CONTROVERSIAL...? GET THIS! ...photons w/o charge...

[humanbydefault]

I understand your surprise when you start reading this lines but be patient and you'll see MY POINT.
Go to any book, any documentary film or any internet page and see that the concept of "photon" is [thanks to Einstein...?] linked to two specific words: "massless and chargeless."
I don't have any hope whatsoever that I'll convince you about such ERROR, but I'm going to try my very best and [IF YOU "HEAR ME OUT" here...] maybe I could come across some of you... Don't bet on it!
More than 100 years ago the work of Plank and Einstein among many others stated that photons have NO CHARGE whatsoever. You see, they can deflect magnetic needles and they can't repel magnets. Light [made from them] do not repel each other when two beams of light confront in space... etc.etc.
At this moment you'd probably be thinking [...if this guy is contradicting himself by supporting Einstein's theories, what a heck is he talking about...?]
Give me a minute and I'll prove you my point!
We [as human beings] have OBSERVED WITH OUR MEASURING DEVICES that the smallest electrical charge is the charge of ONE electron... right? Right!
WHY? Well, the answer to that is whether you like it or not a puzzle for every one yet. Are there theories TRYING and ASSUMING to have the right answer? There are millions of them, but don't be missguided by that. The answer is hiding inside the true nature of the vacuum, and no where else!
It is true that in the vacuum and in every place the laws of the vacuum rule, the charge of ONE ELECTRON is the "supreme" unit.
But hold on your horses! The law does not rule inside the atom structure and therefor across molecules and lattices or crystals. I said it before [didn't I?] that there is no "wave function" attached to the idea of tunneling of charges. My point is simple! HARMONICS! patterns that extend in space [the square of the distance] from the core of the atom with a decrease of energy-density!
Electro-magnetic energy is "transformed" in those harmonics or patterns [standing nuclear waves] and they are scattered in two ways: either photons or electrons! The actual condition that determines which one is "manufactured" is the rule impossed by the VACUUM.
Now! when two or more atoms join together in molecules and chains of them there are harmonics [orbitals] that extend BEYOND simple electronic orbits [as we are tought to be limited by the numebr of electrons]. The energy NEEDED to manufacture quanta of E-M energy inside them is logically less dense [smaller that the needed to produce one electron].
THAT'S WHY I've said that even photons have charge! Photons are made by E-M energy [same goes for electrons...what's the difference my friends?] Since the DENSITY RULED BY THE VACUUM [UNIVERSE IN FACT] equals that of ONE ELECTRON CHARGE, any action or intervention OUTSIDE THE MOLECULAR STRUCTURE of pure photons will be useless in our measuring results! HOWEVER! inside a complex maze of interacting harmonics [orbitals]
[like the one found in crystals and chain of molecules] the reality is different.
One photon could change the shape, the actual bond and function of molecules and substance made by molecules if the right amount of energy "hits" the right place inside the chain!
Our body and our brain do not work with high voltage and electrons! The actual potential and currents flowing is due to the action of patterns whose density is much smaller than one electron-charge... Am I wrong here?
So! we [just like Gods in their own pathetic universe] have RULED that the charge of ONE ELECTRON is a universal CONDITION to the flow of current and NO ENERGY less dense [smaller] than that one could be even consider real... That's true dear HUMANS if you concentrate your conclusion based in your limited observations outside the atom. Magnets are the amplification of a process that is formed by billions if not trillions of patterns spinning in the same direction.
Why would be molecules any different? Are we so "small" that we couldn't even consider that even molecules could behave the same way? And why limiting the pattern to the small? Couldn't be thinkable the fact that a gravitational system in a solar system would be born from the actual amplification of a spinning process of masses and charges inside a star?

