jouyang3

You are correct. By your argument, I will have to scrap the 2d geometry of the wave packet of objects but rather 3d wave geometry for electron and that electron is a packet of spherical EM-Wave with Electric Field vectors pointing outward and all magnetic field and poynting vectors pointing tangential to the surface (electron is cloaked by magnetic field) but its net magnetic field is zero. Since EM-Waves travels in the direction of the poynting vector and in circle, it doesn't matter if they travel at any speed. This, in conjunction with EM-Wave string, proves Ampere's law in that a circle of EM-wave move across EM-strings at rest, which leaves a circular disturbance in the surrounding EM-String which in turn, is the traces of the EM-Wave left behind. Since magnetic field travels in circle, we will expect a circular magnetic field trail left behind by the electron.

Thanks for your posts. Mellinia & swansont: If one studies closely, wave packets have non-uniform wavelengths; In my speculation, EM-strings (or EM-waves at rest), fill up the universe. I speculate EM-Waves superpose together in such way that it has maximum density near the origin and exponentially decay with inverse square law. And that, there is NO PHYSICAL BOUNDARY FOR ANY OBJECT, as it can distort EM-strings into EM-waves surround it (which results in Electric Field, which results in charge, and which follows Gauss' law. Mellinia: you may now question the polarity of charge as EM-waves changes direction of its electric field constantly (eg, waving). To that end, I can't answer you, but I think it is the same reason why EM-waves can be polarized: http://plc.cwru.edu/tutorial/enhanced/files/lc/light/light.htm Now you might say that it still present a variation of electric field. But if object made with spherical EM-wave packets; so that, they show only 1 amplitude (either positive or negative) electric field is oscillating outward. Now for the stability of electric field (why charge are constant but not changing?): since EM-Waves are wave packets, i think that it might as well be spherical EM-waves that form high-frequency square waves by Fourier Transformation.

Good question. Every EM-Wave has Electric Field, with its Magnetic Field orthogonal to it, hence, a packet of EM-Wave is also a packet of Electric Fields. We learned from our physics course that electric field is exerted whenever there is a charge present, hence, in some sense, the direction or orientation of the electric field determines the charge. In other words, the final polarity of the EM-wave packet determines the charge of the particle. Thanks for your response and support!!! However, perhaps my knowledge is not quite sophisticated enough to understand your theory. But can you perhaps elaborate further and label all the variables? PS: you need to surround the equation with [latex][/latex] bbcode for it to be processed.

You are right, imatfaal: it is actually wavelength increasing as momentum decreases, which contradicts with our hypothesis (since we claimed that objects are created by high frequency EM-waves which are a lot greater than that of gamma rays): [latex]p = \gamma mv[/latex] [latex]p = 1 \cdot \alpha \cdot 0 = 0[/latex] since [latex]\nu = \frac{c}{\lambda}[/latex] Hence we mentioned, "flipping the table". Since the table, 'is flipped', wave length of the object actually is proportional to momentum: [latex]\lambda \propto ph[/latex] which implies that the wave length in which we measure is not intrinsic to the object. Our hypothesis states that: [latex]\nu \propto \rho[/latex] Where [latex]\nu[/latex] is the frequency of the EM component waves and [latex]\rho[/latex] is the density of the object; and that: density of the object increases alongside its frequency, such that electron is less dense than rigid matters. But then again, objects can be formed by Packets of low but similar frequencies of EM-Waves or EM-strings, which agrees with de Broglie's formula.

swansont, you hit right on the spot - it is a good catch that we haven't consider. We did, however, comes up with a possible explanation: Indeed, EM-wave propagates in c within a vacuum. But for objects we see daily is incoherent EM-Wave since we don't usually view objects from some light years away (eg, as point sources). Note that in incoherent EM-Wave its intensity decays exponentially, since I is proportional to E^2. EM-wave of the object is indeed travelling, but, since its intensity is also decaying at the same time, what we actually perceive is the part where EM-Waves have Electric Field amplitude != 0 AND forming Wave Packet. So, in our theory, if we are observing the object far far away, we will actually be observing the object moving at speed of light in vacuum (which is absurd).

Hi Everyone, I am an EE undergraduate student. Recently, my friend and I came up with the following idea: What if matters are created based on EM-Waves? We know that based on de Broglie's wavelength, a moving object has the following wave length: p = h/λ so for an rigid and stationary object, we would expect to have close to zero wave length. Then, we decided to flip the table and say that: Objects are created by high [average] frequency EM-Waves, and they are extremely-well localized wave packets. My friends and I then attempt to give consequence of such postulate: 1. Matters are created by em-waves thus with its frequency exponentially decaying around them; space is filled with EM-strings. 2. Based on the observation that beat pattern only forms by superpose waves with similar wave-length/frequency, we propose that the greater the density of the object, the higher the frequency and vice versa for objects of little density. 3. Based on the gravitational force exists between two rigid object, we hypothesize that gravity exist between two object because the em wave have tendency to attempt disrupt EM-waves around it that is at rest AND EM-waves have tendency to attempt to destructively interfere. 4. In chemistry, we know orbital theory that for l = 1,2,3... we will have angular nodes at the center. We know that electron density near the center is zero and that it 'vanishes' upon near the nucleus. Based on our theory, electron is made out of low frequency EM-Waves while neucleus is made out of relatively high frequency EM-waves. We conclude that it might be possible that from distance R from the origin of the neucleus we have a 'phasor' such that the component EM-waves of the electron, upon entering the perimeter of R, will shift in a way such that they destructively interfere and hence the electron will fade out; the rate of the shifting will be exponentially decaying as R approaches the origin such that it looks like it disappear for a while. 5. Based on theory of 4, we conclude that objects fade-in-and-out at all time and that the rate in which rigid matters fading is close to infinity (infinity cycle/second). 6. For the s orbitals, we think that it might be because that it has less energy and that its frequency is less likely to be affected by the 'phasor' of the necleus. 7. We proposed that the movement of an object is the shifting of a wave packet; or make a new disturbance in new location of the EM-string pool. 8. We followed that since big bang, the origin emits super dense matters at t~0. Matters do not cool down and form but rather, they keep breaking down naturally into particles of less frequency and eventually Gamma ray, x-ray, uv, light etc. We are posting this on the physics forum not to start a flaming war, but attempt to see the opinions of experts in the field - how they agree and possibly add-in to our idea or disagree by giving us counter examples. In either case, it will put our curious minds at rest. We apologize if we posted any ignorant statement in which contradicts with actual physical phenomenons. Thank you. Jun D. Ouyang