AOH :: PHOSOL.TXT|
Photonic Solutions to Quantum Problems
Photonic Solutions to
In 1991, Saleh and Teich published,
_Fundamentals_of_Photonics_, and produced a perfect
tool for solving the last remaining problems in the
great quantum puzzle of how the universe is built.
After studying this book, many scientists began to
suppose that Albert Einstein may have been right
after all. Light could be made of particle-like waves
instead of wave-like particles.
There always comes a time in the course of
successfully solving a very difficult problem when
the answers seem to just fall out of the sky. All the
pieces of the puzzle fit so snug and easy that the true
nature of the whole is obvious and no other solution
could possibly work. This is happening now in the
case of fundamental quantum physics.
The answer to the problem of wave-particle
duality came first. This problem began when
scientists noticed that photons impacted upon
photon detectors at small points, and so surely must
be particles. Passing through two slits and impacting
upon a flat screen these same photons produced
interference patterns that could only come from
waves. Scientists could not resolve this using either
the idea that light was made of waves or that it was
made of particles. Most scientists--we can call them
mainstream scientists--finally concluded that light
must be made of wave-like particles that existed in a
strange world of statistical probability.
A smaller group of scientists that included
Albert Einstein thought that this was not reasonable.
Single particles could not possibly exist as the wave
shapes they saw. This group thought that light must
be made of waves as described by Maxwell's
equations and hoped to prove it with a, "unified field
theory." After all, waves were perfectly capable of
existing in a local area and could reasonably contain
peaks of amplitude that existed as points within the
Einstein never quite completed this concept
to his own satisfaction, however. His frustration was
evident when he said, "As a matter of fact up to now
we have never succeeded in representing corpuscles
theoretically by fields free of singularities, and we
can, a priori, say nothing about the behavior of such
entities. One thing, however, is certain: if a field
theory results in a representation of corpuscles free
of singularities, then the behavior of these corpuscles
with time is determined solely by the [partial]
differential equations of the field."
There was another problem with this idea
that was even more damaging than Einstein's failure
to produce a unified field theory. Scientists called it,
"action at a distance," and philosophers had
concluded that action at a distance was not possible.
They said that one particle could not possibly cause
a change in another particle without something
going from the one to the other. The idea that there
may exist a field of force in the vacuum of space was
not allowed. A particle-like wave of electric and
magnetic force fields could not then exist. Scientists
who agreed with Einstein solved the wave-particle
dilemma only to create an action-at-a-distance
Not to be so quickly shot down, these
scientists reasoned that electric and magnetic force
fields may be caused by the exchange of some
minute thing, maybe even a billion times smaller than
a photon. Who knows what these might be? They
might be strings, or super strings, or some such.
Possibilities were infinite, but this idea gained them
They reasoned finally that they didn't really
need to know all the details about things smaller
than photons to accomplish a unified theory any
more than pyramid builders needed to know the
atomic structure of the rocks they hauled. What ever
caused electric and magnetic force fields, they knew
they were there and if they accepted them as they
saw them, photons existed as moving points of
constant amplitude within these fields.
After Einstein's death, the unified field
concept lost ground steadily to the statistical-wave-
like particle concept and it seemed that there would
be a major breakthrough in quantum physics at any
moment. Billions of dollars were allocated to herald
in this breakthrough. Super-conducting super
colliders were planned and students prepared to man
the research teams that would be required to run
them. But, just when it was at its peak, this wave-
like particle concept began to collapse.
From out of the blue answers came favoring
Einstein's idea. In 1991 the book, Fundamentals of
Photonics, showed how photons interacted in such a
way that they could form stable loops. Dr. Robert
Hofstadter of Stanford University had found that
atomic nuclei existed as multiple-shell structures and
was awarded the 1961 Nobel prize in physics for his
discovery. This new book inspired the square-of-
the-shells rule that added theoretical insight to
Hofstadter's shells, and in 1994 the article,
"Hofstadter's Shells Revisited," showed that these
shells must be made of photons trapped in loops by
their own resonance and charge. This provided
means to verify the shell diameters that Hofstadter
observed, and showed that the electric charges on
the surface of the shells were exactly strong enough
to be the source of the strong nuclear interactions.
Charges originated at the surface of the
shells. This avoided Einstein's problem with
singularities and so removed the last obstacle to his
Unified Field Theory. One need only plug in the
numbers to complete it. Who will be first?
