I ran a similar topic some time ago about the effects of photons on atoms and possibly at the cellular level. I have since done more research and believe I have evidence that supports my hypothesis. My hypothesis is that Photons have no mass because the are made up of an electrical charge or potential and an EM frequency corresponding to the spectrum of EM Radiation. In other words the duality would consist not of a particle for the Photon but an oscillating potential. The waveform portion would consist of EM Radiation, not only visible light but all frequencies including Gamma and Xray. I believe the pair are twisted in a helical formation and this would explain why they could occupy the same space being directly opposite each other with a minimal separation. A single beam of light like a fibre optic contains 16 million variations according to its color temperature or wavelength. The effect of the photons depends on the density, weight and reflective properties of the mass its affecting etc... The photons work at small temperature variations in unison with time to move the orbitals of electrons thus changing the structure of the atom. Applied energy like a laser increases the effect and creates a much faster or exponential change in the orbitals. If I'm not mistaken as far as Quantum physics this would suggest Radiation as the 4th state of quanta? We use the spectrometer to measure the frequencies but have not previously concluded that those same color temperatures act to create or change matter at the atomic level.

__________________
We are born blank, we are what we are taught, right or wrong - me

Electrically charged particles have rest mass, unlike the photon.
And "charge" is not the same as "potential": both words have specific and different meanings in Physics.
Can you define what you mean with "electric charge" and "electric potential" before you continue? It would help understanding what you are saying.


Sorry, but duh! Photons are the quanta of the electromagnetic field: they are the EM radiation.


Duality is an illusion.
Our mind has direct experience only of classical waves and classical particles.
Quantum particles, like the photon, are neither, but have properties of both.


Looks like handwaving of word salad.
Is this twisted pair of yours made of an electric potential and a frequency? If so, what does it actually mean?


And as far as I can tell none of this has anything to do with your picture of a photon...
Please explain what this twisted pair in the photon is supposed to be, before going on.


Not at all.


Obviously you have no idea of the experimental results in spectroscopy...

Any discussion will be utterly pointless if you do not explain clearly the meaning of the terms you use and your "model" of the photon.

__________________
papageno


"Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?" - Hobbes (Calvin and Hobbes)

"It's all about context!" - Vince Noir (The Mighty Boosh)

"I've never heard of such a brutal and shocking injustice that I cared so little about!" - Zapp Brannigan (Futurama)

I had it wrong anyway, I should have said Positron. That would also explain the spin similarities.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positron

Yes, I just repeated myself in my wording. My mistake.

I'm suggesting the quanta packets are made up of the varying frequency's of EM wrapped together with the positrons. I'm not sure exactly how the fields are working to hold the two together but I suspect that either an electrical or magnetic field is sheathing the photons and possibly that they are twisted in a helical pattern. That would put a positron directly across from each particular quanta. Or perhaps half steps of spin from each other? Basically Im suggesting that the positrons are the force of energy and the EM radiation along with the makeup (density, reflective qualities etc..) of the mass being affected controls the frequency that the positrons are released. I believe it would be properly termed Supersymmetry?

For example we currently use a single fibre optic beam of light to give us a binary 0 or 1, on or off. That same beam of light carry's 16 million color temperature variations that we can encode and decode on each end. We use the spectrometer to read the temperatures but have never reverse engineered it. If Im correct then a whole new level of supercomputer could be achieved by moving us beyond the binary system.

More food for thought? A flashlight beam spreads outward when shined at an object. I believe this is due to the North and South poles magnetic influence on the positrons in the light beam?

Is this making more sense PapaG? Or am I still rambling?..

__________________
We are born blank, we are what we are taught, right or wrong - me

It does not explain the zero rest mass and spin=1 of the photon.

And if in your mind "electric charge"="electric potential"="positron", then you should do some reading in a university library.


And what would happen to the rest mass of the positron?


Why not imagine the photon as a bundle of oscillations of the electromagnetic field?


"Force of energy"? What exactly do you mean?
And again why would the photon have zero rest mass, since the positron has non-zero rest mass?



And what does this have to do with spectroscopy?


Nope, just scattering from the surface.


Since this thread is about the particle-wave duality, could you give a quick comment about what I said:

__________________
papageno


"Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?" - Hobbes (Calvin and Hobbes)

"It's all about context!" - Vince Noir (The Mighty Boosh)

"I've never heard of such a brutal and shocking injustice that I cared so little about!" - Zapp Brannigan (Futurama)

In classical electromagnetic theory, light turns out to have energy E and momentum p, and these happen to be related by E = pc. Quantum mechanics introduces the idea that light can be viewed as a collection of "particles": photons. Even though these photons cannot be brought to rest, and so the idea of rest mass doesn't really apply to them, we can certainly bring these "particles" of light into the fold of equation (1) by just considering them to have no rest mass. (See the link for the equations referenced.)

