nobody

Hello Mordred cosmology101.wikidot.com/main looks interesting, I will spend some time there. The Einstein page is no longer there. However in equating energy and mass, I am merely agreeing with Einstein. Quote below Einstein Explains the Equivalence of Energy and Matter To listen to Albert Einstein explain his famous formula: Click here for a 1203 K .wav file. Click here for a 436 K .au file. Click here for a 109 K .mp3 file. "It followed from the special theory of relativity that mass and energy are both but different manifestations of the same thing -- a somewhat unfamiliar conception for the average mind. Furthermore, the equation E is equal to m c-squared, in which energy is put equal to mass, multiplied by the square of the velocity of light, showed that very small amounts of mass may be converted into a very large amount of energy and vice versa. The mass and energy were in fact equivalent, according to the formula mentioned above. This was demonstrated by Cockcroft and Walton in 1932, experimentally." From the soundtrack of the film, Atomic Physics. Copyright © J. Arthur Rank Organization, Ltd., 1948. Image © Brown Brothers, Sterling, PA.

Hi MigL It has long been known that an electron positron collision yielded gamma rays , i.e. matter became light. The implication is that matter and light are two forms of the same energy. In the experiments of 1997 and 1999, verify that under the right conditions that light can become matter. Verifying that matter is a different form of light energy by creating particles from photons (light). The Hypothesis: Matter is Light is an attempt to define the relationship between light energy as free photons and and light energy in the form of the elementary particles. Hi Conjurer, It is easy to tell a photon from an electron. A photon has no charge, very little mass, and zips around at the speed of light. An electron has significant mass, a negative charge and puts around at fractions of the speed of light. Something like comparing a speed boat with a canoe. Your question "Do you believe that electrons can act more like photons or waves if they are not observed?" There are interesting experiments going on currently suggesting that the process of collecting experimental results can affect the statistics of those results. The thought has been proposed and could be true, but in my understanding is far from proven. Next question: " They also tell me that all electronic signals are made of light, because electrons are too massive to behave like waves. What kind of light could this hypothesis even shed on this issue?" The advantage of electromagnetic waves, and the light traveling in the light fibers of our internet is they are they travel at the speed of light. You are right electrons are not competitive in speed. But electron diffraction studies of things like crystals allow very high resolution because the waves comprising an electron are very small relative to visible photon. Visible light ranges from 600 nano-meters to violet on the order of 400 nano-meters i.e 6x10 - 7 meters in wave length. The wavelength of an electron changes with speed. At the low velocity of 1 electron volt (pushed by a single flash light battery, the wavelength is about 1 nano-meter (10-9 meters). at 100 electron volts, its velocity is about 1 million meters per second ad the wave length is about 10-10 meters or less than 1/1000th of visible light wavelength. 10-10 meters should read 10-10 meters

If you put a pendulum clock in free space (no gravity) and and accelerate it at one gravity. Initially a stationary clock at the starting point and the moving clock are in phase, but as relative velocity increases for the stationary observer, clock phase of the moving clock will lag behind his "stationary" clock, just like the atomic clocks do. The discussion about the needed precision and stability is important. At low velocity difference, drift inherent in your clocks is more variable than the measurement and your experimental data will be useless (as pointed out above). When velocity becomes a significant percentage of the speed of light the measured data should useful for measuring the phase drift (frequency difference).

Hello Conjurer, It is generally accepted that electrons have properties as observable as particles such as the ability to exist while stationary and properties observable as waves e.g. diffraction. The hypothesis matter is light simply recognizes the mathematical concepts. A photon is a packet of waves of a given color (frequency) that that require a certain amount of energy (a quantum) in a wave length to exist it meets the Plank-Einstein Relation (f = frequency = color) h is Planks constant, where E is the required quantum of local energy for light of that color to exist. The Plank-Einstein Relation implies localized energy dent in the fabric of the universe that is deep enough to keep a photon of that color together. The Plank-Einstein Relation also implies that if there is less local energy the energy dent is shallow and light runs over the edges of the energy dent and dissipates as dark matter unable to participate in quantum mechanical interactions. Good questions. More in the next post. Hi MigL You are right E= m c2 is a momentum equation not a mass energy equation. But the widespread practice of reporting masses as energy (electron volts etc.) defines the localized energy (energy dent) required to keep that particle together.