Scientists knew early in the twentieth century
that relativity would be the natural result if the most
basic components of mass moved in a local area at
the constant speed of light. When "Hofstadter's
Shells Revisited," showed that this must be the case,
relativity was no longer a great mystery. Nature
could not possibly be otherwise given that mass was
made of light.
This is no small thing. If mass is not made of
light, we must invent something that will act upon
mass and make it deform with motion and dilate in
time just exactly as it would if it were made of light
because we see that it does just that. Why invent
such a fantasy? Why not simply accept reality as we
see it? We then have a reasonable "photonic
solution" for the phenomenon of relativity.
Richard Feynman saw the photon as a single
point moving through space at the speed of light.
Each photon had the potential to produce the same
amount of Joule-seconds worth of energy-time and
since they were particles, they could never be
partially absorbed. Electrons could absorb and emit
only complete photons causing both to change
direction of travel.
Electronics engineers have a problem with
this idea, however. They know that when they force
electrons to move back and forth in a wire, photons
seem to leave the wire and move out through space.
When these photons pass close to another wire some
distance away, electrons in that wire move the same
way the original electrons moved. Electrons in the
second wire begin to move in exactly the time it
takes light to travel from one wire to the other.
There is no delay such as would be required if only a
complete photon could start the motion.
Since photons exist in time--energy-time
potential is what they are--they cannot be complete
until enough time passes for them to form. There is
no limit to the amount of time. It may be a
microsecond, a second, or even an hour depending
upon the photon's wave length. If that photon can
not be partially absorbed, how come the electrons in
the second wire begin to move before any single
photon can be completely formed by the first wire?
When a photon passes very close to a slow-
moving electron, the electron changes direction, the
photon changes direction, and the photon loses
some of its energy. Arthur H. Compton studied this
phenomenon and it became known as the, "Compton
Effect." If we believe what we see, the photon is
partially absorbed by the electron.
Of course we could always make up some
excuse to explain the photon's behavior while
holding fast to the notion that it cannot be partially
absorbed. We could say, for example, that the
electron completely absorbs the photon then emits
another photon that has less energy than the first.
But, then there is that problem with time.
The electron starts to move before the photon can
completely arrive. If the photon exists as energy-
time, it cannot possibly impart its total energy before
its total time elapses. Also, there is no delay in the
reflected photon, and such a delay would surely be
there if the photon must be absorbed then emitted.
We could excuse this strange behavior by
saying that photons of long wave length possess
components of short wave length that can arrive in
time to start the electron's new motion. But, then
short wave-length photons have more energy than
long wave-length photons and that greater energy
does not show up, so these can't be real photons.
Richard Feynman called them, "virtual photons."
If we keep making excuses for the electron's
premature movement, we must assign some weird
properties to photons like rotating arrows of
probability, as Richard Feynman did. Even those
don't quite work, so we must make up even more
weird things like, "virtual photons," that are just
almost real and act in advance of the real photons.
Then, these don't quite work either so we must
invent other kinds of virtual particles and assign
them properties that cannot be observed.
This was the state of mainstream quantum
physics before 1991. It just kept getting weirder and
The, "photonics solution," explains photon-
electron interaction by letting photons naturally
exchange energy with other photons, including those
that comprise electrons, just the way we see them do
it. Since they are made of particle-like waves any
photon may be partially absorbed leaving a photon
of less energy.
Why then, if photons may be partially
absorbed, does the photo-electric effect absorb and
emit only complete photons? Why does all the
spectral phenomena of atoms exist? Didn't scientists
predict the phenomena based upon the concept that
photons were particles and could only be completely
absorbed and emitted?
The photonic solution for this is very simple.
The structures of atoms bind their components in
such a way that they absorb and emit only photons
that resonate with the structure. Photons of the
wrong frequency pass by with no effect, while
photons of the correct frequency are completely
absorbed when they pass close and resonate with the
structure of the atom.
The dynamics of an atom produce a complex
structure changing in time. Since the photon is a
localized wave, it need not hit its absorbing particle
dead center but must only pass close enough for its
spread-out fields to resonate with some structure in
it. Dynamic timing in the particle must be just right
for absorption to occur. Particles at a distance from
the photon's center may be timed just right when
closer particles are not, so the distant particle
absorbs the photon. This interaction causes the
observed statistical-random effect in position and
time when photons impact upon photon detectors.
The statistical randomness is caused by the dynamics
of the structure of the absorbing particles and not by
the nature of the photon, as was previously assumed.