I hope that 99.99% of you guys won't accept a word I'm saying... You know what? I' counting on it!
Feel free to deliver your opinions in this elemental principle of quantum physics!
One thing I ask... Be honest with yourself first! If you have doubts, ask! If you are going to defend the orthodox views of the universe [the one you could find in any cheap book on Quantum mechanics...] come to me with more than just "Einstein said..." or "HE OR SHE said..."
I want to know what YOU BELIEVE! The others could be wrong too you know?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm going to illustrate this with a simple example:
MONEY! We know that money is made up by denominations: pennies, niquels,dimes, quarters and [in paper format] we find dollars and others more difficult to get...
ANYWAY! If someone in statistics talks to you about an increase in price of 0.005 cents of a dollar you'll be thinking that the guy is nuts!
You couldn't pay me that small amount of currency could you?
Because WE have ruled that pennies are to be the smallest unit! WE DID IT! WE [HUMAN BEAINGS] DECIDED TTHAT IN THAT WAY!
Well, it turns out that the universe also have the rights to decide wich quantum of energy is going to be the universal unit... is it fair?
The universe decided over the actual energy-density of a quantum and about the ways to force speks of energy to bond with each other: standing waves!
That "decision" of the universe was in "own defense." You see, by confronting two or more speks of radiation energy in space and after forming the pattern of what we called "standing waves" energy HAPPENS TO BE SAVED! YES IT IS SAVED! The "side-effect" of such a pattern of interference is SPIN! To complicate things a little bit more spin could have two directions: UP and DOWN!

Tell me your opinion!

[baudrunner]

Okay, simple human, I will respond. I will first appeal to your simple human euclidian sensibilties. Try to view the photonic background as the blank tapestry of nothing out of which space-time and matter are created. Therefore there are no "photons", only discrete photonic quanta, ie small bundles of it, which can only be quantified by the energy that is required to allow us to observe them, such as when we agitate or excite the atoms in a medium by turning on a lightbulb, thereby revealing glimpses of it, but not really. Since this background represents the nothing out of which the Universe is created, both space and matter, it is still nothing - no mass, no charge. You see, your visual appreciation of "light" is all relative to the ability of the cones and rods in your retinal receptors to sense the limited range of all frequencies at which the components of the medium oscillate, and these oscillations are modulations of the properties of the surface atoms of all the objects that you see around you. These modulations in turn are translated into electrical impulses that stimulate neural receptors in the occipital lobe in your human brain. Are things really as you perceive them to be, perception being defined as sight? Or are they the product of some darker hidden recess of cranial potential? Close your eyes and decide.

[mkirkpatrick]

HBD,very interesting stuff,spin is my middle name?All things spin my friend,they are called,vortexes,and are the very
embodiment of economy,all the energy they save,is shared out among the
elect!!Just kidding my friend.
kindest regards michael.

[Aiya-Oba]

Well, I am willing to say your "Photon Theory" is on the side of progress and new understanding, atop the shoulders of the greats of physics such as Albert Einstein.
There is no question ,there are many more unbelievable things for humans to
believe, to truely understand the geometry of the universe as:the Continuum in the Discrete.Certainly, photons have hidden charge and mass.just as electron has content yet unknown to humans. It all makes for an interesting future for
those with open and creative minds.Everthing is in everything.-Aiya-Oba.

[humanbydefault]

