[Profpat]

Since we are on the subject of particles and anti-particles, I remember wave theory, of waves being amplified or cancelled( annihilated ). A wave vs an anti-wave if you will.



Two waves exactly in phase will interfere constructively ( amplify ) exactly out of phase they will interfere destructively ( Cancell )

[Profpat]

[Profpat]

A photon wave packet. With enough energy and its counterpart, it can interact to form a particle and anti-particle.

[Profpat]

[Profpat]

In the above pipe cleaner model, on the left you have the red circle inside the blue circle and the blue circle inside the green circle. In the circle on right you have you have the opposite configuration. It's my belief that every particle has a built in anti-particle and vice-versa, every anti-particle has built in it's own particle.

[JAK]

Originally Posted by Profpat Since we are on the subject of particles and anti-particles, I remember wave theory, of waves being amplified or cancelled( annihilated ). A wave vs an anti-wave if you will. Two waves exactly in phase will interfere constructively ( amplify ) exactly out of phase they will interfere destructively ( Cancell )

Correct me if I'm wrong. My understanding is that the up and down motion of the wave packet of a photon might be an orbital movement. I find this more appealing in that it simplifies the number of fundamental motions - angular velocity perhaps being one or the singular fundamental motion.

Originally Posted by Profpat A photon wave packet. With enough energy and its counterpart, it can interact to form a particle and anti-particle.

I am also aware of some research where two lasers were pointed at each other and the collision created an electron and a positron.

If the colliding photons from the lasers give rise to the two particles, it would seem that the angular motions (orbits) would oppose each other in the collision. Thus, your hypothesis might be accounted for, not by the inherent particle/anti-particle within the wave packet, but rather by the topography of the collision. This seems more parsimonious to me.

Might this be workable within your model?

[dipayankar]

Great JAK, what would the energy berrier be made of?

Originally Posted by JAK As I recall, when a positron collides with an electron, their energy must be conserved. As a result, they create two photons in the collision. Thus, it would seem that photons would be present in both our world as well as one composed of antimatter. Felix, though you indicated that you are not able to define a boundary between these worlds, it would seem that the boundary would allow photons to pass freely. If this is true, could some of the galaxies we observe in the heavens be "anti-galaxies"? Or does your boundary prevent our seeing them?

[Profpat]

Thank you for your post JAK.

I sometimes think string theory may also be spring theory. I also agree that nature follows the fundamental characteristic of parsimony, which is of course consistent with Occams Razor.

When I described each particle having the potential to be it's own anti-particle by flipping it inside out, the thought of convex/concave came to mind. This also would be a very easy step.( positive/negative curvature )


Best to you,

Pat

[Fredrick]

Originally Posted by Profpat Pure speculation, but it doesn't cost anything to speculate, and without it you have problem with CPT symmetry.

In the pentaist delivery, there is no problem with CPT, Pat. The two dimensions do not deliver pure symmetry, even though each dimension when taken separately is identical to the other, and each field dimension is at least flat-wise symmetrical. What is interesting about a field dimension is that a field contains an enforcement that places one side in opposition to the other side. For instance, left exists in opposition to right in a field. And so do up and down. Both field dimensions are identical, yet when combined together, both fields are forced themselves in one form of (op)position only.

To put this simply, one field becomes the left field, the other the right field, while both their properties of up combine and both their properties of down combine.

The universe is basically a dualist place (dual dimensional), but to some extent separation 'trumps' the dual setting.

[Profpat]

Thanks for your post Frederick. How does your model solve T symmetry. RP and my model of an anti-universe which is really part of ours suggest that in the anti-universe half you may have time reversal( time going backwards ), thus not only giving Charge and Parity symmetry but also Time.

Best,

Pat