Matter are EM-Wave packets

[jouyang3]

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

Edited April 5, 2013 by jouyang3

[swansont]

EM waves travel at c in a vacuum, as per Maxwell's equations. How can a quasi-stationary particle be made of something moving linearly at c?

[jouyang3]

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).

[imatfaal]

 

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.

[latex]\lambda = \frac{h}{p}[/latex]

[latex] \lambda p = h [/latex]

Surely as momentum p decreases and as planck's constant h is fixed, lambda must increase

 

 

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 in particles of less wavelengths 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

[jouyang3]

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.

Edited April 5, 2013 by jouyang3

[Arnaud Antoine ANDRIEU]

EM waves travel at c in a vacuum, as per Maxwell's equations. How can a quasi-stationary particle be made of something moving linearly at c?

 

The only solution is the proof of the existence of a superluminal mechanical clock . The quantum vacuum separates the matter of anti-matter. Mathematically speaking, these speeds are on the order of millon of millard times faster than c ; and it still clocked at ².

It is unimaginable, but possible. Philosophically speaking, for our creator : one year can become a nano second. Only our biological clock allows us to see the matier as perceived. It is the same for time perception.

 

 

An example of the maximum density of the level of the lowest energy (at the peak) represents the incrémentassion clocked a speed c. In the center the velocity of the particle-wave is propagated in ². (See inelastic colision http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inelastic_collision ). In the case of linear propagation sufit it to add a curl. Propagation visual will be linearly extrapolated.

 

But then we must be admitted to the system at infinite gravity center itself. That it works with a single sourse of energy.

[swansont]

The only solution is the proof of the existence of a superluminal mechanical clock .

 

!

Moderator Note

This isn't your thread. Don't hijack discussions, even in speculations, with OT speculative nonsense. If you want to discuss "superluminal mechanical clocks" etc., do it in its own thread.

[qsa]

there are tons of ideas on EM as the Origin of mass started way back by Lorentz and others.

 

see as an example

 

http://arxiv.org/abs/0710.5619

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_mass

 

The Higgs has considerably weakened these arguments, but I think the pundits will not give up easily.

[Arnaud Antoine ANDRIEU]

!

Moderator Note

This isn't your thread. Don't hijack discussions, even in speculations, with OT speculative nonsense. If you want to discuss "superluminal mechanical clocks" etc., do it in its own thread.

 

I never knew that the quantum electrodynamics (QED) of the Hartman effect was speculations. The Hartman effect suggests superluminal velocities as the evanescent tunneling time tends to a constant for large barriers (high frequency EM waves) . http://www.prlog.org/11901363-winfuls-argument-against-superluminality-in-the-hartman-effect-is-supported-by-qed.html

Edited April 5, 2013 by Arnaud Antoine ANDRIEU

[swansont]

I never knew that the quantum electrodynamics (QED) of the Hartman effect was speculations. The Hartman effect suggests superluminal velocities as the evanescent tunneling time tends to a constant for large barriers (high frequency EM waves) . http://www.prlog.org/11901363-winfuls-argument-against-superluminality-in-the-hartman-effect-is-supported-by-qed.html

 

!

Moderator Note

I don't know how you got from superluminal mechanical clocks to the Hartman effect (which is not mentioned in your previous post), nor do I particularly care. Your post was OT, as was this response. Please follow the rules.

 

That would include not further disrupting threads by responding to modnotes. You can discuss them elsewhere, e.g. using the report post function, or via PM

[Arnaud Antoine ANDRIEU]

I just want to help with it.

 

I stop hijack.

[Mellinia]

How would the wave packet carry charge?

[Arnaud Antoine ANDRIEU]

How would the wave packet carry charge?

 

Can I say an idea about it?

 

[swansont]

Can I say an idea about it?

 

 

Can you answer using jouyang3's model?

[Arnaud Antoine ANDRIEU]

Can you answer using jouyang3's model?

 

 

\nu \alpha x (\rho (n/100%))

 

 

 

n is the amount of energy desired to liberate

Edited April 6, 2013 by Arnaud Antoine ANDRIEU

[jouyang3]

How would the wave packet carry charge?

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.

 

 

 

\nu \alpha x (\rho (n/100%))

 

 

 

n is the amount of energy desired to liberate

 

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.

Edited April 7, 2013 by jouyang3

[Mellinia]

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.

 

How would the direction determine the amount of charge? If so, since there is a fundamental unit of charge(electron/quark), I would expect to see a particular direction, when I try to change it, the charge carried cannot be reduced further. However, there can be infinite directions.

 

I'm interested to see how this explanation would, on the macroscopic level, link Gauss' Law of Electric fields and mass.

[swansont]

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.

 

How do you get an electric field that drops off as 1/r^2 from this? And no classical magnetic field?

[Arnaud Antoine ANDRIEU]

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.

 

Your equation is to simple to calculate it.

 

[latex]\nu \alpha x (\rho (n/100%))[/latex]

How can you formulate your carry charge ? You need sequence equation calculator

 

The charge may move at the same time that the scalar field in the Normal case (dot product) ; But the charge density varies in time. The sequence allows one instorer Velocity control of the charge liberated in time.

 

To do this you must reverse the energy levels. We must leave at 100% of energy in the simplest mathematical case (max expanded matter).

 

Thus we can say:

 

 

Condensed matter = state at rest = zero energy developed

 

Vacuum(empty of matter) = state at full working = 100% energy developed

Edited April 7, 2013 by Arnaud Antoine ANDRIEU

[jouyang3]

Thanks for your posts.

 

How would the direction determine the amount of charge? If so, since there is a fundamental unit of charge(electron/quark), I would expect to see a particular direction, when I try to change it, the charge carried cannot be reduced further. However, there can be infinite directions.

I'm interested to see how this explanation would, on the macroscopic level, link Gauss' Law of Electric fields and mass.

 

 

How do you get an electric field that drops off as 1/r^2 from this? And no classical magnetic field?

 

 

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.

 

 

 

Your equation is to simple to calculate it.

 

[latex]\nu \alpha x (\rho (n/100%))[/latex]

How can you formulate your carry charge ? You need sequence equation calculator

The charge may move at the same time that the scalar field in the Normal case (dot product) ; But the charge density varies in time. The sequence allows one instorer Velocity control of the charge liberated in time.

To do this you must reverse the energy levels. We must leave at 100% of energy in the simplest mathematical case (max expanded matter).

Thus we can say:

 

 

Condensed matter = state at rest = zero energy developed

Vacuum(empty of matter) = state at full working = 100% energy developed

[swansont]

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.

But these wave packets are not at rest, they move at c — they are wave packets — and fields from static charges do not. And how is it that you have an E field but no B field from a classical electron?

[jouyang3]

 

But these wave packets are not at rest, they move at c — they are wave packets — and fields from static charges do not. And how is it that you have an E field but no B field from a classical electron?

 

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.

 

Edited April 12, 2013 by jouyang3