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...oton_mass.html
Nothing whatsoever, I was just using it as an example of the spectral code I believe exists in the EM spectrum.

This may be true but even so they would still function in the same way. A frequency or wave is a signal and a particle holds a charge.
ok, problem solved. Your the expert, Im not a physicist and I dont know all the proper terms but thats why Im asking people who do..

I'm just referring to the force that forces electrons out of their orbital. If I understand it correctly when a positron collides with an electron it annihilates it and ejects a photon. In comparison to what happens when a particular laser frequency kicks electrons out of their orbital also resulting in photon release.

If its moving at the speed of light would it have a rest mass? I'll have to research this question more to give a responsible answer. I did post the link that implies there are alternate theories on the issue?

__________________
We are born blank, we are what we are taught, right or wrong - me

I did not ask you for a copy&paste job.
I asked you to explain how you go from a positron with non-zero rest mass and spin 1/2 to a photon with zero rest mass and spin 1.




You should try to stick to the point, then.


The state of a quantum particle is characterized by its wavefunction, whether the particle has a net charge or not.
This has been tested experimentally from subnuclear particles up to macroscopic systems such as superconductors.


What is the point of this thread?



Usually its two photons, because of conservation of momentum.


Handwaving.
The electron-positron annihilation does not happen exclusively to electrons bound to atoms or molecules.


A positron will not reach lightspeed.


The only link is to Baez's website.
I am dealing with what you are writing here.

__________________
papageno


"Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?" - Hobbes (Calvin and Hobbes)

"It's all about context!" - Vince Noir (The Mighty Boosh)

"I've never heard of such a brutal and shocking injustice that I cared so little about!" - Zapp Brannigan (Futurama)

Just to irritate you.. And to get some feedback as to what I should be looking for to support my hypothesis. I don't know enough to put it all together so if I throw out enough ---- maybe some will stick..

__________________
We are born blank, we are what we are taught, right or wrong - me

So you believe that the positron has a rest mass of zero? Also, why pick out the positron when we have a lot more experience of its evil twin, the electron?

I dont know if its a positron? Im just guessing. The positron just came up as a possible candidate. I'm suggesting that Photons consist of some kind of charge or massless energy and EM frequency wrapped into one beam. Perhaps held together by the magnetic or electric fields. The quanta or packets would be like a piece of garden hose with varying sizes of marbles inside. Each one with a particular charge. Like +15mv, +2.5MV etc... and a corresponding spectral frequency for each charge. The spectral frequency would control which charges were applied to a mass according to its density, atomic makeup etc...

What do we know of the Electron in this sense? I'm interested in what we do know already?

Also I dont really understand rest mass but doesn't it apply to something at rest? If an electrically charged particle is moving as in a beam of light would it have a rest mass?

__________________
We are born blank, we are what we are taught, right or wrong - me

Just for thought: Have you ever noticed in a flashlight beam shined on a wall or a cardboard box that it has concentric circular configurations? As the beam gets further from the box the circles expand. Again that leads me to think of the beam in a circular or helical configuration? And a possible reaction with Earths magnetic fields?

__________________
We are born blank, we are what we are taught, right or wrong - me

You're way over thinking here...

That has to do with the reflective backing of the flashlight casing.

How about actually addressing the content of my posts?


You still have not explained what the picture you presented is supposed to mean in physical terms.

And what you should look for is something to refute your hypothesis, such as:


Why don't you try to learn more about the subject, before starting to throw?


This is word salad now as it was word salad before.
Photons are packets of EM energy, massless (zero rest mass) and electrically neutral. They are packets of oscillations of electric and magnetic fields.

"EM frequency" as you use is meaningless, because frequency is a parameter characterizing a wave or a wave-function. It is not a physical entity.

Unless, of course, you are going to redefine "frequency" with your very own meaning.


How would the rest mass and the electric charge of the particle vanish when we get the photon?

And please note also that the particle-wave duality is not an exclusive of photons, but is valid for any quantum particle.
This has been tested experimentally from subatomic particles to molecules.


Please stop hand-waving. The air you are blowing around is killing me.


Have you tried the Q&A section of the board?
Or a university library?


Apart from the fact that charged particles do not move "as in a beam of light" (though they are moved by the fields of the beam), rest mass does not depend on the state of motion of the particle.


Or simply the beam produced by the flashlight is not nicely cylindrical, but a cone.

__________________
papageno


"Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?" - Hobbes (Calvin and Hobbes)

"It's all about context!" - Vince Noir (The Mighty Boosh)

"I've never heard of such a brutal and shocking injustice that I cared so little about!" - Zapp Brannigan (Futurama)

ok, if this is the case then couldnt these oscillations have an order or frequency as I put it that could interact with a particles electrons? Perhaps over time? Particles decay over time so I would think their creation could be the same? A kind of oxidation in reverse.

__________________
We are born blank, we are what we are taught, right or wrong - me