If you’ve been following along in my effort to work out details of the Unitary Twist field, you will have seen the evolution of the concept from an original EM field theory to something that might be described as a precursor field that enables quantized sub-atomic particles, Maxwell’s field equations, relativity, and other things to emerge . I’ve worked out quite a few contraints and corollaries describing this field–but I need to make it really clear what this field is not. It cannot be an EM field.

My sidebar on this site calls it an EM field but now is the time to change that, because to achieve the goal of enabling the various properties/particles I list above, this field has to be clearly specified as different from an EM field. Throughout physics history there have been efforts to extend the EM field description to enable quantization, General Relativity, and the formation of the particle zoo. For a long time I had thought to attempt to modify the Maxwell’s field equations to achieve these, but the more I worked on the details, the more I realized I was going at it the wrong way.

The precursor field (which I still call the unitary twist field) does allow EM field relations to emerge, but it is definitely not an EM field. EM fields cannot sustain a quantized particle, among other things. While the required precursor field has many similarities to an EM field that tempt investigators to find a connection, over time many smart people have attempted to modify it without success.

I now know that I must start with what I know the precursor field has to be, and at some point then show how Maxwell’s field equations can arise from that.

First, it can readily be shown that quantization in the form of E=hv forces the precursor field to have no magnitude component. Removing the magnitude component allows a field structure to be solely dependent on frequency to obtain the structure’s energy. This right here is why EM fields already are a poor candidate to start from. It took some thinking but eventually I realized that the precursor field could be achieved with a composition of a sea of orientable infintesimal “balls” in a plane (actually a 3D volume, but visualizing as a 2D plane may be helpful).

The field has to have 3 spatial dimensions and 1 imaginary dimension that doesn’t point in a spatial direction (not counting time). You’ll recognize this space as already established in quantum particle mechanics–propagators have an intrinsic e^i theta (wt – kx) for computing the complex evolution of composite states in this 3D space with an imaginary component, so I’m not inventing anything new here. Or look at the photon as it oscillates between the real and imaginary (magnetic) field values.

Quantization can readily be mapped to a vector field that permits only an integer number of field rotations, easy to assign to this precursor field–give the field a preferred (lower energy) orientation in the imaginary direction called a default or background state. Now individual twists must do complete cycles–they must must turn all the way around to the default orientation and no more. Partial twists can occur but must fall back to the default orientation , thus allowing integration of quantum evolution over time to ultimately cause these pseudo-particles to vanish and contribute no net energy to the system. This shows up in the computation of virtual particles in quantum field theory and the emergence of the background zero-point energy field.

Because of this quantized twist requirement, it is now possible to form stable particles, which unlike linear photons, are closed loop twists–rings and knots and interlocked rings. This confines the momentum of the twist into a finite area and is what gives the particle inertia and mass. What the connection is to the Higg’s field, I candidly admit I don’t know. I’m just taking the path of what I see the precursor field must be, and certainly have not begun to work out derivations to all parts of the Standard Model.

The particle zoo then results from the tree of possible stable or semi-stable twist topologies. Straight line twists are postulated to be photons, rings are electrons/positrons differentiated by the axial and radial spins, quark combinations are interlocked rings where I speculate that the strong force results from attempting to pull out an interlocked ring from another. In that case, the quarks can pull apart easily until the rings start to try to cross, then substantial repulsion marks the emergence of the asymptotic strong force.

Quantum entanglement, speed of light, and interference behavior results from the particle’s group wave characteristics–wave phase is constant and instantly set across all distance, but particles are group wave constructions that can only move by changing relative phase of a Fourier composition of waves. This geometry easily demonstrates behavior such as the two-slit experiment or Aharonov’s electron. The rate of change of phase is limited, causing the speed of light limit to emerge. What limits this rate of change? I don’t know at this point.

All this has been extensively documented in the 168 previous posts on this blog. As some point soon I plan to put this all in a better organized book to make it easier to see what I am proposing.

However, I felt the need to post here, the precursor field I call the Unitary Twist Field is *not* an EM field, and really isn’t a modified or quantized EM field. All those efforts to make the EM field create particles, starting with de Broglie (waves around a ring), Compton, Bohm, pilot wave, etc etc just simply don’t work. I’ve realized over the years that you can’t start with an EM field and try to quantize it. The precursor field I’m taking the liberty of calling the Unitary Twist Field has to be the starting point if there is one.

Agemoz

Tags: particle zoo, photons, physics, quantization, twist, twist field, twist ring, twist theory, twists quantization, vector field

## Leave a Reply