Spring Theory

I'm saying the geodesic is a spiral path.

When the photon collapses, the charge source is the dipole that is created. I stipulate that every electric field implies a charge source. By deterministic, I'm implying you can tabulate the momentum and position properties of a particle (at the same time) with plank's constant being a fundamental property of all particles. Lorentz's dilation equation can be made more precise from using the speed of the orbiting photons instead of the speed of a photon in free space as the correction factor. Autopsy is just the best we can do when a positron and electron is annihilated into photons. I'm inferring that what is left after the carnage is what makes up the bodies. Hope that helps. The intrinsic argument is a weak one to me. There is no actual physical spin but it has the properties of something spinning? How unsatisfying is that. Yes, because the radius times the mass also scales by the same factor. The orbital velocity is still c for both.

Defining Mass as overall curvature: Since the structure of a photon is described in quantum physics as a “particle” of spin “1” and +/-h angular momentum, this means it will rotate one revolution per wavelength. A potential candidate for a physical description would be a symmetric photon with a length of one wavelength and a circumference of one wavelength as in figure 1.2. This means it’s effective radius can be determined: circumference=λ=2πrc Solving for radius: [latex] r_c = \frac{\lambda}{2 \pi} [/latex] So now the photon has a propagation direction and physically defined radius. This radius is the curvature radius of the photon since it otherwise travels in a straight line. Since all particles are made of photons, then the curvature has to be somehow conveyed by the structure and properties of the photon to calculate mass. Without redefining what mass is, whether a convention selection or simply a property of a particle made up of photons, the standard idea across classical and quantum physics is the consistency of momentum. This means momentum is a conserved quantity which does not change over time or the rate of change is zero or its derivative with respect to time is zero. As stated previously, it is well accepted that photons have momentum. The classical momentum of a photon (usually described with greek letter gamma) is defined specifically in physics and quantum mechanics as follows: [latex] momentum_{\gamma} = p_{\gamma} =\frac{h}{\lambda} [/latex] Where h is Planck's constant and λ is the wavelength of the photon. By defining momentum as mass times velocity: p=mv We can derive a mass equation as: [latex] m_{\gamma} = \dfrac{p}{v} = \dfrac{h}{λv} [/latex] Where h is planks constant, λ is the wavelength of the photon and v is the velocity of the photon (typically the speed of light). Following this path of logic, the mass can be expressed in terms of the curvature radius and the velocity of the photon along that curvature: [latex] mass = m_{\gamma}= \frac{h}{λv_c} =\frac{h}{2πr_cv_c} = \frac{\hbar}{r_cv_c} [/latex] Where ħ is the reduced planks constant (h divided by 2π) as stated before. Since the curvature is geometrically a helix and effectively “open” (like a slinky), we will see that leads to the reason the photon appears to have no mass but still can have momentum. In fact, the mass would be just incredibly difficult to measure.

I know you're busy but I would really like an good explanation of spin. Maxwell described the electromagnetic field "as the part of space which surrounds bodies of electric (charge) to magnetic conditions." (Maxwell, James Clerk (1865). "A dynamical theory of the electromagnetic field". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. 459–512. page 460) I'm proposing an underlying structure to charge that does not conflict with Maxwell's equations. Positronium decay is a decay of both an electron and a positron into photons. You'll have to do an autopsy on the photons that are released. An electron won't decay by itself, but I do propose a positron will decay on it's own.

It is common to refer the photon as having no charge. It is more complete to say the photon has no “net” charge. A relative observer sees the positive field, then the negative field as it passes by. This is an oscillating effect as with the magnetic fields. You could equate this as seeing a positive charge and then a negative charge with the total net effect zero. Please describe the correct way spin works. Positronium decays into two or three photons. This is an example of an electron being destroyed by a positron. ref: https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-ph/9911410.pdf Testable prediction: The decay will be offset in trajectory. Picture (2) ball like photons in orbit held together by a piece of string between the photons. If the string is cut (particle decays), then the photons will fly off in opposite directions along lines that are tangent to the orbit diameter. The path is parallel but it is not collinear.

All these are addressed in the paper.

Page 5 shows a particularly good candidate for the photon propagating in space as a slinky like structure. Reference: https://www.scirp.org/pdf/oalibj_2019112114183125.pdf An electric charge is presented by the formation of the dipole. Not sure if this is too pedantic, but maybe you can say an electric field is presented. Since electric fields are created by electric charge I don't see how you get around having a field without the charge present. I consider the photon having zero net charge in free space. How does spin work? I'm familiar with the a geometric description and the angular momentum description: 1/2 ħ There are numerous testable predictions.

