So I continue studying quantum physics, and it gets weirder and weirder.
For instance, did you know that the electron we know actually consists of two particles? Yeah, the electron we know is formally known as a "mass electron", and is made up of a left-chirality electron and right-chirality anti-positron.
The elementary particle known as an 'electron' is a spin 1/2 (the measure of its quantum spin, or its resistance to perturbation when interacting with other elementary particles), charge -1 lepton which is left-chiral. It has the symbol e-L.
But when e-L interacts with the Higgs bosonic field, it flips its chirality, turning into the chiral-doppelganger of the electron, the anti-positron, with symbol e-R, spin 1/2 and charge -1. That's known as quantum mixing.
Then it interacts with the Higgs bosonic field again, and flips back to e-L. That interaction is what gives the "mass electron" its mass, as the universe attempts to keep the "mass electron" from moving backward or forward in time beyond the current temporal frame. This quantum mixing happens about 100 trillion trillion (100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) times a second, according to theoretical physicist Matt Strassler.
You'll note that while the electron (e-L) and anti-positron (e-R) have the same charge and spin (and are thus otherwise indistinguishable), they have opposite chirality, which makes them different particles. This type of particle is known as a "Dirac Mass" particle.
The other type of particle (the Majorana particle) is generally uncharged, and it only has the particle and its anti-particle, rather than the 4-spinor of the Dirac Mass particle.
So the "electron" is actually two different elementary particles (e-L and e-R)!
And the positron is actually e+L (positron) and e+R (anti-electron), as well!
It gets confusing due to the confusing language used... it's clearer when working with the electron, because its anti-particle is the "positron", instead of the "anti-electron"... had they named it the "anti-electron", then e+R would need a new name. That is the case with other elementary particles. Some have taken to calling them anti-anti-particles.
I prefer this convention:
I wonder what it'd take to get actual particle physicists using the term "chidopp" to describe the chiral doppelgangers of the elementary fermions? :D
Now, take a look at this:
You'll note the quantum spin + velocity of the left-chiral electron (e-L) = -c, and the quantum spin + velocity of the right-chiral electron chidopp (e-R) = c. This means the "mass electron" (e-L + e-R) is a temporal particle! It's in balance, locked to our temporal frame because it equally switches between e-L and e-R.
Ever wonder why E = mc2? Now you know... the elementary particle must go one direction, slam into the Higgs field, reverse chirality and direction, and slam into the Higgs field again (again flipping its chirality and changing direction), etc., etc., in order for mass to be imparted to it... it attempts to do so at c.
This is why the weak fundamental force is a short-range force... the elementary particles are always trying to move at c (and in the absence of the Higgs field, they would), but they aren't allowed to travel very far before they interact with the Higgs field and slow down via a process known as tachyonic condensation... it's a process whereby the elementary particle slams into the Higgs field (a tachyonic, or scalar, field) and tachyons (Higgs bosons) would come out of the Higgs field except for the fact that the energy density is low enough that the velocity of the elementary particle is damped and the elementary particle has mass imparted to it, instead. For energies at or above 125.09 GeV/c2, a Higgs boson does come out of the Higgs field (which is how they found it at the LHC), but it's such high energy that it immediately decays, via various decay modes, into gauge bosons or fermions, as the ATLAS experiment at CERN found.
In the earliest moments of the universe, the weak force (at the time combined with the EM force into the electroweak force) was a long-range force. Then, as the universe expanded and energy density fell, the electroweak force symmetry-broke into the weak fundamental force and the electromagnetic fundamental force, giving rise to the Higgs field and thus fermionic mass. Before electroweak symmetry breaking, there were 4 species of Higgs bosons in existence (the only things which had mass), but when electroweak symmetry breaking took place, three of them underwent quantum mixing (via the Higgs mechanism) with the isospin force and hypercharge force which existed at the time, making the W-, W+ and Z0 bosons massive, and leaving only the H0 Higgs boson today (the H0 Higgs boson couldn't interact with the EM fundamental force, which means we were left with one Higgs boson and massless photons). The Higgs boson is virtual today because the universe's energy density is too low for it to be concretized. It pops into existence for a brief moment, but its energy density is so high that it immediately decays via destructive interference, smearing its energy back into the QVZPE field, leaving behind a molasses-like Higgs field instead which we sense as the other particles having mass.
