It is impossible to detect a particle such as a photon or an electron directly at an empty space because this would necessitate placing a detector within that space thereby rendering it non empty. This is the catch twenty-two of physics.
Extreme Interpretations
Aag Bohr and Ole Ulfbeck claimed that atomic scale objects do not exist at all. As an example they stated that a click on a Geiger counter is nothing more than a fortuitous event correlated with a radioactive substance.
Correlation is correct but could it be true that atomic scale objects do not exist at all?
Models
Our ideas of particles in space are models only and have been developed by using extrapolation and extension techniques and by processing observations from detectors which by virtue of their existence must have been in occupied spaces and not empty spaces.
Provided that our models conform to the observations it can be useful to use them but they should be used with care and the limitation of the models should not be exceeded. As an example if we have a model of electrons moving through space under the influence of exchange photons then we can describe that there are effects at spaces where there are encounters between the photons and electrons but not at empty spaces. Limitations such as this apply particularly to the concept of the field.
The Field
If iron filings are sprinkled on a board which is situated above a bar magnet they settle into the pattern illustrated below where point x is a place which is empty of iron filings or other suitable detectors.
It is results like this that give the impression that the field is predominantly due to the magnet and that it exists at empty spaces. We may try to prove that the field exists at point x by placing another iron filing but that previously empty space now becomes occupied.
Catch twenty-two is unremitting and we need to accept the limitations it imposes by adopting the principles outlined below.
1.The field has an observable effect only at suitably occupied locations.
2.There is no observeable field at all unless there are at least two interacting parts.
3.The field is a mutual thing and the presence of every single interacting part IS instrumental in creating the observable field at its own location and other suitably occupied locations.
4.If an interacting part changes its location, the field changes also.
(The four comments above apply to all fields.)
We shall now reanalyse a well documented event, the accelerated electron. The electron will interact with a positively charged part which can be anything suitable such as a proton or the electrode structure in an electron tube, for the sake of brevity this will be referred to as the second particle.
The Event
Let the particles be decelerating away from each other in a vacuum the momentum being equal to zero. Each particle will lose its kinetic to the field and as the kinetic energy decreases the potential energy increases.
If the particles reach a maximum separation and then approach the opposite will happen. Each particle will pick up its kinetic energy from the field and as the kinetic energy increases the potential energy decreases.
The approach part of the event is shown schematically below.
There is an important question that relates to this event which can be expressed in different ways:
1. Where is the field?
2. When the particles lose kinetic energy where does this go to and when they gain kinetic energy where does this come from?
3. If a model of exchange photons is applied where do the photons come from and go to and how do they display their presence in terms of mass energy changes upon departure and arrival?
The answer will be given and all that is asked at this stage is that the reader accepts that there is a slight possibility that the answer could be true.
The Answer
The field exists at the location of the interacting particles.When the particles separate the reducing kinetic energy mass of each particle is displayed as an increasing rest mass of the opposite particle. When they approach the opposite happens, the increasing kinetic energy mass of each particle being displayed as a reducing rest mass of the opposite particle. If a model of exchange photons is applied it would be the photons that convey the energy exchanges between the particles.
The answer clears up the limitations as imposed by catch twenty-two but it shows that the rest mass of a particle depends upon the structure of the rest frame and the location of the particle within it (it should be remembered that the change of potential energy with separation is independent of the method of separation).
It is known that macroscopic structures can have a variable rest mass but not microscopic particles. Could the answer be at odds with special relativity? The reader is asked not to come to any conclusions until all of the following evidence has been evaluated and done so without any preconceptions that cannot be justified.
____The Evidence_____
The Measurements
By considering the closeness of approach and by applying Coulombs law one finds that the proposed variability in rest mass is several orders of magnitude smaller than the current experimental uncertainty of the measurements (this, at present, being of the order of parts per hundred million for the electron) for those environments within which the measurements have so far been made. The measurements, therefore, give equal credence to the concepts of constancy and variability.
Special Relativity Part 1
· Einstein’s mass variation equation can be written as follows:
· If the equation is looked at without any preconceptions it can be seen that its predictions are wider ranging than is currently believed because it predicts that it is the ratio M/Mo that changes, with speed.
· There are two extreme ways of interpreting this ratio change:
1. At one extreme Mo would be constant and M would change. This is the interpretation currently applied to the electron.
2. At the opposite extreme M would be constant and Mo would change.
· Between the extremes neither M nor Mo would be constant and both would change.
· So can Mo change for the electron? A useful philosophy to adopt is to assume that if a successful equation predicts that it can happen then there is a possibility that it does happen. At the very least the full implications of the equation need to be explored.
· Special Relativity Part 2
· Einstein derived the mass variation equation in his paper entitled “on the electrodynamics of moving bodies". He never considered that Mo could be variable and the penultimate equation was written in a form as shown below.