The electron is actually (2) photons, but looking at (1) photon is easier to envision. The topology of the photon is such that it has (1) spin or twist per photon wavelength (per quantum mechanics). This can be modeled as a flat ribbon as shown in Figure 3.3: The flat ribbon with a single twist can have the gray side representing negative charge and the white side representing positive charge side. If this topology is projected around a circumference, it will collapse into (2) flat circular obits (no twist) with the photon’s opposing electric fields aligned radially in an out as shown in figure 3.4. The net effect is a double orbit of the photon in on itself. The Electric fields also line up opposite of each other creating an electric dipole point. A simplified depiction of a single photon collapsing into a double orbit, ignoring the spiral structure, is shown in figure 3.5. Likewise the magnetic field alignment will be similar but perpendicular as in figure 3.6. All three depictions help to describe the ring structure. The topology figure shows how the twist results in the flat portions of the ribbon to align radially. This flattens the twisted electrical fields to a purely radial direction after the collapse effect. Positive charge is shielded completely inside and negative charge is presented outwardly. Included for free is a 1/2 spin property. It takes (2) rotations to get back to where you geometrically start.

It is a combination of photons in orbit. The ring structure is stationary, but the photons are traveling in orbit to give properties such as mass and charge.

Hello world...I'm a mechanical engineer (oh no!) and appreciate some feedback. I have updated my theory of everything which explains the following: The nature of spacetime Quantum gravity and unification with electromagnetic force The reason for antimatter scarcity A physical description for the Wave Function and therefore a solution to the measurement problem A definition of mass and force An explanation of dark Matter A more precise Lorentz dilation equation The reason for the electron’s anomalous magnetic moment A physical description of the Fine Structure Constant Many others My first papers abstract: Current quantum theory is based on probability and includes a myriad of fields, forces and force carrying particles. The principle cornerstone of physics is to determine observable values from experiments that match quantum calculations. There are several particles classified as fundamental such as the electron, the quark and the photon. The cloud of uncertainty (principle) around quantum physics has kept any deterministic explanation from been accepted in the physics community. This paper sets the groundwork to connect quantum physics with classical physics concepts. First principles define the photon as the single fundamental particle that all other particles are made from. A geometric analysis of the photon and its measured properties are used to derive a mass equation. Mass is defined as a function of curvature and the velocity along that curvature. This mass equation is used to derive the equations of motion based on the principle of least action. The semi complete Lagrangian of the photon presented leads to Euler-Lagrange equations that agree with its measured properties. The kinetic energy of the presented Lagrangian also directly leads to the Einstein Planck relation. Taking these first principles and applying various thought experiments, explanations are revealed including the double slit experiment, vacuum energy, the Casimir effect and a potential contributor to Dark Matter. A testable prediction resulting from the Ring Theory hypothesis is that the photons resulting from decaying particles have an offset in trajectory. The trajectory is based on the geometry of the ring based particle. The final takeaway is that Ring Theory lays the foundation for the photon to geometrically present positive charges, negative charges, positive masses and magnetic moments that appear in particles previously considered to be fundamental. Here is the full paper: https://acct89456.app.netsuite.com/core/media/media.nl?id=11245&c=ACCT89456&h=QJmsw4-9zydXKSC5cKdu4TMeVg3heptvZM8n4z3fYZOeuA4q&_xt=.pdf Thanks for reading this and let me know what you think. Paper 1 - On the Structure of the Photon 2023 R39.pdf

I'm not saying that Schrodinger is wrong. His wave function actually implies an ether. You could say the variance of time is very well tested too. Taking a new perspective that time is constant explains the perception of the invariance of light.

Since word salad seems to be the buzz word, I will lay out the ingredients of the salad… 1. There are no particles. Schrödinger had it right. 2. In compression, this refers to the compression/rarefaction of space caused by the photon/wave. 3. The transport mechanism is that of the mass flux of space itself. 4. So are you satisfied with the math so far presented? 5. More math representations to follow relating Hooke's law to that of the forces in space. So you're satisfied with the Lorentz invariant shown mathematically based on velocity? Yes, density of space affects the speed of light as well as the elasticity or spring constant of space.