ASIDE:
------------------------------
This means mass and gravity are two separate phenomena... the Higgs field causes mass, mass deflects space-time, that deflected space-time represents a change in potential energy of space-time, that negative potential energy is gravity. So gravity is emergent instead of fundamental, therefore there needn't be any gravitons mediating gravitational potential energy. It's merely a phenomenon of a higher potential energy of an object converting to kinetic energy as it reorients in space without anything blocking it from reducing its energy. It would entail mediating the transformation of the form of energy itself, and I don't believe a change in form of energy requires mediation. Remember, matter itself is a condensate of energy, as proven via Einstein's equation (E2=p2c2 +m2c4), so if a change in energy form requires mediation, so does matter itself... and we know it doesn't.
------------------------------
This is also why electron quantum spin axis changes with electron velocity. As electron velocity increases, the spin axis becomes shallower to its direction of motion. An electron's spin points at a velocity-dependent angle from its momentum axis (higher velocities shrink the angle). If you were able to push an electron's velocity to c (which you'd not be able to do unless you were somehow able to shield the Higgs field, or else the apparent mass of the electron would increase as the electron interacts more with the Higgs field, so you'd add more energy to push the electron faster, which would make the electron interact more with the Higgs field, which would require more energy to push the electron faster, etc.), its spin axis would be aligned with its momentum axis, and thus its mass would be converted to energy... it'd be a photon (which always has its quantum spin axis aligned with its momentum axis).
You'll remember in my previous post, I'd described how the virtual photons which are emitted from the outflowing interface of each pole face of a magnet and pulled into the inflowing interface of each pole face of a magnet affected time:Quote from Cycle on February 9th, 2017, 07:45 PM Because the magnetic material we have is too weak to resist the internal forces, approximately half the magnetic domains unpin and flip to minimize the magnet's internal energy, which is why there is an inflowing and outflowing interface on each pole face of a magnet.
And because there is an inflowing and outflowing interface on each pole face of a magnet, the temporal effects cancel out. This is why, when you just place a stationary magnet next to a stationary wire, no voltage is induced.
So while the virtual photon flux of the magnet provides the EM fundamental force component to interact with electrons, we need to add something else to the mix in order to get those electrons to move. That 'something else' is motion, which slows time down, causing a perceived charge compression, which pushes the electrons out over the wire.
In addition to causing charge compression, we force the electron to remain in e-L mode for a tiny fraction longer than e-R mode. Thus the power we transmit over our wires is literally the time imparity we've imparted to the electron.
Now, we know that all particles (elementary or composite; concretized, resonance or virtual; massive or massless) are merely fluctuations in fields. This knowledge further implies that the "mass electron" is the result of two fields... the electron (e-L) and anti-positron (e-R) fields. So the Higgs field is causing the energy which comprises the "mass electron" to constantly transfer from the e-L to the e-R field and back. It is this constant 'pinging' back and forth which keeps the fluctuation in those fields concretized as the 'mass electron', and thereby that which gives it its mass. Without the Higgs field, the energy of those e-L and e-R fields would "smear out" the fluctuation that we know as a "mass electron" over time. In other words, electrons would be virtual, instead of concretized. The rest mass of the "mass electron" is simply the energy associated to a quanta of a standing wave in the EM field, divided by c2, and it is the Higgs field which effectively converts the wave vectors of e-L and e-R into a standing wave.
This is why we can 'create' electrons (in fact, all elementary particles) with the right amount of energy (just as Chalmers University did in 2011 with photons, pulling them directly from the quantum vacuum)... we're merely setting up a standing wave in the quantum vacuum. If we learn how to do this more efficiently, we could increase the efficiency of generating electricity to the point that we could literally power civilization from the quantum vacuum, as Tesla predicted we would eventually learn how to do.
For instance, did you know that the electron we know actually consists of two particles? Yeah, the electron we know is formally known as a "mass electron", and is made up of a left-chirality electron and right-chirality anti-positron.
