 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Natural Science Forum / Physics / Particle Physics / December 2004Feynman diagrams - a new interpretation
A virtual electron-positron pair is created in the vacuum and then annihilates.In this loop the energy of one of the virtual particles does not have to follow E^2 = p^2c^2 + m^2c^4 because the other particle can compensate for its failure to do so.This leads to infinity in the path integral for all possible energy combinations for the virtual particles.But here is an interpretation of Feynman diagrams that does not lead to infinities: (1) all particles are real (even the so-called virtual particles) (2) particles can reach a speed far greater than the speed of light, but a speed which is,nevertheless,finite. (3)the speed of any particle is given by the ratio of an electric field vector associated with that particle divided by a magnetic field vector associated with that particle. (E/B) (4) When a particle and antiparticle annihilate then E1 + E2 = E3 B1 + B2 = B3 where E3/B3 is the speed of a photon (E1/B1 and E2/B2 would be speed of particle and antiparticle). (5) E^2 = p^2c^2 + m^2c^4 = p'^2v^2 + m'^2 v^4 where v = the limiting speed for all particles (3 x 10^22 m/s - in my opinion!). David Bohm's version of quantum mechanics then makes sense: "virtual" particles - which could constitute the guiding wave - would move real particles, and one real particle would change the velocity of another real particle, but only after a small time delay. | A virtual electron-positron pair is created in the vacuum | and then annihilates.In this loop the energy of one of the virtual [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] | move real particles, and one real particle would change the velocity of | another real particle, but only after a small time delay. If you allow virtual particles, then you also have to allow for "less than virtual" particles. These are the particles in a modified Dirac sea. FrediFizzx http://www.vacuum-physics.com/QVC/quantum_vacuum_charge.pdf or postscript http://www.vacuum-physics.com/QVC/quantum_vacuum_charge.ps The magnetic and electric field of the particle and antiparticle will each be associated with certain total energy.The magnetic field of each particle could be given by integer multiples of a minimum Bo e.g 1 x Bo, 2 x Bo, 3 x Bo since a particle or antiparticle must have a maximum magnetic field because there is a finite amount of energy in the universe, this would mean a finite number of energy distributions between particle and antiparticle and so no infinities in the path integral. David Bohm's version of quantum mechanics can be summed up as follows: dQ/dt = f(x,t) velocity of a particle depends instantaneously on the position of another particle at a certain time This is at odds with notions of causality. However if we write: dQ/dt = f( x, t - a small increment in t ) and assume a signal passes from one particle to another, causality is restored to the universe. The ratio of E/B for a particle, moving relative to another particle with its own value of E/B, determines the relative speed of that particle in the universe.As a quark or lepton moves faster through a medium of magnetic particles, these magnetic particles accumulate in the quark or lepton, and cancel out the magnetic charge at the centre of the quark or lepton (the magnetic charge is inside a sphere of electric charges).B decreases and the quark or lepton expands.The mass of the quark or lepton has increased.Relativity theory says that a particle with a certain rest mass must have a fixed mass at a fixed speed.But this is not the case if B is artificially changed by outside intervention e.g we could feed magnetic charge to the particle in a laboratory. And virtual particle pairs can have lots of combinations of E/B each with a probability amplitude.We know that E/B can never be greater than the speed of light for photons, so we know also that virtual positron-electron pairs (which can yield photons) can't both have E/B greater than the speed of light.In other words the probability amplitude for this happening is zero. Why don't virtual positrons and electrons naturally have a non-zero probability to travel faster than light if the limiting value of E/B can be far greater? There must be a force which limits how much B ,and therefore energy, can be removed from an electron ( some B must be tightly bound to electric charge or colour charge).Virtual particles that transfer energy from one real particle to another faster than the speed of light (e.g in my interpretation of David Bohm's version of quantum mechanics) must have a weaker force binding B to electricity or the colour force,and so a high probability of getting a low B and a high E/B. According to Planck's theory: Energy per unit volume per unit frequency is given by: Sv = 8pih/c^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1] Since the energy of a photon is all kinetic, and kinetic energy is proportional to temperature, and temperature is proportional to pressure (for an