Great questions. Photons interact with space through the compression they are composed of. Being an orbital of two compression waves, the photon pair system has a specific time cycle. When the orbital system travels through a decompression area, the cycle slows down equivalently to the Lorentz invariant. I have yet to get to the proton system, but in the nucleus of an atom, the photons that make up protons and neutrons create decompression areas around them which results in decompression around an atom. Circular orbits don't radiate because the photon system sees the path as linear. The compression makes space bend so, to the photon, it is traveling in a straight path. Outside of this system and decompression, the path appears to be circular. Spring theory postulates space as a super phase state of matter, meaning density is mass/volume and pressure is force/area (or energy/volume). I have some more math to introduce, but the units selected are SI units. Exactly how to measure these metrics are based on the mathematics, but I have not found constant results yet. Currently, my calculations of the density of space (non compressed) are ranging from 2.09341x10-26 kg/m3 to1.42742x10-44 kg/m3. g = acceleration, if present (from a mass like the earth). I assume this is zero when looking at a system of photon compressions. Similar to the momentum equation for a sound wave. Really it is a momentum flux of mass. Intuitively it seems a mechanical wave doesn't carry momentum since there's no mass flow, but thinking of the energy and momentum transport as successive collisions it gets easier to picture. The original source transfers energy and momentum to adjacent "space springs" which collide with the next layer, etc.

It's the decompression of space that creates a circular orbit. As stated before, the photons refract around each due to the velocity gradient they create. Another experiment would be to measure the trajectory of two photons from a decaying particle. Spring theory would predict a very small parallel offset. This distance would be the diameter of the orbital.

Derivation of the speed of light: The general continuity equation: ∂ρ/∂t + ∇ · ρu = 0 ∇⋅ is divergence, ρ is the density of space u is the velocity of a photon wave in the x direction t is time ∂ρ/∂t + ∇ · ρu = 0 ∂ρ/∂t + ρ ∇ · u + u∇ · ρ = 0 ∂ρ/∂t + u(∂ρ/∂x + ∂ρ/∂y + ∂ρ/∂z) + ρ(∂u/∂x + ∂v/∂y + ∂w/∂z) = 0 Assume changes in the y and z direction are small ∂ρ/∂t + u∂ρ/∂x + ρ∂u/∂x = 0 {equation 1} Conservation of momentum equation (1D Steady flow): ρ ∂u/∂t + ρ u · ∇u + ∇p = ρg Where g = 0 ρ ∂u/∂t + ρ u · ∇u + ∇p = 0 ρ ∂u/∂t + ρ u · (∂u/∂x + ∂v/∂y + ∂w/∂z) + (∂px/∂x + ∂py/∂y + ∂pz/∂z) = 0 Assuming smooth flow in the x direction with negligible changes in the y and z: ρ ∂u/∂t + ρ u ∂u/∂x + ∂p/∂x = 0 {equation 2} Equation of state: ∂p/∂x = (dp/dρ)(∂ρ/∂x) Where p = pressure of space Substituting: ρ ∂u/∂t + ρ u ∂u/∂x + (dp/dρ)(∂ρ/∂x) = 0 {equation 2} The plane wave function is expressed as: u = Aei(kx-ωt) = Aeik(x-ct) Where k = 2π/λ and ω = 2π c/λ Using the plane wave function as a solution: u = Aeik(x-ct) ρ = Beik(x-ct) Where: ∂u/∂x = Aikeik(x-ct) and ∂ρ/∂x = Bikeik(x-ct) ∂u/∂t = -Aickeik(x-ct) ∂ρ/∂t = -Bickeik(x-ct) This makes equation 1 and 2: -Bickeik(x-ct) + u Bikeeik(x-ct)+ ρ Aikei(kx-ct) = 0 {equation 1} -ρAickeik(x-ct)+ ρ u Aikeik(x-ct) + (dp/dρ)(Bikeik(x-ct)) = 0 {equation 2} Dividing by ikei(kx-ut): -Bc+ u B + ρ A = 0 {equation 1} -ρc A + ρ u A + (dp/dρ)(B) = 0 {equation 2} Simplifying coefficients: ρ A + (u - c)B = 0 (u - c) ρA + (dp/dρ)B = 0 The solution will be non trivial is the determinant of the matrix is zero: ρ (dp/dρ) - ρ(u - c) (u - c) = 0 (dp/dρ) - (u - c)2 = 0 (u - c)2 = (dp/dρ) u - c = √ (dp/dρ) Resulting in: u = c + √ (dp/dρ) {equation 3} And the velocity of the photon is reduced as dp/dρ gets smaller. When dp/dρ = 0 (no space compression/decompression effect), the velocity is the c - the speed of light in a vacuum. Please let me know if I made any mistakes.

