It is hard to know where to begin. Are you familiar with vector spaces, quaternions, and multi-dimensional geometries? Have you read A.E. Abbot's Flatland? Do you have the vocabulary to translate the algebraic language into geometrical pictures?
It is hard to know where to begin. Are you familiar with vector spaces, quaternions, and multi-dimensional geometries? Have you read A.E. Abbot's Flatland? Do you have the vocabulary to translate the algebraic language into geometrical pictures?
If you do, signify, and we can begin a discussion.
If you don't, I would suggest that this forum is not the place to learn. I would be happy to converse with you on the subject if you would consider doing some reading.
If you understand abstract algebras, set theory, or even "mechanical drawing", how three dimensional forms can be accurately rendered by two dimensional projections and cross-sections, and how numbers map to points then I can explain. If you do not understand those things, then it will take some time and trouble on my part to explain, if you are not willing to do the work, I won't bother.
If you are familiar with the math, then we have a basis for discussion.
Yes, yes, the electric field is perpendicular to the magnetic field and both are perpendicular to the direction of travel. As I said.
The "particle" is the field until the wave form collapses.
I prefer the term "oscillation" to "spin". "Spin" implies rotation, and "oscillation" just implies some sort of periodic change, but we can use the term "spin" as long as it is understood that it does not imply any rotating mass.
I understand.
The electric field oscillates in one dimension, the magnetic field oscillates laterally. The field can be described by the expression: A X (cos ( x ) + i X sin(x ), where "A" is the amplitude and "x" is the period. "i" of course represents the lateralization of the two fields, although the "two fields" are just one oscillating in two dimensions. At light speed there is no momentum, no mass, all the energy is in the field, and only when the energy is absorbed (the photoelectric effect) or reflected, is the field localized to a "particle". Note that the cross product of the fields results in a vector in the third dimension, the direction of motion. (It is actually better described with quaternions than vectors.)
At light speed there is no momentum, no mass, all the energy is in the field, and only when the energy is absorbed (the photoelectric effect) or reflected, is the field localized to a "particle". Note that the cross product of the fields results in a vector in the third dimension, the direction of motion. (It is actually better described with quaternions than vectors.)
Are we in agreement about that? I have simplified the thing somewhat, leaving out Planck's constant and the phase angle, but we can always add the complexity if necessary. Of course I may have got it wrong, and you can correct me.
Umm, no. Photons are not pulled in by extreme magnetism; they have no electric charge. They travel in a null geodesic, a term which generalizes the straight line in flat spacetime. Under the extreme gravitational field of the black hole spacetime is curved inward, and the resulting geodesic (shortest path between two points) is also curved.
...Photons don't accelerate, they travel at the constant speed of c...
Until a few months ago, we were reliant on indirect evidence of the existence of black holes. Such as the stars orbiting something we can't see at the centre of our galaxy.