ideal gas), then the force exerted on a real particle, with rest mass, by an electromagnetic photon, is proportional to Sv. Holding frequency,f, constant, and invoking a photon that moves faster than the speed of light ( a posulated gravitational force carrier-in reality there will be 2 bound photons to give spin 2 for this carrier)with speed v, we can write: force of gravity/force of electricity = {10^-38 = 8pih/v^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]}divided by { 8pih/c^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]} v = 10^21 m/s The gravitational force carrier moves fast! David Bohm's version of quantum mechanics can be summed up as follows: dQ/dt = f(x,t) velocity of a particle depends instantaneously on the position of another particle at a certain time This is at odds with notions of causality. However if we write: dQ/dt = f( x, t - a small increment in t ) and assume a signal passes from one particle to another, causality is restored to the universe. When a real particle changes its position, it stops blocking gravitatonal force carriers along the line that joined it to a second real particle, and that second real particle reacts to the increase in flux.This is the origin of correlated photon polarizations.Also,because the speed of gravity is 10^21 m/s, and it takes an atom about 10^-8 seconds to absorb a photon, we can say that correlated polarizations would no longer exist at a photon separation of 10^13 metres or greater (it would take the gravitational force carrier 10^-8 seconds to travel this distance to cause correlations).10^13 metres is about 100 times the distance of the Earth to the Sun.So to measure the breakdown in photon polarization correlation we need to look for photons from pions that have split into correlated photon pairs in space,photonswhich have been redirected to Earth by strong gravitational fields - and photons that have had their polarization changed by passage through a gas,dust etc. The idea that the EM force carrier and the gravitational force carrier can be considered to be a gas of radiation following a Planck blackbody spectrum would also suggest that the EM force of attraction between two opposite charges is caused by a pushing force.The EM force of repulsion would have to be due to the effect charges have on the structure of space itself (which would reduce the transfer of energy from force carriers to one side of a spherical charge).This probably amounts to saying that charges affect some surrounding medium of particles which scatter force carrying particles. Particles with rest mass moving faster than light could only exist in space-time if they somehow obeyed the usual laws of gravity. A particle moving in a circular orbit can be described by v^2 / r = g For a bigger value of v at the same radius a bigger value of g and hence a bigger force are required.The particle speed is given by E/B.To make the particle orbit faster we take away some B and some rest mass with it.The particle travels faster with a smaller rest mass but the same total mass because a faster moving particle with a smaller rest mass interacts with more mass-causing particles (in the medium it is moving through) per unit time. But because there is less B the mass-causing particles are not bound tightly and the volume of the orbiting particle increases , allowing it to trap more gravitational force carriers from space and to experience an increased force which keeps it in orbit. force of gravity/force of electricity = {10^-38 = 8pih/v^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]}divided by { 8pih/c^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]} v = 10^21 m/s Using a more accurate value of Fg/Fe ( 7 x 10^-39) we get v = 5.7 x 10^21 m/s. This speed makes sense for the following reason: The gravitational force carrier has the same energy as the electric carrier but if it has a speed 7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8 times faster than light then for the same number of wavelengths it must have (3 x 10^8/ 7 x 10^21) times the amplitude, for its electric and magnetic field vectors to have the same total energy as the electric force carrier ( it is less energetic per unit length).Squaring the amplitude gives the intensity. So the gravitional force carrier has an intensity (3 x 10^8/ 7 x 10^21)^2 times less than the electric force carrier. With a wavelength 7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8 times greater it is 1/ (7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8) times less likely to be absorbed by a spherical charge { probability proportional to tan^-1[(L1 - 2L2)/ d ] ( L1/L2 cos theta ) where L2 is radius of sphere and L1 is wavelength of force carrier - deduced using idea that electrically neutral bosons are made from one positive and one negative charge which oscillate and have to pass through a spherical "slit"}. Combining the amplitude squared and the wavelength factor gives a reduction in intensity for gravity of 7 x 10^ - 39. force of gravity/force of electricity = {10^-38 = 