The most compelling evidence are in Electron–positron annihilations: http://www.fnal.gov/pub/inquiring/questions/annihilation2.html "While these positrons may be fast moving at first eventually they encounter matter and slow down. Soon, they will encounter an electron in an atom and annihilate with it. In doing so, the total rest energy of BOTH particles, 2 times 0.511 MeV = 1.022 MeV is released. This release most commonly occurs by producing two particles of light called photons or gamma rays. These photons are emitted in opposite directions and each have an energy of 0.511 MeV. (The reason TWO photons are produced may seem a bit complicated, but two are needed to conserve both momentum and energy. Briefly, since the electron and the positron were at rest, the total system had no momentum. Thus the available energy of 1.022 MeV is accounted for by the emission of the two photons while zero total momentum is achieved by having the two photons going off in opposite directions.)" other evidence of photon orbital systems: http://arxiv.org/abs/1302.0874 "Neutral Meson Decays into Two Photons from Lattice QCD" http://journals.aps.org/pr/abstract/10.1103/PhysRev.77.213 "High Energy Photons from Proton-Nucleon Collisions" http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1997/09/970918045841.htm "The energy-to-matter conversion was made possible by the incredibly strong electromagnetic fields that the photon-photon collisions produced" http://arxiv.org/pdf/0812.2373.pdf "The π0 decays in about 98.8% into two photons" Theoretical evidence: http://phys.org/news/2014-05-scientists-year-quest.html http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/may/18/matter-light-photons-electrons-positrons "They worked out that – very rarely – two particles of light, or photons, could combine to produce an electron and its antimatter equivalent, a positron."

Yes I have more math to present. To answer your questions: A photon is not a lepton. I propose a lepton is an orbital system of photons. I will address the spin issue shortly, but the term "electron spin" is not to be taken literally in the classical sense. What do you mean by correlations to your left hand and right hand neutrinos? The spin is based on direction of propagation. I agree they don't interact with electromagnetic force because the lines of force cancel each other out in the orbital system. Those articles are interesting but why is it the the W-Boson is 100 more massive than a proton but decays to an electron and antineutrino?

Actually you are right, I should have said tangential velocity instead of radial velocity- sorry. I will correct the derivation. The photon does not have to follow a helical path, it is just a circular path combined with any other linear direction. I was just selecting that path to make it easer to visualize. Revised: Also used s for distance along the arc. Thanks for helping me clean it up.

Yes, I understand radial. Picture the photons traveling on a double helix path with the axis of propagation running through the center of the helix. The velocity of a particle traveling along the double helix can be broken down to two components, a radial and a linear component. I could relabel to vl if that makes it easier to visualize. Again, maybe i should use a different variable than r so as not to confuse with radius. To understand the r value, make the reference frame moving with the orbital system. Then circular distance, r, traveled by the photon in the orbital plane is equivalent for a moving system or a stationary system. However, when the orbital system has an overall linear velocity, the radial velocity component of the photons in orbit reduces in magnitude per pythagorean theorem to maintain the overall resultant photon velocity as the speed of light in a vacuum. This makes the time to travel "r" increase because the orbital velocity is reduced. If these orbital systems are the building blocks atoms, the the overall atomic system clock will "slow down".

Derivation of time dilation in a lepton orbital system: Photon radial velocity in an orbital system at rest vr= c0 and linear velocity vx = 0 where c0 = the speed of light in a vacuum An lepton photon orbital system with a linear velocity will have two velocity components where the total velocity is conserved at c0: vr2 + vx2 = c02 Solving for radial velocity: vr = √(c02-vx2) Change in time of an orbital system at rest: dt = r/c0 Where r = the radial distance traveled during that time Assuming the same distance, r must be traveled an equivalent orbital cycle, the change in time realized when an orbital system is in motion is: dt' = r/vr Substituting for the equation for radial velocity: dt' = r/√(c02-vx2) Looking at the ratio of the change in time realized to the change in time of the original frame of reference: dt'/dt = (r/√(c02-vx2))/(r/c0) = c0/√(c02-vx2) Dividing numerator and denominator by c0: dt'/dt = 1/√(1-vx2/c02) Which is identical to the Lorentz factor. The time dilation effect in Spring Theory due to velocity is equivalent to GR.