Lets' put aside for a moment the fact that the way [most of us] see light in specific colors and frequencies has to do with our anatomy... I don't think that here [I mean in this forum] those who have a crush with philosophy would dare to state that light is a product of our "wild imagination..." just as the rest of nature. It would be a very hypnotic and self-convincing one since even measuring devices are capable of DETECTING, MEASURING and OBSERVING a type of energy called Electro-magnetic AMONG MANY MANY OTHERS...
So, let's put our minds and hearts to work with our imagination in the context of PHYSICS AND QUANTUM MECHANICS for the time being...shall we?
Besides, those spending their time in a bubble of words about an individually-fitting universe are not the ones in the news today... condensed matter and its marvelous technology is as solid and realistic as we are!
Did you get the title of this thread?
Let's repeat it for the pleasure of it:
Could we affirm that not until we have a full glass of water we couldn't calm our thirst or water a plant in the garden or wash our hands?
No one [thanks God for it!...] denies the "content" of light... not even you who reads this post, I hope! ELECTRO-MAGNETIC ENERGY...That's the name.
It's the same making for "electrons." Of corse some very smart guys with a great and DESERVED reputation [do not missread my words...] claim photons as "messenger particles" that sort of transfer energy between electrons... you know the rest I hope... If not get a book of QED and read all about it.
It makes perfect sense! A little quantity of "water" trasfer between two glasses WITH DIFFERENT VOLUME could mean something...!
In the vacuum "electrons" have all the same "volume" "water density" [charge] because the ether force them to, but inside crystals and lattices of solids the story is entirely different!
A little "drop" of "water" even if it is not enough to fullfil a glass of 8 onces could make a difference in the bonding [coupling] structure of molecules.
Einstein himself imagined that photons [UV high energy ones] would be able to "knock out" "electrons" from the atomic orbits...! Well I have said that things are not happening the same way and I came with another explanation about the same observed-conclusions. The point is that Einstein-milliken's lumps of E-M energy [photons] were the little portion of "water" needed to fill the atomic oscillator composed by my "electronless" harmonics.
We FRABICATE [sounds rude does it?] lets' say we produce electricity [current of charges across wires] with the help of magnetic fields and solar pannels that "capture" light from a star called Sun. In the first case E-M energy is much more dense and "glass-ready packed" in ether-electrons. In the second example E-M energy is weaker and will take time to it to manufacture electrons.
When I said MANUFACTURING ELECTRONS I didn't mean creating MATTER. Electrons (outside the atom) are [to me] just quanta of energy with a specific energy density that makes for what we knoW as the charge of ONE ELECTRON. In order to create MATTER we would have to be able to create the same energy found inside stars, put it together in a standing wave pattern of interaction with the size or magnitude of leptons... This doesn't sound like a present HUMAN technological possibility TO ME!
Is it a work only destined to be done by God? I tell you what: When I came to this forum I decided to write my views and revealing images in a scientific context. For me [as it was for Albert Einstein too who in fact was a very religious person by the way...] there is an OBJECTIVE REALITY OUT THERE!
I am part of that reality and I am trying to explain to myself [and to others interesting in hear me out] the answers (the way I see them) for those puzzles we face today in science. Theology was never my favorite and I tend to keep it that way... no offense to any one in this beautiful forum!
I just feel I had to clarify to some of you that this section of the forum is about quantum mechanics and not until we finally unveil the secrets of matter and the TOE, we should engage ourselves in guessing games about the participation of God in all this... It doesn't sound right.
There is a section about philosophy and paranormal stuff right here in this forum, I suggest to those highly motivated by that subject to visit them more often.
Anyway! I was saying that the fact that electrical current of charges can't be transported in a light ray it doesn't mean that the actual tapestry of lights is other than E-M energy and the same making for electrons.
The vacuum does not allow for charges other than electrons the way we have [wrongly] assumed as eternal and universal PARTICLES with some magic attributes like a mass holding charges and moving in a ficticious and virtual "wave function" as abstract as the human image of God.
The rules and laws of the ether [vacuum] are not omnipotent inside long chain of molecules! Light is a weaker form of the same energy found in electrons and the same one in so-called protons and so on! It's the actual density what makes them act differently... positive or negative? it was all a human-given conventionality to make since easier to represent in our equations.

HUMANBYDEFAULT

latest references of related topics:
http://www.toequest.com/forum/general-physics/1504-misguided-the-measurement-procedure.html
http://www.toequest.com/forum/quantum-physics/1450-what-might-have-troubbled-einstein.html
http://www.toequest.com/forum/physics-articles/824-rediscovering-the-atomic-model-part-two.html
http://www.toequest.com/forum/quantum-physics/949-theoretical-clean-up-dirty-physics.html
http://www.toequest.com/forum/quantum-physics/990-bose-einstein-condensate-same-matter-different-feeling.html
http://www.toequest.com/forum/your-toe-theory/1039-oops-many-electrons-takes-right-professor.html

[subversion]

so are you suggesting that photons are negatively or positively charged?

[baudrunner]

I wish that you would reduce your evangelical physics diatribes down to the basic fundamentals of what it is that you are trying to say. From what I gather, the gist of wat you are saying is essentially a disagreement with the status quo in the field of quantum physics. Uh, just because something doesn't have a charge, it can still have a charge? Uh, if you squeezed enough photons into a well packed snowball type of object then you would have a charged object with mass? Or something like that? But that experiment is outside of the realm of possibility and the closest that we can come to defining a real photon is that it is a small quantity of the nothing out of which everything was wrested, including space-time and matter.

