alpha2cen Posted February 16, 2011 Share Posted February 16, 2011 (edited) Some different viewpoint, we can see photon. Photon has a mass, but it has no inertia mass. E=mC2 Photon's "primal mass" is (+-)1/2( E/C2) Photon has it's anti-photon When photon collide with some particle, it transfer energy to the particle by using it's own annihilation reaction. The concept has not been authorized yet. More discussion is needed. It can explain photon disappearing after collide with other particles. Photon and anti-photon concepts are discussed on the main stream physics. But it have not been discussed that photon disappearing after colliding with other particles. To describe this phenomena we introduce new concept "primal mass". Photon has +1/2(E/C2) and anti-photon has -1/2(E/C2). When photons collide with other particles, photon and anti-photon are annihilated together, and make energy. Using this concept we can explain next photon problems. 1) Photon and anti-photon concept. 2) Photon disappearing after colliding with other particles. 3) Photon mass , i.e., everyone state that "why photon has no mass?". Particle and massless problem. Edited February 16, 2011 by alpha2cen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imatfaal Posted February 16, 2011 Share Posted February 16, 2011 Is the antiphoton main stream physics? I thought the photon was its own anti-particle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klaynos Posted February 16, 2011 Share Posted February 16, 2011 A photon is its own antiparticle. Photon annihilation is called destructive interference, of course there is always a matching constructive location as well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted February 16, 2011 Share Posted February 16, 2011 What does "primal mass" get us? What does it explain that is currently unexplained, or at least explain better than what we already have? i.e. what does this predict, and how do you test it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mississippichem Posted February 16, 2011 Share Posted February 16, 2011 (edited) When photons collide with other particles, photon and anti-photon are annihilated together, and make energy. Using this concept we can explain next photon problems. So a photon collides with said "anti-photon" [i'll leave that one alone for the moment] to yield energy in the form of what?...more photons? Edited February 16, 2011 by mississippichem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpha2cen Posted February 17, 2011 Author Share Posted February 17, 2011 (edited) What does "primal mass" get us? What does it explain that is currently unexplained, or at least explain better than what we already have? i.e. what does this predict, and how do you test it? There are all summaries. Dirac states us vacuum is the state of full of energy. So, matter is the some of the energy, and anti-matter is energy empty space. This site states you vacuum and anti-matter concept. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_sea The concept comes from Dirac's theory. Anti-hydrogen primal mass is opposite, but inertia mass is plus. According to Higgs boson concept, inertia mass value is not depend on mass polarity. Inertia mass is like this. If you attach spheres top and down of the rubber plate, and draw the rubber plate, the total fore to draw the plate is depend on the sphere number, not on the position of spheres. In this case the sphere which are attached on the top of the plate is matter and the sphere which are attached below the rubber plate are anti-matter. Primal mass proton 1 anti-proton -1 mass proton 1 anti-proton 1 the relation mass and primal mass in general mmass = |mprimal| I think about the benefit of this new primal mass. In the fusion reaction we can calculate the reactant and product mass easily. m(P) + m( P-) =0 *Proton + anti-proton annihilation m(P) + m(p)=~2 *Proton + proton fusion m( P-)+m( P-)=~2 * anti-proton + anti-proton fusion 2m(P)2m(n)+m( P-)=~3 *Helium+anti-proton annihilation 3m(p)3m(n) +m( P-)=~5 *lithium + anti-proton annihilation where m is primal mass, fusion energy is released. I also think that this concept would be tested by many theoretician. And I wish the experiment of finding mass origin were finished rapidly. m(photon)+m(anti-photon)=0 The test method is Higgs boson existence from collider experiment. Light has +- primal mass, but has not inertia mass. Edited February 17, 2011 by alpha2cen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steevey Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 A photon is a photon, it has no inherent charge that makes it anti or normal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 What does "primal mass" get us? What does it explain that is currently unexplained, or at least explain better than what we already have? i.e. what does this predict, and how do you test it? (Yes, I asked that already. I can't help but notice that you didn't answer.) IOW, how would one try and falsify your conjecture? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpha2cen Posted February 17, 2011 Author Share Posted February 17, 2011 (edited) What does "primal mass" get us? What does it explain that is currently unexplained, or at least explain better than what we already have? i.e. what does this predict, and how do you test it? (Yes, I asked that already. I can't help but notice that you didn't answer.) IOW, how would one try and falsify your conjecture? Primal mass definition. We can write particle and anti-particle creation reaction like this. vacuum +m particles + energy -----------> (vacuum - newly generated particle space) + (m +n) particles + n anti-particles Next we simplify the equation vacuum + energy ---------------> (vacuum - newly generated particle space) + n particles + n anti-particles From above reaction equation, when the total net energy to make the particles and anti-particles is E , we define the particle primal mass, 1/2n(E/C2) and the anti-particle primal mass, -1/2n(E/C2). The signal +- differences are the filled energy state above the vacuum and the empty energy state in the vacuum. And, the concept that the filled energy state above the vacuum and the empty energy state in the vacuum comes from Dirac's theory. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_sea vacuum mass 0 particle mass m anti-particle mass m vacuum primal mass............0 particle primal mass............m anti-particle primal mass.....-m Edited February 17, 2011 by alpha2cen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D H Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 Why are you opening yet another thread on this same tired nonsense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpha2cen Posted February 17, 2011 Author Share Posted February 17, 2011 (edited) Why are you opening yet another thread on this same tired nonsense? Using mass concept, can we explain fission, fusion and annihilation perfectly? No matter how two particles make fusion, the particles do not disappear. How do we explain the mass disappearing at the annihilation reaction? Edited February 17, 2011 by alpha2cen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D H Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 Using mass concept, can we explain fission, fusion and annihilation perfectly? You are creating a false dilemma here. Perfectly? Almost certainly not. Perfection is an illusory goal. More to the point, what observed problem in physics are you trying to solve with your nonsense of primal mass, and how does your nonsense notion explain that phenomenon? No matter how two particles make fusion, the particles do not disappear.How do we explain the mass disappearing at the annihilation reaction? Non sequitur. Just because you don't understand something doesn't mean no one understands it. There are multiple ways of looking at annihilation events. I'll look at an electron-positron annihilation; other annihilation events are similar in form. Here are three points of view: Mass is a form of energy, specifically bound energy. From this point of view, what is happening in annihilation events is just conversion of one form of energy to another. The energy of the photons created from the annihilation event is given by the relativistic c. Note that this formula falls apart if the mass of either particle negative. Energy is a form of mass. From this point of view, what is happening in annihilation events is just conversion of one form of mass to another. The intrinsic mass of the photons created by the annihilation event is exactly equal to the intrinsic mass of the electron-positron pair. The intrinsic mass of a system of particles follows directly from the mass-energy equivalence formula. Mass and energy, while different, are nonetheless related. Specifically, they are related by the mass-energy equivalence formula. Note how the mass-energy equivalence formula plays a key role in each of these interpretations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 E=mc^2 works pretty well. I will ask yet again what "primal mass" gives us that existing physics does not. How does "primal mass" fit in with CP violation? i.e. when an antiparticle turns into a particle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpha2cen Posted February 18, 2011 Author Share Posted February 18, 2011 E=mc^2 works pretty well. I will ask yet again what "primal mass" gives us that existing physics does not. How does "primal mass" fit in with CP violation? i.e. when an antiparticle turns into a particle? The difference is fusion and annihilation explanation. current physics explanation fusion m(proton) + n(neutron)--------->(about m+n)(proton neutron nuclear) fitted well annihilation m(proton) + m(anti-proton)----->(about 2m) (others) 2m is not fitted Next step is required. Form E=mc2 , energy 2mc2 is released so remaining mass is 0. primal mass concept fusion m(proton) + n(neutron)---------->(about m+n)(proton neutron nuclear) fitted well annihilation m(proton) + -m(anti-proton)----->(0) (others) fitted well. We can easily calculate the remaining mass of fusion or annihilation reaction. At the complex fusion and annihilation reaction calculation, we can easily estimate the remaining mass by using primal mass concept. We do not fully understand anti-particle world. The matter Universe, i.e., proton, neutron and electron particle system is stable. We do not know whether anti-particle Universe is stable or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D H Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 We do not fully understand anti-particle world. The matter Universe, i.e., proton, neutron and electron particle system is stable. We do not know whether anti-particle Universe is stable or not. Just because you do not fully understand antiparticles does