The experiment of creating an electron-positron pair from light was proposed in 1934 and accomplished in 1997 by D.L. Burke as reported in Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 1626 – Published 1 September 1997. The experiment was reported more fully by C. Bamber et al. in Studies of nonlinear QED in collisions of 46.6 GeV electrons with intense laser pulses (Phys. Rev. D 60, 092004 – Published 8 October 1999) Their data supported by their theory suggest that five photons were absorbed in order to make one electron - positron pair Hypothesis Matter is Light has thus been strongly supported by direct experiment.

Please close this topic, Matter is light. I hope to reopen it after further study. Thank you all for your comments.

Gentlemen, I have read through my math, and as of your input, see that it only implies the energetics of the 6 photon electron. I will re do the math and present them here. In may take several weeks. Thank you for your help. Review of where we are is attached.

Thank you Mordred, your question helps to define the areas where further work is needed to fit these hypotheses into all aspects of the Standard model. That will help to focus my continued effort. My faith in this began when I found the demarcation line between quantum light and dark matter Forgive me for taking so long to realize that we are talking about two different pages of the book of Quantum Physics. In my (new) understanding, Quantum Mechanics is the rules and mathematics by which particles change through high energy impacts. While I depend on the rules on conservation momentum, conservation of spin (angular momentum) etc. in Newtonian Physics calculations and thus understand how they apply to Quantum Mechanics. I can also read the equations and understand the particle transitions which describe the intermediate and end products of the process of change. But you are right, I know nothing about the mathematics describing how the energetics of these processes take place. Fortunately, as shown below, I don’t need to. In that context, let me coin the name for what I am doing as Quantum Statics. I am not discussing how particles came to be or the processes by which they change. The first step has been developing a mathematical model describing the nature of the fabric of the universe that fits all the experimental data known to physics. The second objective was to use the mathematics of this “fabric model,” to develop free-space-zero-velocity models of the elementary particles as defined by the Standard Model. The mathematical model of a moving photon will be investigated in the future. This model of nature of the fabric of the universe rests on: Since both ε and μ are variable in different local condition c is variable under local conditions. C = 1/√𝜀𝜇 where c is the speed of light, These two properties make ε is the electrical permeability electromagnetic waves μ is the magnetic permeability possible (and nothing else). The Einstein 1911 theory, and 1918 verified that light travels by relativistic mathematics and that that curvature varies with the slope of the gravitation density. A mirage bending light upwards as much as 5 degrees demonstrates that light speed is inversely related to local mass density and that a relatively small variation in mass density generates significant curvature. The error in the frequency of the mathematics of the Bohr atom revealed that like light particles the motion of particle is described by relativistic mathematics (according to general relativity, everything does). The Michaelson-Morley experiment has historically interpreted it to exclude any fabric to the universe i.e. there is no such thing as ether(aether). Recognition that matter is light reinterprets the Michael-Morley experiment as verifying that the physical arm and the light beam have identical length properties as a function of velocity (Lorentz contraction?). The term “energy dent” should probably be changed to “potential energy dent” to more correctly describe an area that it takes energy to climb out of. The current theory of photons shows that in order to be a particle they must be a range of velocities with fastest portions of the photon going faster than the group velocity and the slowest going slower than the group velocity. As the fastest portion of the photon pass the mean group position it begins to climb out of the potential energy dent, losing energy and slowing down. Conversely as the slowest portion is overtaken by the mean group position, it begins to slide up the rear end of the potential hill and is accelerated. If the depth of potential energy dent is one less than a quantum at that frequency, the energy escapes into unquantified dark matter. The proton radius conundrum is experimental evidence of two particle sharing their potential energy dents, thereby reducing their local light speed and thus reducing the diameter of the photon.

In a similar manner because the theory does address transition processes it cannot violate the mathematics describing those transitions, or the laws conservation relating the transition processes. MigL question: Now BH mechanics are increasingly well understood. If you fire something at them, they absorb the incoming mass-energy and become larger. Elementary particles instead, scatter and produce additional particles from the kinetic energy. Same answer this theory does not address transitions YET. Still working on Spin -- it should be addressed in this theory, but even though I see the elements of spin in the models, I don't yet see how they are observable (measureable) from the outside. My questions are on topic. When this theory addresses experimental data that is not accounted for in the standard model, that is a strong argument for the importance of this theory as a needed extension of the standard model. That is not a criticism of the standard model and certainly not a criticism the experts on the standard model. Like this theory does not address transitions, the standard model simply does not address a number of aspects of the published experimental data like the measured photon size conundrum, what is dark matter, why do some quarks have 2/3 of an electron charge. This theory is absolutely necessary to extend the standard model to accurately describe the new set of experimental data.