[humanbydefault]

If any of you has done some studies on the nature of light you would see that photons propagates [move] in space in a diferent manner compared to other quanta of E-M such as "electrons." They do not have 1/2 spins as their cousins the more complex electrons and therefore they couldn't "produce" any magnetic field around them. It's is no secret that their "substance" is nothing more and less than Electro-magnetic and that is referred to the actual nature of their internal ENERGY. Photons are being observed during decay and so-called "jumping up and down of "electrons"... It makes sense right? after all I have always said that even Electromagnetic energy is DERIVED-COMES FROM-decays from ONE ONLY ENERGY sitting inside the very atomic core during their mutual interaction...am I right? Of course I am Mr. experimentalist! You know better than anyone that since the very beginnings I have OUTLINED THE VERY DETAILS of my atomic model and [worthy is to say] it DIFFERES 100% from the one Neils Bohr theorized to be the real one...
That's why photons HAD TO CALLED "messenger particles"... They were always present in any transformation process inside mater and they are [believe it or not] always present during the so-called "ATOMIC COLLISIONS" inside molecules every time.
Scientists talk about the quantum numbers and eigenstates of those one when refering to elemental particles like "electrons." They observed according to results of spectral lines that those [how is what they still call them?] Oh yes! point-particles that sometimes behave as waves... a magnetic momentum as the only reason to cause such conclusive results, and then they INVENTED a SPIN that our "weak human imagination" can not figure out and only smart mathematician could...!
How could we even try to imagine an atom based in J.J. Thompson's particles spining around a cheap Bohr's "solar system" type of model...?
The fact that "electrons" are being scattered from atoms AFTER ENERGY WAS ABSORBED or during DECAYS, does not mean that they were INTERGRAL PART of the atomic structure!

"THE ATOMIC STRUCTURE OF ATOMS IS DEFINED BY THE INTERACTIONS TAKING PLACE AT VARIOUS INTERNAL LEVELS OF THE NUCLEUS."

"THE ORBITS [assumed to be populated by point-particles called "electrons"] ARE JUST THE SOLUTION OF BONDS BETWEEN DEEPER HARMONICS."

"THE REARRANGEMENT AND CONSTANT TRANSFORMATION OF THE BONDS HAPPENING IN DEEPER LEVELS OF THE ATOM BRINGS ABOUT THE SCATERING OF PHOTONS AND SOMETIMES EVEN "ELECTRONS" [during Beta decay] FROM THE VERY CORE OF THE ATOM."

"AT NO TIME [It means never in english] WHATSOEVER THE ACTUAL STRUCTURE OF THE ATOM IS CHANGED OR TRANSFORMED BY EXTERNAL BONDS OR EVEN DURING THE ABSORPTION OF EXTERNAL ELECTRO-MAGNETIC ENERGY!" THOSE PROCESSES DO NOT RWACH THE ATOMIC CORE AND THEREFORE CAN NOT ALTER THE HARMONIC SPECTRUM OF THE ORBITS."

"AT NO TIME [well, you know what I mean] WHATSOEVER A POINT-PARTICLE "JUMP UP OR DOWN" AS THE RESULT OF THE ABSORPTION OF ENERGY! IT IS SIMPLE-INERT MASS WHAT DOES THE "MOVE." THAT'S IS WHAT MAKES ATOMS TO ACT AS "ATOMIC OSCILLATORS" AND COULD PERFORM THE PRODUCTION OF PHOTONS TOO.

Of course, if you try to make sense out of a wrong picture of REALITY as they insist we live in, I wouldn't be surprise to see mathematicians trying to steal the "show."
Those quantum numbers assumed to be private property of a piece of matter baptized with the name "electron" are needed to justify and try to kake fit a bunch of results and conclusive observation into the description of a REALITY Albert Einstein himself was unwilling to believe.

It's not quantum mechanics! It is the atomic model and the way we try to depict to ourselves the PHYSICAL REALITY what's FLAWED!

[humanbydefault]

