@memcculloch #QI's idea of mass and inertia contrasts considerably with *the narrative* of particle physics. In particle physics, mass is derived from particle interactions with fields, and scales up from those subatomic processes. 1/
The models associated with particle physics (eg. QCD, the Higgs field and so forth) are derived from extensive empirical experiments. Logically, other models, to be considered, need to concur with the physical experiments. I think #QI is up to the task. 2/
It is not a trivial exercise to separate results of empirical experiment with the interpretation through the "eyes" of the prevailing model. One has to start somewhere and realise that if one particle's experimental results can be explained with QI, then all may be. 3/
An electron is the simplest, most stable, common particle of matter. One of the ideas of @memcculloch's #QI is to model the electron as a high energy (gamma ray) photon trapped in its own horizon, orbiting with a radius in the order of 1x10^-16 m (1 Angstrom) 4/
The problem with a single trapped photon is that it neither has a preferred direction to have an antiparticle, nor has a reason to have (store) an electrical charge. However as an accelerated particle, it will have inertia, and therefore mass under #QI 5/
My solution is for the electron to be a toroidal/hexagonal set of photons each trapped in their own orbit, with a seventh photon trapped along their common axes. The toroid gives charge storage similarly to a superconducting coil with photons' EMR properties. 6/ 
Inertia, therefore mass will be given by its acceleration via #QI as with a single photon case. There are also two chiral configurations of this arrangement, giving the possibility of the positron. Positron will be attracted to this configuration by opposite charge polarity 7/
The positron's reversed polarity of photon orbits will "unlock" the otherwise extremely stable configuration and release the gamma ray(s) to be seen as energy. The energy will have equivalence to mass with the standard E=Mc^2 formula - directly derived from the configuration. 8/
I believe that this is the starting point At this stage it is just a stab at the correct answer in terms of radius of gamma ray orbits, but at this stage, I believe that all of the particles described in particle physics can be described in terms of trapped high energy photons 9/
The beauty in this approach is that the mass/energy equivalence becomes a far more sensible "mass is trapped photons" model which has the potential to revolutionise particle physics, without wasting the experiments done already. Each particle just needs to be redescribed. 10/
In this approach, quarks/antiquarks can be described in terms of the chiral patterns of trapped photons that gives them their charge and rest mass. Gluons, hadrons and so forth will be just sets of photon loops gluing together quarks into Neutrons/Protons. 11/
Anti-particles, especially in the sense of anti-matter will be mirror-symmetrical versions of the matter particles. Other exotic derivative particles do not necessarily destroy/unlock their respective anti-particles, and some may be their own anti-particle as shown empirically12/
To conclude, it is a mistake to dismiss #QI as being incompatible with the narrative of particle physics. It appears that #QI should be able to simplify particle physics and explain the results derived empirically. 13/13
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