The time dilation effect is equivalent from either perspective (my theory or GR). The major difference is that Spring Theory explains the nature of space time rather than making an assumption that "time slows down". Before I go into the math, I want to display some more of the Perez Model. This is a deterministic theory where the physical mechanisms must be understood first. Positron– 2 photons in orbit or multiple photons in superposition Photon A charge, +1/2, (Negative belly 100%) Photon B charge, +1/2, (Negative belly 100%) Net charge +1 Opposite charged sides of photons are in synchronous orbit This is simply the reverse configuration of an electron with the "tires" towards the center of the system with the "sun roof" of the photon on the outside. In the antimatter configuration, the negative charge components of the photons are buried in the orbital system with the positive charge affect space around the orbital system. A really interesting twist to the configuration is the Neutrino (electron neutrino to be exact): Photon A charge, +1/2, (Negative belly 100%) Photon B charge, -1/2, (Positive belly 100%) Net charge 0 Opposite charged sides of photons are in synchronous orbit In this configuration, one photon has its "sun roof" on the outside of the system and the other has its "tires" on the outside. These two photons in orbit almost cancel their magnetic and electric effects. The neutrino only comes in two configurations - left hand and right hand spin. These are also the neutrino and antineutrino respectively and explains why there are only two versions. If you inverted the photons to create a proper antineutrino, the particle would appear identical to the original. The balance of the electrical and magnetic fields explain why there is very little interaction with other particles. One experimental test would be to slow down a left hand neutrino to zero velocity and then accelerate it in the other direction. You will then have a right hand neutrino or antineutrino.

To understand Electrodynamics, or specifically the quantum version, the mechanism behind it must be modeled. Space Compression Spring Theory is a deterministic theory explaining the electrical charges and magnetic fields. Here is how the mechanism works - To have enough energy to compress space most likely requires a photon stack (multiple photons in superposition) but simplified to a single photon (gamma ray), the model (Perez Model) is as follows: Magnetic fields are the result of the vortex created by the compression and decompression areas (similar to the Coriolis effect). The photon creates a positive torque effect on the space in one direction across the "front seat" of the photon and a negative torque effect in the other direction across the "back seat" of the photon. The electric fields are the result of space transition areas of compression and decompression. Think of the positive electric field as space decompressing, or a transition area from a compressive state to a decompressive state. The negative electric charge is the opposite. As the compression travels through space the point at which the velocity of the vortex edge is closest to space at rest is tangential to the direction of the electrical charge. Space Compression Spring Theory really starts to make sense when you begin to model particles (Perez Model). The next major assumption of the theory is that all Leptons are made from 2 body photon orbital systems and Hadrons are made from three body photon orbital systems. Starting with the most common lepton, the electron, it is modeled as 2 photons in orbit or multiple photons in superposition: Photon A charge, -1/2, (Positive belly 100%) Photon B charge, -1/2, (Positive belly 100%) Net charge -1 Positive charged sides of photons are in synchronous orbit You can see how having the "sunroof" of the photon on the inside of the orbital system, the effect of the positive charge is buried and only the negative effect is felt in space. Also notice how the magnetic fields are lined up to explain the magnetic moment. Electrons can have a right hand spin or left hand spin and oscillates at the speed of light if it is at rest. Electrons with a linear velocity component will oscillate at just under the speed of light because the total overall velocity of the photon is conserved.

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? Space Compression Spring Theory postulates 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 driver’s 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 velocity because this 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 particles (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. Particles consisting of photons in orbit will experience time dilation because the speed of their photons is slower in decompressed space and the system's orbital cycles are extended. In addition, matter traveling through space at a high velocity will also experience time dilation because the total velocity of the photon is conserved. As the linear component of the photon velocity is increased, the radial component will be decreased also resulting in lengthier orbital cycles. Time is constant, we just perceive that time slows down because the photons that make up our bodies and our measuring devices travel slower. This translates to a perception that the speed of light the same for any observer and an explanation for time dilation. Einstein just had it backwards. Time is constant. The speed of light is variable.

Haven't seen a discussion of the tidal forces of the sun. An important aspect of anything falling into a large mass is the extreme tidal forces on the falling object (or grazing object) that tends to cause it to break apart. This is the result of the difference in gravitational force across the cross section of the falling body is greater than the forces holding the body together. Anything can fall into the sun - just most of it will arrive there in pieces.