YES OUR INSTRUMENTS SHOW ABSOLUTELY NO TYPE OF ELECTRICAL CHARGE WHEN IT COMES TO PHOTONS... But before turning the page over let's specify that all that happens "in the vacuum." Let me put it in other way: those measured were photons traveling across space and not moving inside crystals of solids... see the difference now?
By the way... the question you haven't asked is why are they [photons] showing NO CHARGE whatsoever?
The answer is plain and simple: THE VACUUM! The nature of the vacuum rules that for a specific energy density the interaction qunatum-vacuum condition a transformation of the E-M energy into a next step of "quanlity." It's like a "mutation" I couldn't explain other than imagine it. Do I have "empirical evidences" to assure that is so? No I wish I had them but I don't.
To this point in time my theory remains just what it is: an unprovable theory and nothing else.
How do you believe electrons propagate across lattices of solids?
Do you imagine that they move as point-particles or billiard balls as they tought you in high school in the seventies?
Come on! snap out of that stupid dream! They move across wires as WAVES [what they are and always were] waves of quantized E-M energy. This is a fact and I have nothing to do with that observation... just in case you didn't know about it. So, what's the difference between the way light propagates versus the way electrons [waves] also propagate in crystals? NONE!
In fact tunneling [as I being saying all along] is the "passing throught" of E-M energy from one point to another [across a barrier a typical "human point particle with a definitive charge and mass] couldn't performe... unless you believe in electronic-miracles...
The E-M energy [in tunneling] is modulated or transformed in harmonics belonging to an scale well farther away from electronic ones. No "wave-function" is necessary here. The so-called wave-function they claim exist and no one has show eveidence about is part of the "invisible" structure of the atom as their harmonics extend across space. Remember that when I speak about harmonics I am referring to the same pattern built from bonded orbitals in deeper levels of the atom: The reality that I mentioned in my thread titled "what might have troubbled Einstein" right here in this forum.
It's interesting after all! Tunneling is a process that we observed all the time in condensed matter, but the cause of it remains still a probability based on uncertainties [mathematical ones of course].
The human ATOM ends with electrons! Since we are not able to measure a point-particle smaller than they are we had to stop right there!
My model has no END! NO END is the right word so you could get it easier. The fact that energy is still decreasing with the square of the distance from the atomic core to the outermost orbits does not mean that it will end "any time soon." The base for our uncertainties is due to the actual limitation of our theories and in no less importance the limitation of our "apparatus." If we expect to find the TOE based on the rudimentary of our atomic model and our ways to measure it forget it! Let's talk about fishing instead!
LIGHT DOES HAVE CHARGE! That's the only reason for a ray of light to deviate its path while propagating close to a star. It wasn's a bump in space-time my friend, it was the effect of an orbit made by spinning energies inside a star. NO STAR NO GRAVITY! If the sole presence of matter in space is capable of "curving" the fabric of space how come there are no gravity systems in the universe where the center was ruled by a big planet? As far as we know only star systems are present and those are the center of every trajectory in space.
By the way is so simple! If our solar system [as well as the other nearby] are so curved already by the presence of the sun and the rest of planets and moons... How could you explain to me [making sense eh!] that comets fly across entire systems as if nothing were there at all! They do not pay attention to the already distored and bumped fabric of our space at all! not even their path is changed for God's sake!
Gravity is the result of a process inside the star and we are puppets moving around it with no control whatsoever. Our planet and the rest of the other [including Jupiter in the group] are "curving" nothing! We are here in this orbit of ours because the Sun mandate it with their internal structure.
Don't you see the parallel in both issues? Humans believe that the solar system is just like their pathetic atomic model they assumed universal: both were built by pieces with no conexion what so ever. Electrons are like the earth or mars... they could chose a different path by the collision of a meteor or something! Come on! Even if the Earth were destryed tomorrow, in relative short time [perhaps millions of years I don't have a clue] another Earth will be right here with the same orbit today! Pieces from outside systems will rush to where the Earth is now and they will replace the same matter. It will be a bunch of moons like ours today? The shape and actual magnitude of matter will determine the final orbit but it will be located between mars and venus just like today...
The orbits [all of them including deeper ones] are ruled and created by the interference between two "suns." Those suns are speks of radiation energy in a pattern of interference. In the center of our galaxy there has to be a core and is that interaction what gives as a resule the orbits each galaxy component of the cluster will occupy! No collisions and no chaos! It's all perfect! just like the true nature of matter. There will be changes, mutations and transformation inside the systems... we are born, live and die and so the universe... but not all of it at the same time. The human race is in a permanent presence thanks to the process of evolution, but the clock is ticking to us too. The pattern of standing waves is the only presence will never die... it is the reason for the existence of music, matter and the universe too.

HUMANBYDEFAULT

[mkirkpatrick]

how can you keep up these massive postsHBT my
hand gets weary after about twenty lines,are you a keep fit merchant!
kind regards michael.