8pih/v^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]}divided by { 8pih/c^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]} v = 10^21 m/s Using a more accurate value of Fg/Fe ( 7 x 10^-39) we get v = 5.7 x 10^21 m/s. This speed makes sense for the following reason: The gravitational force carrier has the same energy as the electric carrier but if it has a speed 7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8 times faster than light then for the same number of wavelengths it must have (3 x 10^8/ 7 x 10^21) times the amplitude, for its electric and magnetic field vectors to have the same total energy as the electric force carrier ( it is less energetic per unit length).Squaring the amplitude gives the intensity. So the gravitional force carrier has an intensity (3 x 10^8/ 7 x 10^21)^2 times less than the electric force carrier. With an amplitude averaging 7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8 times smaller it must be 1/ (7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8) times less likely to be absorbed by a spherical charge (the amplitude will be a measure of how positive and negative charges are seperated within the electrically neutral bosons, and hence of how unscreened a charge is and how able it is to interact with the charges of a larger spherical charge such as a proton). Combining the amplitude squared and the amplitude gives a reduction in intensity for gravity of 7 x 10^ - 39. force of gravity/force of electricity = {10^-38 = 8pih/v^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]}divided by { 8pih/c^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]} v = 10^21 m/s Using a more accurate value of Fg/Fe ( 7 x 10^-39) we get v = 5.7 x 10^21 m/s. This speed makes sense for the following reason: The gravitational force carrier has the same energy as the electric carrier but if it has a speed 7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8 times faster than light then for the same number of wavelengths it must have (3 x 10^8/ 7 x 10^21) times the amplitude, for its electric and magnetic field vectors to have the same total energy as the electric force carrier ( it is less energetic per unit length).Squaring the amplitude gives the intensity. So the gravitional force carrier has an intensity (3 x 10^8/ 7 x 10^21)^2 times less than the electric force carrier. With an amplitude averaging 7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8 times smaller it must be 1/ (7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8) times less likely to be absorbed by a spherical charge (the amplitude will be a measure of how positive and negative charges are seperated within the electrically neutral bosons, and hence of how unscreened a charge is and how able it is to interact with the charges of a larger spherical charge such as a proton). Combining the amplitude squared and the amplitude gives a reduction in intensity for gravity of 7 x 10^ - 39. force of gravity/force of electricity = {10^-38 = 8pih/v^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]}divided by { 8pih/c^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]} v = 10^21 m/s Using a more accurate value of Fg/Fe ( 7 x 10^-39) we get v = 5.7 x 10^21 m/s. This speed makes sense for the following reason: The gravitational force carrier has the same energy as the electric carrier but if it has a speed 7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8 times faster than light then for the same number of wavelengths it must have (3 x 10^8/ 7 x 10^21) times the amplitude, for its electric and magnetic field vectors to have the same total energy as the electric force carrier ( it is less energetic per unit length).Squaring the amplitude gives the intensity. So the gravitional force carrier has an intensity (3 x 10^8/ 7 x 10^21)^2 times less than the electric force carrier. With a wavelength 7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8 times greater it is 1/ (7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8) times less likely to be absorbed by a spherical charge { probability proportional to tan^-1[(L1 - 2L2)/ L1 ] ( L1/L2 cos theta ) where L2 is radius of sphere and L1 is wavelength of force carrier - deduced using idea that electrically neutral bosons are made from one positive and one negative charge which oscillate and have to pass through a spherical "slit" at different angles relative to the "slit"}. Combining the reduction for the amplitude squared and the wavelength,we get a reduction in intensity for gravity of 7 x 10 ^ -39. force of gravity/force of electricity = {10^-38 = 8pih/v^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]}divided by { 8pih/c^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]} v = 10^21 m/s Using a more accurate value of Fg/Fe ( 7 x 10^-39) we get v = 5.7 x 10^21 m/s. This speed makes sense for the following reason: The gravitational force carrier has the same energy as the electric carrier but if it has a speed 7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8 times faster than light then for the same number of