The elementary particle known as an 'electron' is a spin 1/2 (the measure of its quantum spin, or its resistance to perturbation when interacting with other elementary particles), charge -1 lepton which is left-chiral. It has the symbol e-L.
But when e-L interacts with the Higgs bosonic field, it flips its chirality, turning into the chiral-doppelganger of the electron, the anti-positron, with symbol e-R, spin 1/2 and charge -1. That's known as quantum mixing.
Then it interacts with the Higgs bosonic field again, and flips back to e-L. That interaction is what gives the "mass electron" its mass, as the universe attempts to keep the "mass electron" from moving backward or forward in time beyond the current temporal frame. This quantum mixing happens about 100 trillion trillion (100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) times a second, according to theoretical physicist Matt Strassler.
You'll note that while the electron (e-L) and anti-positron (e-R) have the same charge and spin (and are thus otherwise indistinguishable), they have opposite chirality, which makes them different particles. This type of particle is known as a "Dirac Mass" particle.
The other type of particle (the Majorana particle) is generally uncharged, and it only has the particle and its anti-particle, rather than the 4-spinor of the Dirac Mass particle.
So the "electron" is actually two different elementary particles (e-L and e-R)!
And the positron is actually e+L (positron) and e+R (anti-electron), as well!
It gets confusing due to the confusing language used... it's clearer when working with the electron, because its anti-particle is the "positron", instead of the "anti-electron"... had they named it the "anti-electron", then e+R would need a new name. That is the case with other elementary particles. Some have taken to calling them anti-anti-particles.
I prefer this convention:
| Old Convention | Symbol | New Convention |
| electron | e-L | electron (positron anti-particle) |
| positron | e+L | positron (electron anti-particle) |
| anti-positron | e-R | electron chiral-doppelganger (chidopp) |
| anti-electron | e+R | positron chiral-doppelganger (chidopp) |
I wonder what it'd take to get actual particle physicists using the term "chidopp" to describe the chiral doppelgangers of the elementary fermions? :D
Now, take a look at this:
You'll note the quantum spin + velocity of the left-chiral electron (e-L) = -c, and the quantum spin + velocity of the right-chiral electron chidopp (e-R) = c. This means the "mass electron" (e-L + e-R) is a temporal particle! It's in balance, locked to our temporal frame because it equally switches between e-L and e-R.
Ever wonder why E = mc2? Now you know... the elementary particle must go one direction, slam into the Higgs field, reverse chirality and direction, and slam into the Higgs field again (again flipping its chirality and changing direction), etc., etc., in order for mass to be imparted to it... it attempts to do so at c.
This is why the weak fundamental force is a short-range force... the elementary particles are always trying to move at c (and in the absence of the Higgs field, they would), but they aren't allowed to travel very far before they interact with the Higgs field and slow down via a process known as tachyonic condensation... it's a process whereby the elementary particle slams into the Higgs field (a tachyonic, or scalar, field) and tachyons (Higgs bosons) would come out of the Higgs field except for the fact that the energy density is low enough that the velocity of the elementary particle is damped and the elementary particle has mass imparted to it, instead. For energies at or above 125.09 GeV/c2, a Higgs boson does come out of the Higgs field (which is how they found it at the LHC), but it's such high energy that it immediately decays, via various decay modes, into gauge bosons or fermions, as the ATLAS experiment at CERN found.
In the earliest moments of the universe, the weak force (at the time combined with the EM force into the electroweak force) was a long-range force. Then, as the universe expanded and energy density fell, the electroweak force symmetry-broke into the weak fundamental force and the electromagnetic fundamental force, giving rise to the Higgs field and thus fermionic mass. Before electroweak symmetry breaking, there were 4 species of Higgs bosons in existence (the only things which had mass), but when electroweak symmetry breaking took place, three of them underwent quantum mixing (via the Higgs mechanism) with the isospin force and hypercharge force which existed at the time, making the W-, W+ and Z0 bosons massive, and leaving only the H0 Higgs boson today (the H0 Higgs boson couldn't interact with the EM fundamental force, which means we were left with one Higgs boson and massless photons). The Higgs boson is virtual today because the universe's energy density is too low for it to be concretized. It pops into existence for a brief moment, but its energy density is so high that it immediately decays via destructive interference, smearing its energy back into the QVZPE field, leaving behind a molasses-like Higgs field instead which we sense as the other particles having mass.