not mean that we (read: scientists) do not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 Primal mass doesn't appear to help in explaining phenomena other than annihilation. Since antimatter can turn into matter it's not conserved, so it doesn't even help in all antimatter interactions. It's just an ad-hoc explanation for annihilation. It adds nothing to existing theories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D H Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 It doesn't explain annihilation, either. From whence comes the energy in annihilation? In the standard model the energy arises precisely because both a particle and its antiparticle have positive mass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 It doesn't explain annihilation, either. From whence comes the energy in annihilation? In the standard model the energy arises precisely because both a particle and its antiparticle have positive mass. Right. At best it seems to be a poor stand-in for baryon number or lepton number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpha2cen Posted February 19, 2011 Author Share Posted February 19, 2011 (edited) Primal mass doesn't appear to help in explaining phenomena other than annihilation. This is one of the useful field. It gives us more basic understanding of our mass world and Universe. But this concept is not clear before Higgs boson existence is proved. If Higgs boson exists, the minus primal mass can turn into plus inertia mass. massinertia=|massprimal| Since antimatter can turn into matter it's not conserved, so it doesn't even help in all antimatter interactions. Antimatter can turn into matter. I have not heard about this phenomena before. Do you have any literature? It's just an ad-hoc explanation for annihilation. The primal mass, i.e., anti-matter having minus primal mass is based on Dirac sea concept. Edited February 19, 2011 by alpha2cen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 This is one of the useful field. It gives us more basic understanding of our mass world and Universe. But this concept is not clear before Higgs boson existence is proved. If Higgs boson exists, the minus primal mass can turn into plus inertia mass. massinertia=|massprimal| You have done absolutely nothing to back up these claims. At best it may help you to think you understand antimatter. Antimatter can turn into matter. I have not heard about this phenomena before. Do you have any literature? There's the whole matter-antimatter imbalance problem, and you can Google on matter antimatter cp violation The primal mass, i.e., anti-matter having minus primal mass is based on Dirac sea concept. It's still ad-hoc. Who uses the Dirac sea concept for anything but historical context? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Time Mechanics Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 The photon does have mass represented by the electron. Remember a photon is the observation of harmonic motion of the electron. A positron and electron of the same resonance will transmit destructive waves. How primal mass doesn't make into the category of "Pseudoscience" is beyond me. Mass is the definition of the flow of time and so is a wave the anti-observation. Particle physics makes sure the energies are balanced but lacks the ability to describe the process. Like y(+distance)y = e+(-distance)e-+u where space becomes component and space is described in physics as a flow of time. But that ends up being pseudoscience because it makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 The photon does have mass represented by the electron. Remember a photon is the observation of harmonic motion of the electron. A positron and electron of the same resonance will transmit destructive waves. How primal mass doesn't make into the category of "Pseudoscience" is beyond me. Mass is the definition of the flow of time and so is a wave the anti-observation. Particle physics makes sure the energies are balanced but lacks the ability to describe the process. Like y(+distance)y = e+(-distance)e-+u where space becomes component and space is described in physics as a flow of time. But that ends up being pseudoscience because it makes sense. ! Moderator Note You need to keep your own speculations separate from others'. Responses here still must be drawn from accepted physics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpha2cen Posted February 20, 2011 Author Share Posted February 20, 2011 (edited) You have done absolutely nothing to back up these claims. At best it may help you to think you understand antimatter. Fusion and annihilation are major parts of nuclear reaction in the Universe. The reactions are like this. mpn (Deuterium)+ mpn(Deuterium)--------->m2p2n(Helium) mp(proton)+mp-(anti-proton)--------------------->0 where, m is mass. We can explain fusion reaction well. According to the current mass concept, how do we explain mass disappearing during the annihilation reaction? Particles mass are not easily disappearing immediately in the Universe. Then, is it right that we consider particle and antiparticle reaction as very special case in the Universe? Edited February 20, 2011 by alpha2cen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 According to the current mass concept, how do we explain mass disappearing during the annihilation reaction? E=mc^2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now