· Mathematically it is correct to shift the integration sign and write the equation as follows.
· This now allows the possibility of a variable Mo and includes the assumption of constancy as a special case.
· It may be possible to derive an improved mass variation equation and if so one may informedly speculate that any deviations become appreciable only when the mass of the second particle reduces and approaches that of the electron this being when quantum effects become more appreciable.
· In the absence of a possible improved equation this work will continue with the assumption that the normal equation is correct. This work is accepting the equation but exploring the possibility that Mo could be variable.
· Special Relativity Part 3
· It is instructive to look at Einstein’s simplifying assumptions. These are summarised by the following quote which is taken from his work.
· “As the electron is to be slowly accelerated and consequently may not give off any energy in the form of radiation the energy withdrawn from the electrostatic field must be put down as equal to the energy of motion W of the electron.”
· There are three related features of relevance:
1. The energy given off by the electron was ignored on the basis that it “is to be slowly accelerated”. Of course slow is not stopped and so energy must be given off. The energy may be small but it is of exactly the right magnitude to allow the given answer to operate.
2. For the electron to move in a field there must be at least one other charged particle or object or some sort of structure (in this work referred to as the second particle) that the electron interacts with but Einstein made no reference to what this was he simply referred to the field. When the electron moves the second particle must move also in order to conserve momentum but this fact was overlooked probably because it was considered to be irrelevant
3. The field was referred to as if it was an independent and unchanging entity and no reference was made to the electrons part in creating the observable effects of the field. It was pointed out earlier that the field is due to the presence of all interacting parts the electron being one of these. The effects of the field are displayed at the locations of the interacting parts the field changing as the locations change.
· It can be seen that Einstein’s simplification was doubly lopsided. He considered the second particles part in creating the field but he ignored its motion and he ignored the electrons part in creating the field but he considered its motion. There is some justification in ignoring these things if the second particle is a massive macroscopic structure, for example if the electron moved between parallel metal plates of opposite charge (which is something like what one imagines Einstein envisaged) but not if the second particle is microscopic, for example a positiron. Physicists are in the business of making simplifying assumptions, after all it is impossible to take everything into account and it is better to get approximate answers rather than no answers at all. What is important, however, is to try to get an awareness of those circumstances under which the assumptions break down. In this case the breakdown becomes more appreciable when the mass of the second particle approaches that of the electron.
· Special Relativity Part 4
· Arguably the most influential work published by Einstein was the paper entitled “Does the Inertia of a Body Depend upon its Energy Content?” Whilst referring to the relevant parts of this I shall quote directly from the work itself.
· Einstein referred to a body giving off radiation and after a brief mathematical analysis he concluded that:
· “If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation its energy diminishes by L/speed of light squared.”
· After elaborating on the above Einstein closed his work the final sentence being:
· “If the theory conforms to the facts radiation conveys the inertia between the emitting and absorbing bodies.”
· It seems that Einstein had expressed the ideas being promoted in this work but for macroscopic objects and not microscopic particles. Had he not assumed that Mo was constant for the electron and had he considered the whole system and not just one part of it he would have probably come up with the same conclusions as this work will reach.
· System Structures
· If the given answer is correct the rest mass losses of each approachin particle are conveyed to the opposite particle this resulting in each particle displaying kinetic energy gains(during a separation event the kinetic energy losses of each particle are carried to the opposite particle each one displaying the gains as an increase in rest mass)the size of these changes being determined by the system structure in terms of how the mass of the second particle compares to that of the electron. There is an infinite range of structures but two extreme types:
· At one extreme we can define a perfectly asymmetrical structure where the second particle is infinitely more massive than the electron. This cannot be achieved exactly but it can be approached.
· At the opposite extreme we can define a perfectly symmetrical structure where the second particle has the same mass as the electron. The second particle will be a positron.
· The range of structures between the extremes can be defined as intermediate structures.
· ____THE ELECTRON EVENT IN DIFFERENT STRUCTURES_____
· The Perfectly Asymmetrical Structures
It is only within this theoretical construct that Einstein’s simplifying assumptions apply exactly. The second particle will not move and Mo will remain constant. The troublesome zero and infinity appear only because this structure is not real.
· The Intermediate Macroscopic Structure
As the mass of the second particle decreases its kinetic energy change increases and the interpretation of the mass variation equation moves away from that of a constant Mo. It is easy to calculate that the changes in Mo are vanishingly small but they are not negligible in that they are of the right magnitude to allow the given answer to operate.
· The Intermediate Microscopic Structure
We shall consider the hydrogen atom, this structure being the most familiar and the closest we can get with commonly observed particles to perfect symmetry and we shall consider the particle approaching from an ionisation configuration.