ASIDE:
------------------------------
This means mass and gravity are two separate phenomena... the Higgs field causes mass, mass deflects space-time, that deflected space-time represents a change in potential energy of space-time, that negative potential energy is gravity. So gravity is emergent instead of fundamental, therefore there needn't be any gravitons mediating gravitational potential energy. It's merely a phenomenon of a higher potential energy of an object converting to kinetic energy as it reorients in space without anything blocking it from reducing its energy. It would entail mediating the transformation of the form of energy itself, and I don't believe a change in form of energy requires mediation. Remember, matter itself is a condensate of energy, as proven via Einstein's equation (E2=p2c2 +m2c4), so if a change in energy form requires mediation, so does matter itself... and we know it doesn't.
------------------------------
This is also why electron quantum spin axis changes with electron velocity. As electron velocity increases, the spin axis becomes shallower to its direction of motion. An electron's spin points at a velocity-dependent angle from its momentum axis (higher velocities shrink the angle). If you were able to push an electron's velocity to c (which you'd not be able to do unless you were somehow able to shield the Higgs field, or else the apparent mass of the electron would increase as the electron interacts more with the Higgs field, so you'd add more energy to push the electron faster, which would make the electron interact more with the Higgs field, which would require more energy to push the electron faster, etc.), its spin axis would be aligned with its momentum axis, and thus its mass would be converted to energy... it'd be a photon (which always has its quantum spin axis aligned with its momentum axis).
You'll remember in my previous post, I'd described how the virtual photons which are emitted from the outflowing interface of each pole face of a magnet and pulled into the inflowing interface of each pole face of a magnet affected time:
So now lets look at magnets, the inflowing interface (where virtual photons enter the magnet from the QVZPE field) of a magnet is a reduced QVZPE field density, meaning time slows down. And the outflowing interface (where virtual photons come out of the magnet and are subsumed back into the QVZPE field) of a magnet is an increased QVZPE field density, meaning time speeds up.
And because there is an inflowing and outflowing interface on each pole face of a magnet, the temporal effects cancel out. This is why, when you just place a stationary magnet next to a stationary wire, no voltage is induced.
So while the virtual photon flux of the magnet provides the EM fundamental force component to interact with electrons, we need to add something else to the mix in order to get those electrons to move. That 'something else' is motion, which slows time down, causing a perceived charge compression, which pushes the electrons out over the wire.
In addition to causing charge compression, we force the electron to remain in e-L mode for a tiny fraction longer than e-R mode. Thus the power we transmit over our wires is literally the time imparity we've imparted to the electron.
Now, we know that all particles (elementary or composite; concretized, resonance or virtual; massive or massless) are merely fluctuations in fields. This knowledge further implies that the "mass electron" is the result of two fields... the electron (e-L) and anti-positron (e-R) fields. So the Higgs field is causing the energy which comprises the "mass electron" to constantly transfer from the e-L to the e-R field and back. It is this constant 'pinging' back and forth which keeps the fluctuation in those fields concretized as the 'mass electron', and thereby that which gives it its mass. Without the Higgs field, the energy of those e-L and e-R fields would "smear out" the fluctuation that we know as a "mass electron" over time. In other words, electrons would be virtual, instead of concretized. The rest mass of the "mass electron" is simply the energy associated to a quanta of a standing wave in the EM field, divided by c2, and it is the Higgs field which effectively converts the wave vectors of e-L and e-R into a standing wave.
This is why we can 'create' electrons (in fact, all elementary particles) with the right amount of energy (just as Chalmers University did in 2011 with photons, pulling them directly from the quantum vacuum)... we're merely setting up a standing wave in the quantum vacuum. If we learn how to do this more efficiently, we could increase the efficiency of generating electricity to the point that we could literally power civilization from the quantum vacuum, as Tesla predicted we would eventually learn how to do.