wavelengths it must have (3 x 10^8/ 7 x 10^21) times the amplitude, for its electric and magnetic field vectors to have the same total energy as the electric force carrier ( it is less energetic per unit length).Squaring the amplitude gives the intensity. So the gravitional force carrier has an intensity (3 x 10^8/ 7 x 10^21)^2 times less than the electric force carrier. With a wavelength 7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8 times greater it is 1/ (7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8) times less likely to be absorbed by a spherical charge { probability proportional to tan^-1[(L1 - 2L2)/ d ] ( L1/L2 cos theta ) where L2 is radius of sphere and L1 is wavelength of force carrier - deduced using idea that electrically neutral bosons are made from one positive and one negative charge which oscillate and have to pass through a spherical "slit"}. Combining the amplitude squared and the wavelength factor gives a reduction in intensity for gravity of 7 x 10^ - 39. force of gravity/force of electricity = {10^-38 = 8pih/v^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]}divided by { 8pih/c^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]} v = 10^21 m/s Using a more accurate value of Fg/Fe ( 7 x 10^-39) we get v = 5.7 x 10^21 m/s. This speed makes sense for the following reason: The gravitational force carrier has the same energy as the electric carrier but if it has a speed 7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8 times faster than light then for the same number of wavelengths it must have (3 x 10^8/ 7 x 10^21) times the amplitude, for its electric and magnetic field vectors to have the same total energy as the electric force carrier ( it is less energetic per unit length).Squaring the amplitude gives the intensity. So the gravitional force carrier has an intensity (3 x 10^8/ 7 x 10^21)^2 times less than the electric force carrier. With a wavelength 7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8 times greater it is 1/ (7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8) times less likely to be absorbed by a spherical charge { probability for absorption proportional to speed} Combining the amplitude squared and the wavelength (speed) factor gives a reduction in intensity for gravity of 7 x 10^ - 39. force of gravity/force of electricity = {10^-38 = 8pih/v^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]}divided by { 8pih/c^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]} v = 10^21 m/s Using a more accurate value of Fg/Fe ( 7 x 10^-39) we get v = 5.7 x 10^21 m/s. This speed makes sense for the following reason: The gravitational force carrier has the same energy as the electric carrier but if it has a speed 7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8 times faster than light then for the same number of wavelengths it must have (3 x 10^8/ 7 x 10^21) times the amplitude, for its electric and magnetic field vectors to have the same total energy as the electric force carrier ( it is less energetic per unit length).Squaring the amplitude gives the intensity. So the gravitional force carrier has an intensity (3 x 10^8/ 7 x 10^21)^2 times less than the electric force carrier. With a wavelength 7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8 times greater it is 1/ (7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8) times less likely to be absorbed by a spherical charge { probability for absorption proportional to speed} Combining the amplitude squared and the wavelength (speed) factor gives a reduction in intensity for gravity of 7 x 10^ - 39. force of gravity/force of electricity = {10^-38 = 8pih/v^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]}divided by { 8pih/c^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]} v = 10^21 m/s Using a more accurate value of Fg/Fe ( 7 x 10^-39) we get v = 5.7 x 10^21 m/s. This speed makes sense for the following reason: The gravitational force carrier has the same energy as the electric carrier but if it has a speed 7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8 times faster than light then for the same number of wavelengths it must have (3 x 10^8/ 7 x 10^21) times the amplitude, for its electric and magnetic field vectors to have the same total energy as the electric force carrier ( it is less energetic per unit length).Squaring the amplitude gives the intensity. So the gravitional force carrier has an intensity (3 x 10^8/ 7 x 10^21)^2 times less than the electric force carrier. With an amplitude averaging 7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8 times smaller it must be 1/ (7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8) times less likely to be absorbed by a spherical charge (the amplitude will be a measure of how positive and negative charges are seperated within the electrically neutral bosons, and hence of how unscreened a charge is and how able it is to interact with the charges of a larger spherical charge such as a proton). Combining the amplitude squared and the wavelength factor gives a reduction in