It is within microscopic structures that variations in Mo became more appreciable but even with the hydrogen atom the variations are small because the electron picks up more than 99.9% of the available kinetic energy. It is no small wonder that the assumption of a constant Mo has persisted for over one hundred years.
During any uninterrupted parts of the approach we can describe that energy is transferred between the particles and as a result of energy level transitions some energy is transferred to the surroundings the latter transfers accounting for the spectra produced.
· The Perfectly Symmetrical Structure
We shall consider the electron positron approach but before doing so a quick reminder of how classical physics is used to calculate potential energy. In fact we cannot calculate an absolute potential energy at any separation we can only calculate how potential energy changes with separation this making potential energy indeterminate.
Quantum electrodynamics (QED) works out the probability of the particles reaching a certain small separation, this being described more precisely as a sub Compton wavelength encounter and this resulting in the particles emitting gamma ray photons and becoming annihilated in the process. Rest mass, therefore, does change and totally from a finite value to zero.
It is instructive to ignore the contribution that quantum theory makes in describing the event and to see what relativity, on its own, predicts.
· The Normal Interpretation of a Constant Mo
· With this interpretation the approaching and accelerating particles would withdraw their kinetic energy from an external field each one displaying a relativistic mass increase. Mass creation is predicted rather than mass annihilation. Although relativity is used to explain the eventual annihilation the mass variation equation makes predictions that are at odds with the observations.
· In addition to the above this interpretation cannot account for the loss of any residual potential energy that occurs during annihilation.
· The same difficulties apply, but less severely, if Mo varies only slightly as it does in intermediate structures.
· The Interpretation of a Constant M
· With this interpretation each accelerating particle would withdraw its kinetic energy from the rest mass content of the opposite particle. Because of the symmetry of the structure the losses from each particle are balanced by the gains from the opposite particle.
· The mass variation equation, on its own, predicts annihilation this being when the rest mass of each particle, in other words the potential energy reduces to zero.
· QED is used to describe events such as this but now relativity can be incorporated more fully into the theory. As an example we can describe that rest mass annihilation is occurring along the whole line of approach the particles becoming less particle like and more wavelike as they pick up speed.
.
· The Range of Interpretations
· The analysis made here has shown that the whole range of interpretations apply to Einstein’s equation. As one extreme structure is approached the extreme interpretation of a constant Mo is approached and as the opposite extreme structure is approached the opposite extreme of a constant M is approached.
· The Full Event and how this Relates to Matter and Antimatter
· The electron event is similar in all system structures and here we shall further compare these similarities. The whole range of structures can be covered by considering just three structures. The choices here will be.
1.The perfectly symmetrical structure.
2. The hydrogen atom in its ground state configuration. This can represent intermediate structures.
3.A macroscopic structure containing a metal. This can represent the near perfect asymmetrical structure.
· These structures will be referred to as structures one, two and three.
1.Triggering the Event
In each case the event can be triggered by the input of energy of sufficient magnitude. We shall use the example of the energy being inputted by an incident photon.
In structure one the energy needed to create and cause a separation of the particles to a position of momentary rest must equal the rest mass energy of the particles at that separation. In structure two the energy needed to further increase the separation must be equal to an excitation or ionisation energy and in structure three the energy must be equal to or greater than the work function of the metal.
In structure three the extra positive charge created is due to the absence of the negative charge resulting from the ejection of the electron this being analogous to, but arguably more realistic than Dirac’s concept of a positron being a hole in an infinite sea of negative energy electrons.
2.The Completion of the Event
The separated particles are in an unstable configuration and depending on the structure of the rest of the system they will return to a state of minimum potential energy and can do so by emitting photons as they go. The total energy of the photon(s) is equal to the energy of the photon that triggered the event this being evidenced by the spectra produced.
It may not be immediately apparent that there can be a spectrum for structure three but there is for example in the form of the x-ray spectrum from an x-ray tube. Although the electron approach is initiated by a different process to the one that applies here the spectrum so produced is dependent on the nature of the metal and the kinetic energy of approach the latter being independent of how the approach is initiated.
3. Further Scrutiny of the Similarities
The electron event is basically the same in all structures, the main difference being one of scale. The fractional rest mass change per particle, calculated by reference to the currently measured value of rest mass, is unity in the perfectly symmetrical structure and tends to zero as the structure tends to perfect asymmetry.
· In every structure the event can be triggered by incoming photons, in every structure there is a temporary creation of positively charged rest mass and negatively charged rest mass and in every structure the event can terminate with outgoing photons.
