It’s been 22 years since I started as an amateur crackpot, and have nothing more to show for it except that I’m still an amateur crackpot. However, I did reach the goal of a better understanding of the physics behind the particle zoo and the history of physics. I still think that my basic premise could work to produce the array of particles and force mediators we know to exist. The idea is analogous to the Schroedinger wave solutions for excited electrons and is based on the assumption that at quantum scales there is a way (other than gravity) to curve EM waves. We already know that this outcome cannot result from Maxwell’s equations alone, so I have proposed that EM field twists can occur. These could be considered strings and consist of an axially rotating field vector that propagates only at speed c. If the axis is a straight line, we have a photon that cannot rest and has no rest mass. However, a twist that forms in a closed loop must only exist in quantized structures (any point on the loop must have a continuous vector twist rotation, so only complete rotations are possible). Loops can exist as a simple ring or more complex knots and linked knots and would provide the basis for a particle zoo. The loop has two counteracting magnetic fields that curve and confine the loop path, thus enabling the soliton formation of a stable particle–the twist about the axis of the twist, and the rotation of the twist about the center of the loop. Mass results from the momentum of the twist loop being confined to a finite volume, inferring inertia, and electric charge, depending on the loop configuration, results from the distribution of magnetic fields from the closed loop. Linked loops posit the strong force assembly of quarks.

The biggest objection to such a twist model (aside from assuming an unobserved variation of Maxwell’s equations that enables such a twist field) is the resulting quantized size of particles. Electrons have no observed dimensional size, but this model assumes they result from twist rings that are far larger than measurements indicate. I have to make another assumption to get around this–that collisions or deflections are the result of hitting the infinitely small twist ring axis, not the area of the ring itself. Indeed, this assumption helps understand why one and only one particle can capture a linear twist photon–if the electron were truly infinitely small, the probability of snagging a far larger (say, infrared) photon is vanishingly small, contrary to experiment (QFT posits that the electron is surrounded by particle/antiparticle pairs that does the snagging, but this doesn’t answer the question of why only one electron in a group will ever capture the photon).

In order for this twist theory to work, another assumption has to be made. Something needs to quantize the frequency of axial twists, otherwise linear twists will not quantize like loops will. In addition, without an additional constraint, there would be a continuous range of closed loop energies, which we know experimentally does not happen. In order to quantize a photon energy to a particular twist energy, I posit that there is a background state direction for the twist vector orientation. In this way, the twist can only start and finish from this background state, thus quantizing the rotation to multiples of 2 pi (a complete rotation). This assumption leads to the conclusion that this background state vector must be imaginary, since a real background state would violate gauge invariance among many other things and probably would be detectable with some variation of a Michelson-Morley experiment (detecting presence of an ether, or in this case an ether direction). We already describe quantum objects as wave equations with a 3D real part and an imaginary part, so this assumption is not wildly crack-potty.

So in summary, this twist field theory proposes modifying the EM field math to allow axial twists in a background state. Once this is done, quantized particle formation becomes possible and a particle zoo results. I’ve been working hard on a simulator to see what particle types would emerge from such an environment.

One remaining question is how does quantum entanglement and the non-causal decoherence process get explained? I propose that particles are group waves whose phase instantly affects the entire wave path. The concept of time and distance and maximum speed c all arise from a limit on how fast the wave phase components can change relative to each other, analogous to Fourier composition of delta functions.

You will notice I religiously avoid trying to add dimensions such as the rolled up dimensions of various string theories and multiple universes and other such theories. I see no evidence to support additional dimensions–I think over time if there were other dimensions connected to our 3D + T, we would have seen observable evidence, such as viruses hiding in those dimensions or loss of conservation of some quantities of nature. Obviously that’s no proof, but KISS to me means that extra dimensions are a contrivance. My twist field approach seems a lot more plausable, but I may be biased… 🙂

Agemoz

Tags: causal, entangled causal, quantization, quantum, quantum theory, twist theory, twists, twists physics

## Leave a Reply