intensity for gravity of 7 x 10^ - 39. force of gravity/force of electricity = {10^-38 = 8pih/v^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]}divided by { 8pih/c^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]} v = 10^21 m/s Using a more accurate value of Fg/Fe ( 7 x 10^-39) we get v = 5.7 x 10^21 m/s. This speed makes sense for the following reason: The gravitational force carrier has the same energy as the electric carrier but if it has a speed 7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8 times faster than light then for the same number of wavelengths it must have (3 x 10^8/ 7 x 10^21) times the amplitude, for its electric and magnetic field vectors to have the same total energy as the electric force carrier ( it is less energetic per unit length).Squaring the amplitude gives the intensity. So the gravitional force carrier has an intensity (3 x 10^8/ 7 x 10^21)^2 times less than the electric force carrier. With an amplitude averaging 7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8 times smaller it must be 1/ (7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8) times less likely to be absorbed by a spherical charge (the amplitude will be a measure of how positive and negative charges are seperated within the electrically neutral bosons, and hence of how unscreened a charge is and how able it is to interact with the charges of a larger spherical charge such as a proton). Combining the amplitude squared and the wavelength factor gives a reduction in intensity for gravity of 7 x 10^ - 39. force of gravity/force of electricity = {10^-38 = 8pih/v^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]}divided by { 8pih/c^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]} v = 10^21 m/s Using a more accurate value of Fg/Fe ( 7 x 10^-39) we get v = 5.7 x 10^21 m/s. This speed makes sense for the following reason: The gravitational force carrier has the same energy as the electric carrier but if it has a speed 7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8 times faster than light then for the same number of wavelengths it must have (3 x 10^8/ 7 x 10^21) times the amplitude, for its electric and magnetic field vectors to have the same total energy as the electric force carrier ( it is less energetic per unit length).Squaring the amplitude gives the intensity. So the gravitional force carrier has an intensity (3 x 10^8/ 7 x 10^21)^2 times less than the electric force carrier. With a wavelength 7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8 times greater it is 1/ (7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8) times less likely to be absorbed by a spherical charge { probability proportional to tan^-1[(L1 - 2L2)/ d ] ( L1/L2 cos theta ) where L2 is radius of sphere and L1 is wavelength of force carrier - deduced using idea that electrically neutral bosons are made from one positive and one negative charge which oscillate and have to pass through a spherical "slit"}. Combining the amplitude squared and the wavelength factor gives a reduction in intensity for gravity of 7 x 10^ - 39. force of gravity/force of electricity = {10^-38 = 8pih/v^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]}divided by { 8pih/c^3 x f ^ 3 / [e ^ (hf/kT) - 1]} v = 10^21 m/s Using a more accurate value of Fg/Fe ( 7 x 10^-39) we get v = 5.7 x 10^21 m/s. This speed makes sense for the following reason: The gravitational force carrier has the same energy as the electric carrier but if it has a speed 7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8 times faster than light then for the same number of wavelengths it must have (3 x 10^8/ 7 x 10^21) times the amplitude, for its electric and magnetic field vectors to have the same total energy as the electric force carrier ( it is less energetic per unit length).Squaring the amplitude gives the intensity. So the gravitional force carrier has an intensity (3 x 10^8/ 7 x 10^21)^2 times less than the electric force carrier. With an amplitude averaging 7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8 times smaller it must be 1/ (7 x 10^21/ 3 x 10^8) times less likely to be absorbed by a spherical charge (the amplitude will be a measure of how positive and negative charges are seperated within the electrically neutral bosons, and hence of how unscreened a charge is and how able it is to interact with the charges of a larger spherical charge such as a proton). Combining the amplitude squared and the amplitude gives a reduction in intensity for gravity of 7 x 10^ - 39. (essentially I am saying that the electric and gravitational forces between particles with rest mass are caused by electromagnetic waves and gravitational waves. If you allow virtual particles, then you also have to allow for "less than virtual" particles. These are the particles in a modified Dirac sea. FrediFizzx http://www.vacuum-physics.com/QVC/quantum_vacuum_charge.pdf or postscript http://www.vacuum-physics.com/QVC/quantum_vacuum_charge.ps Reply Thanks for the references. Alistair |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.