This theory cannot violate conservation of lepton number, because it does not address any processes of transition. It only suggests models for some of the elementary particles.

Well put Mordred. I am sure that your understanding and interpretation of Quantum Mechanics is correct. Furthermore, your ability and of others with your training to accurately apply both the concepts and the mathematics of the Standard Model to how to bring this new theory in closer agreement with that model is absolutely essential. But your objections to the new theory are simply assertions. For example, your assertion that it violates the conservation of charge is just not true. This theory preserves charge absolutely.

Keep asking questions Marcus Hanke, they are fun. 1. How do you know this? It seems like you posit this as a claim in order to make an idea work - I am pretty sure you have not actually worked through the maths of this. Yes I did the math, the math is in the paper. 2. Having done a lot of GR maths over the years myself, I can tell you pretty much for a fact that six photons confined into a small region on the order of the electron radius will not travel on circular paths. As a general statement your statement is true but has an exception -- orthogonality. In space there are three orthogonal planes. and an electomagnetic wave there are two phases, one in which at its peak all the energy is expressed as electric field, and one in which at its peak all the energy is expressed as magnetic field. Traveling in a circle one wavelength long, two waves 90 degrees out of phase in time are also 90 degress out phase in direction and are thus orthogonal. Three planes each with two orthogonal phases provide 6 homes for 6 photons, each orthogonal to the rest. That is how two electrons can live in the lowest orbit a Bohr atom.

Dark Matter 200126.pdf Thank you Mordred for your contribution of questions that require further research and definition. The hypothesis inherently addresses all leptons, the more complex ones have not yet been described. The calculations are all based on total energy and electro-weak forces. Attached is a discussion of the associated boundary between quantum matter and dark matter. Things that should catch your attention include: 1. The theory predicts the difference in proton diameter when measured with electrons or the much heavier muon. Do you have any other hypothesis for that experimental data. 2. That the theory of the electron predicts the contents of quarks. Do you have any other hypotheses that even address the contents of a quark, or why they come in 2/3 or -1/3 if an electron charge, or how you could have the negative sign on the 1/3 charge? 3. Do you have any theory that address the contents of 8 of the 17 elementary particles? Note: Your comments are assertions not mathematical or theoretically based evidence.

In answer to our technical expert Mordreds How do you plan to account for the electron spin 1/2 fermionic statistics and polarity states as per the Pauli exclusion principle with 6 spin 1 bosonic photons ? In my understanding the Pauli exclusion principle does not apply because each of the 6 photons are orthogonal to every other photon either in phase or spatial plane. Spin? I hope the spin topic will be resolved through this discussion.

Thank you for your question swansont 1. What is the evidence that this energy well exists You will very personally experience the energy dent of the earth if you hold a brick two feet above your toe and release it. 3. Why doesn’t it travel at c? It always travels at c but is affected by both energy and mass in its region. For example a prism is able to sort light by color because the speed of light in glass is slower than the speed of light in free space. Sun set and Sun rise start with red colors because the variation of the atmospheric density with altitude sorts the colors by wavelength just like a prism. The speed of light is slower in the lower atmosphere thus nbending the light around the earth. In the desert, the atmosphere is is very hot near the surface of the ground. Because of this temperature difference with the air above the air density near the ground is lower than the air above. Because of this density difference, the speed of light near the ground is faster than the speed of light above light bends upwards. A mirage occurs when the blue light from the sky is bent so much you see sky while looking at the ground. 2. Mass is required to make light bend (a lot of it) but aren’t you claiming photons do this on their own? No on its own (free space) a photon will travel in a straight line at c0 the speed of light of light in free space where Mu = Mu0, the magnetic constant of free space. and Episilon = Epsilon0 the electrostatic constant of free space. Mass and Energy are different aspects of the same thing -- both make an energy dent. The energy dent affects both Mu and Epsilon thus changing the speed of light.