Resonance is a very powerful force, and
photons should resonate readily with electrons of
circumference equal to their wavelength. This
circumference is 2.4 x 10-10 centimeters if the
electron is made of a photon shell in accord with the,
"photonics solution." This just happens to be the
Compton wavelength of electron resonance; why so
is a mystery to the wave-like-particle folks, but it is
a natural requirement for the particle-like-wave
J. J. Thomson showed in 1881 that a moving
object with electric charge must be more massive
than such an object at rest, and Henri Poincare
wrote the famous equation E=mc2 in 1900, five
years before Albert Einstein published his special
theory of relativity. Einstein completed the idea
by showing that mass and energy were really just
two different forms of the same thing.
This state of things is obvious, reasonable,
and required in the photonics concept. If the
particles in mass are made of photons, mass must
necessarily release those photons and their energy
must necessarily be felt when the mass comes
unglued. If mass is made of wave-like particles this
is a great mystery.
Given the photonic structure of mass, these
reasonable answers to quantum problems not only
are obvious, they are necessarily the way we observe
them to be. These include relativity, wave-particle
duality, mass-energy equivalence, the statistical
nature of quantum physics, strong nuclear forces,
cause of Planck's constant, gravity, cause of electric
charge, and the constancy of electric charge.
Could all this be mere coincidence? If Nick The
Greek gave a fifty-fifty chance that the photonics
cause for each one of these complex phenomena fit
nature so perfectly by pure chance, his final odds
would be 99.9 to one in favor of the photonics
Quantum mechanics still stands as the best
final solution to the puzzle of how the universe is
built, but its concepts must continue to change with
each new discovery just as they did in the past. The
photonics concept calls attention to recent
discoveries that are very real but are not yet included
in the quantum mainstream. When we add these to
this great science we see that this insight into the
workings of nature is so reasonable, so simple, and
so obvious, that it could not possibly be otherwise.
(1) Bahaa E. A. Saleh and Malvin Carl Teich, Fundamentals
of Photonics, New York, 1991.
(2) Albert Einstein, "Physics and Reality," Ideas and Opinions,
New York, 1954.
(3) Robert Hofstadter, Grolier Electronic Encyclopedia, 1993.
(4) Vernon Brown, "Hofstadter's Shells Revisited," Photonics,
Cabot Arkansas, 1994.
(5) Albert Einstein, "Development of Our Conception of the
Nature and Constitution of Radiation," Physikalische
Zeitschrift 22, 1909. Translated by Christian Holm.
(6) The World of Physics Vol. II, 1991
Page 311, H. Ziegler; "If one thinks about the basic
particles of matter as invisible little spheres
which possess an invariable speed of light, then all
interactions of matter-like states and
electrodynamic phenomena can be described..."
(7) Richard P. Feynman, QED, Princeton, 1985.
(8) Planck's Constant, 6.6260755 x 10-34 Joule seconds.
June 1, 1992 Physical Review D.
(9) Samuel Devons, "Compton effect," Grolier Electronic
Encyclopedia, 1993.The equation is: wavelength = h/mc
where h is Planck's constant, m is mass and c is the speed
of light. A shell made of a photon must then be of
diameter = h/pi mc. Electron diameter is then
7.7 x 10-11 centimeters.
(10) J.J. Thomson, Philos. Mag. 11, 299, 1881. Hendrick
Lorentz, The Theory of Electrons, Brill Leiden, 1909.
(11) Poincare considered a pulse of light, or a wave
train, with energy E and momentum p. Recalling that,
according to the Poynting theorem, p=E/c, and applying
to the pulse of light the Newtonian relation, p=mv,
Poincare concluded that a pulse of light with energy
E has mass m=E/c2. Students of algebra will immediately
see that this is the same equation as E=mc2.
(12) H. Poincare, Arch, Neerland, 5, 252, 1900.
Lev B. Okun, "The Concept of Mass," Physics Today, June 1989.
(13) Albert Einstein, "Special Theory of Relativity,"
Ann. Phys. (Leipzig) 17, 891, 1905.
(14) Vernon Brown, "Hofstadter's Shells Revisited,"
Feb. Photonics, Cabot AR 1994. Expanded treatment of
these last four items are in this work.
(15) To get the answer, multiply .5 x .5 x .5 etc.
once for each one. The final result is the probability
that the whole is false.
The entire AOH site is optimized to look best in Firefox® 3 on a widescreen monitor (1440x900 or better).
Site design & layout copyright © 1986- AOH
We do not send spam. If you have received spam bearing an artofhacking.com email address, please forward it with full headers to firstname.lastname@example.org.