I’m doing several lines of thought at once. I’ll just try to summarize here and flesh each out in later posts. First–I said no discontinuities, but this keeps nagging me, and I began to see some reasons why that approach is still on the island. Any discontinuity clearly cannot have a spatial dimension, even if that dimension lies on one spatial slice of a light cone–there will always be some frame of reference where some portion does not lie on a light cone, and thus violate analytic behavior of a field. I said that a twist has a wavelength and thus has a spatial dimension, and thus cannot be a valid solution for that reason. However, a wavelength can have a “length” and lie on the light cone. It would have a spatial distance representing the particle’s wavelength, but only a point at any given point in time–that is, the point of twisting expresses wavelength by twisting in time. It would lie on the light cone, so would be at a boundary for a possible discontinuity–in **every frame of reference** except its own. This should still be workable and I think I gave up on it too soon. I have to decide whether this is more likely to be correct or whether the analytic solution with the magnetic field sheath has fewer flaws. I also have come to a point where I need to understand what it means to move and what momentum really means. Are the field components in a photon actually moving, or just staying in place but spinning in such a way that adjacent field vectors are somehow influenced by its neighbors, this influence travelling at speed c. If the field components of a photon are actually moving, then the vector field going magnetic because its moving in the pointing direction makes sense (the dimension in relativistic travel goes to zero), but if it’s just a wave passing through spinning elements, then I don’t see how a magnetic interpretation could be formed (nothing is actually moving at c). In either scenario, what is it that is actually propagating in a twist and why does it continue to move (that is, why does the twist continue around in a circle rather than being pulled back or stopping). In fact, it’s not even clear that this is a question that can be asked. Quantum mechanics defines momentum in a way that doesn’t really have a classical geometrical interpretation. Yet another area of questioning is this–in order to make E=hv quantization to work, there has to be a local neighborhood where the field vector has a lowest energy state (the background direction). A twist is stable because both ends are tied down to this background direction, even though the middle of the twist is not in the lowest energy state. But what is the property of a field vector that gives it this potential energy state? Electric field elements do not interact. What keeps the twist from dissipating? Finally, I want to know what it means to have a point (dimensionless) twist in a field. This seems problematic to me.

Yeah, everything I think about grows questions like rabbits, and the ability to test possible answers has no experimental method that isnt too small for me to execute. So should I quit asking, or is there a path somewhere in here?

Agemoz

## Leave a Reply