagation speed because this speed is based on the properties of the medium the photon propagates through - space. I have derived velocity formulas that show the speed of a photon is slower in decompressed space and faster in compressed space. The difference in speed provides a mechanism for the photons to get trapped in orbit around each other. If the photon has enough energy (or compression) it will create a velocity gradient enough to slow down the "tires" of another photon while the "roof" of the photon at a faster speed turns the complete photon. Basically this a gradient in the index of refraction of space causing the two photons to continuosly refract around each other. Photons trapped in orbit around each other are the fundamental building blocks of matter.Now to finally address the rhetorical question - I propose that time is constant but the velocity of light changes. This is the mechanism by which time appears to "slow down" in a gravity well - or space decompression area. The matter consisting of photons in orbit will experience time dilation because the speed of their photons is slower in decompressed space and the orbit cycles take longer.In addition, matter traveling through space at a high velocity will also experience time dilation because the velocity component of the combined orbital system will be subtracted from the radial orbital component so the orbital cycles will take longer.Time is constant, we just perceive that time slows down because the photons we are made of travel slower. This makes the perception of the speed of light the same for any observer.
Quote from: Space Flow on 23/12/2015 12:17:21What is a photon orbit in a particle decay scenario?The weapon used by gauchos to catch game consists of two or three bolas (balls) held together by a string or strings. Centrifugal force stretches the string(s) because the balls have angular momentum relative to one another. Whatever force holds a pair of photons in orbit can be thought of as the string between a pair of bolas. If the string snaps, the two bolas fly apart, relative to one another, along lines which are tangent to their previous circular orbit; they are parallel, but not collinear; the two parallel paths are separated by the diameter of their previous orbit. The center of mass of the pair continues to move at its previous speed in a straight line, while the individual bolas keep their velocity relative to that moving center of mass.What makes photon pairs different from bolas is that the individual photons lack proper mass. Only the photon pair can have proper mass. You can derive the proper mass of the pair by adding the individual energies and multiply by the speed of light squared. Adding momentum to the pair is like boosting the forward moving photon more than the rearward moving photon (in a given coordinate system). If you add momentum to one side only, you get motion of the pair. (If I could persuade my brain's math coprossessor to come out of retirement, I'd derive E = mc2 from this model.) I'm glad to see that others are now talking about orbiting photons. This is the first time I've seen others discussing my orbiting photon concept, other than to say it can't happen. As far as I know, this part of my model was totally unique until now. I'd like to know if anyone else had this idea before I thought of it; I think that was about 8 years ago. For the speed of light to vary, you must discard the definitions of time, distance and speed, since the meter and second are defined by the constant speed of light. We used to measure the speed of light in relation to the circumference and rotational speed of planet Earth. Now, we measure everything else in relation to the speed of light. Measuring something whose value is fixed by definition is like measuring the number one. "Hmmm, this number one seems to be bigger than that number one. The number one must be variable." Photons can have any amount of energy, not just the specific quanta of energy that must be exchanged when electrons jump between orbitals. Yes; photons originate with specific energies, and a particle can only absorb specific energies, but the expansion of space gradually reduces the amount of energy that arrives in a distant reference frame; and this does not happen in quantum jumps. There is no smallest quantum of energy. Any, yes; it is proper to say a photon has energy and momentum; not that it is energy or momentum. What it is is a disturbance of the aether; it takes a certain amount of energy to create that disturbance.
My theory is based on the fact that photons are not transverse waves, they are longitudinal with the closest thing in nature being seismic waves (particularly Rayleigh waves).
Quote from: Spring Theory on 20/05/2015 03:20:35My theory is based on the fact that photons are not transverse waves, they are longitudinal with the closest thing in nature being seismic waves (particularly Rayleigh waves). Which experiment do you base your claim on?I've seen many experiments clearly show that electromagnetic wave is transversal by showing linear polarization.
I havent read through everything here yet, but I do like it. Theres alot to take in, so I'll do it in bite sized pieces, or I could start making my coffee stronger. But I've read enough to be satisfied, you have build up a literacy model in your mind which is consistent with many aspects of nature. So whether you're right or wrong, thats still a commendable effort. And even if you do turn up some problems within youre theory, there is no-doubt you are approaching real truths. I think the best evidence of things is found in the associations and interactions between various phenomena, and describing those in a self consistency, and that seams to be a focus of your considerations. I think you have good instincts, and nicely done.