· In the symmetrical structure it has been normal to refer to the temporary creation of matter and antimatter but now, because of the similarities revealed, we can apply the same terminology to describe the event in all structures. As an example we can describe that the temporary creation of additional rest mass of the electron and proton in the ionised hydrogen atom is equivalent to the temporary creation of additional matter and antimatter. As mentioned before the main difference is one of scale the fractional changes being total in the symmetrical structure and partial in other structures.
· Observations show that events in symmetrical structures of all fundamental particles are comparatively rare and this is to be expected since photons of sufficient energy needed to trigger these events are comparatively rare. In addition there is a tendency for the energy of high frequency photons to be converted into the energy of two or more lower frequency photons this being due to the energy level configurations of different structures that the photons interact with. This explains why positrons, negative protons and the like are rare in our world.To clarify this if antimatter is redefined to be matter which is in a temporary excited or ionised state then the amount of matter in our world is equal to the amount of antimatter.
The field
This work has extended special relativity beyond the domain of applicability imposed by the simplifying assumptions made by Einstein.It shows tiny deviations which become more apparent within those systems where quantum effects become more apparent.The work is compatible with quantum theory in that the total mass energy of a system can be considered as the mass energy which is contained within the interacting parts and particles themselves and within the mass energy content carried by the exchange photons these conveying mass energy changes between the particles.One would expect there to be quantum fluctuation displayed by the interacting particles when these are analysed separately,these fluctuations being due to changes at the locations of the particles brought about by the arrival or departure of the exchange photons.Such fluctuations are consistent with the fluctations predicted by Heissenbergs uncertainty principle.
Further Notes on the Correlation Between a Photon Source and a Photon Detector
· We shall refer to locations that photons leave as being sources and locations that they arrive at as being detectors the photons conveying their energy content between the two.
· In the electron event each particle is both a source and a detector. The exchanges are equal in all parts of the event in symmetrical structures and in other structures the second particle is a net photon absorber when the particles separate and a net absorber when they approach.
· There is a definite correlation between the particles but is this generally the case for all sources and detectors? We begin by posing the following question.
· Can a source radiate photons to infinity, in other words photons that never link with any detectors at all? A yes answer would exceed the limitations of the models and could never be proven and it would indicate that observable energy is leaking away from the universe.
· It can be argued that given a long enough time photons will eventually arrive at some suitably occupied locations and it can be argued that sources radiate in relation to whatever detectors there are in the surroundings. There is some evidence to support both views.
· The evidence to support the latter view is rather brief and indefinite but it can be used as the basis for further experimental investigation. It comes from electromagnetic induction which, coincidentally, Einstein referred to in the opening paragraph of his work.
· Electromagnetic Induction
· We shall consider the case when electricity is generated in a conductor when a magnetic moves close to it. The assumption that the observable phenomena depend only on the relative motion is only approximately correct and then only if the magnet and conductor are isolated, sufficiently, from the surroundings. As an example imagine the magnet moving closer to a first conductor and at the same time moving further away from a second conductor. In this case more electricity is generated by moving the magnet only than by moving the magnet and or one of the conductors.
· With all methods of electromagnetic induction there is an interaction between all involved parts. These interactions are given by Lenz’s law, which expresses the conservation of energy, in terms of induced electromotive forces and any resulting currents and magnetic polarities. Expressing this crudely each part is aware of and reacts to changes in each other part.
· Moving a magnet or conductor can be used as a method of signalling for example to a coil of wire connected to a meter. It is equivalent to the transmission and reception of radio waves. This method may not actually be used but mainly for practical rather than theoretical reasons. A more practical transmitter can be made by using a circuit fed by a changing current supply and a further improvement could be made by constructing part of the circuit in the form of an aerial.
· It is already known that receivers, for example lumps of metal, react to transmitters but Lenz’s law shows that it is a two way interaction and transmitters react to receivers. By extension it might be reasonable to assume that something similar applies to all parts of the electromagnetic spectrum and that photon sources radiate in relation to and not independently of the surroundings.
· When a photon has an encounter with a receiver, which can be one of the structures referred to previously, the photon can be absorbed and the electron event triggered. This will culminate with the release of new photons, one possibility being that there is a copy of the original photon. Photons can advance by this method and the structure at each encounter can be described as a receiver and then a transmitter. Photons can continue their advance undergoing multiple annihilations, regenerations and direction changes en route the amount of which depends on the structure and geometry of the surroundings.
· The notes in this section are rather tenuous but hopefully can be a spur for further research.
Data for the hydrogen atom
If the main findings of this work are correct one would expect that when an atom is excited or ionised the extra energy gained by the separated particles displays itself as a mass increase of those particles.Hydrogen one would be the simplest atom to investigate to see if this is the case and it is predictable that the mass of the hydrogen atom plus the mass equivelent of the ionisation energy would be equal to the sum of the measured masses of the proton and electron.Experimental observations show that this is the case.
