Wow, this twist ring is becoming a thing of beauty. Yes, it is mostly a semiclassical treatment and thus probably won’t be taken seriously by any working physicist now, yet I look at this and wished I had been there when these approaches were debated about 100 years ago.

I had thought about how to get momentum from a ring, and was considering computing how the ring would cause the radial motion without resorting to assuming a momentum from the ring’s charge distribution (I’m always looking for a cool Mathematica project, but each time so far, a bit of followup thinking has quickly determined analytic solutions not requiring computation). I had always assumed a dipole, but this has problems, and I got to a point where I realized that it just wouldn’t work. Yes, it would explain the radial motion, and the forces involved would be proportionate to the dipole momentum–but it would never create net forces in an electric field (or magnetic field). As mentioned previously, though, twists do work, and give the four unique particles: spin up electron, spin down electron, spin up positron, and spin down positron. So then I tried to see what kind of radius would be enforced by two twists of the same type. Is there a fixed radius resulting from the interference pattern of the twists? And to my astonishment, yes, there is a beautiful solution. If the twist rate is exactly the same as the speed of light around the ring, only then will the two twist fields cancel each other out, resulting in a net zero far field, and a stable “geosynchronous” dipole position!

In this system, the twists are continuously turning at the same rate as the propagation around the ring, thus creating standing waves that resemble a dipole. This explains why there are the previously mentioned working solutions using a dipole. There is only one possible radius for this system of twists, although other Schroedinger two body solutions will also give stable twist patterns presumably representing other particles (assuming, of course, that this ring model represents reality at all…). For example, we have good evidence that muons are a propagating braid of three strings of twists, each braid momentarily appearing in real space as one of three muon types–the slight twist displacement yielding the tiny mass associated with muons. Speculative, of course–but intriguing to me with possibilities.

I still don’t have proof of anything, though–and the twist ring does not yet provide an answer as to why *this particular mass*. In this model, electrons form from two twists with a very particular momentum, the God constant of posts I made a few years ago. In a scale less system, one of two things has to happen to explain what we see (constant mass for all electrons): either there is an intrinsic property of 3D scale-less systems with a fixed speed of all twists, or all rings are stimulated by a constant oscillating source (see previous posts, now thought to be unlikely), or there is only the illusion of constant mass, when in fact any radius ring will exhibit all our observed measurements of mass (I think this is unlikely, some aspect of the “real” radius would show up in different particles).

Right now I think the first case is the valid case–I just haven’t found the property of our system that enforces a particular ring radius. Note that the Standard Model uses the Higgs particle to enforce a quantized mass for particles, but what gave it its particular mass? This is a recursive question not unlike the What Created the Creator question. That argument doesn’t necessarily disqualify the validity of the Higgs solution, but I’m guessing that if the Higgs particle is found, no physicist will even then argue the elegant simplicity of the Standard Model. Obviously I don’t bother refuting the Standard Model, that is the domain of crackpots stupider than I, but the model’s inability to create a representation of the electron family that works as well as the twist ring makes me want to pursue the twist ring still further.

Is there something about the twist ring that would create a unique radius? The stable “geosynchronous” result enforces a particular radius given a particular twist rate, but the linear twist rate is not quantized. Why is the ring twist rate quantized? What is it that allows only one twist rate to form a local stable state (in other words, why are there no electrons with 1.1 electron masses).

We already know that twist propagation in this model goes at the speed c, and that the twist frequency determines the energy and momentum of the twist. We know that the twist is spin quantized, that is, can only do a twist angle that is a multiple of 2 Pi (hypothetically enforced by the start and finish complex field alignment requirement). We know that the particle phase component is non-causal, which implies that the twist angle state impact is noncausal as well. Whatever it is, if this twist ring has any connection to reality, there has to be something about the ring that constrains the rate of twisting. I’ll break for now to focus my thinking on possibilities here.

Agemoz

## Leave a Reply