Talk:Geon (physics)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics. |
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the assessment scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating within physics. |
|
Help with this template This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. |
|
 |
This article has been automatically assessed as Stub-Class by WikiProject Physics because it uses a stub template.
|
I have printed out Wheeler's original article, and will read it and do some work on this. I am thinking we might move the good ideas from Black hole electron here and redirect. -- SCZenz 22:41, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
- Excellent! But make sure to study the book by Griffiths, Colliding Plane Waves. It might not be clear from a glance why this is relevant, but search the arXiv for ultraboosts, plane waves and quantum gravity. The Aichelburg-Sexl ultraboost and CPW basics is essential for reading arXiv papers dealing with attempts to model ultrarelativistic collisions of particles. Note that this is directly related to papers by t'Hooft and Gibbons which you may already know.---CH (talk) 08:28, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
-
- I'll do my best, but looking at that many articles outside my subfield will take me some time. It looks like you can do a much better job with it than me, if you have time. If not, I'll get to it in the end. -- SCZenz 09:18, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Geons & particles?
A geon is a quantum-mechanical entity if it consists of a single photon, gravitationally confined in a closed loop (ring) configuration. It would have one unit of angular momentum and two quantized energy concentrations with opposite electric fields. Each energy concentration would have 1/2 unit of angular momentum. DonJStevens 17:51, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
This doesn't make much sense to me. Do you have a citation?---CH (talk) 22:11, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
- CH: Linear photon momentum is photon energy divided by light velocity. Linear momentum is h/wavelength. Angular momentum in a one wavelength loop (ring) is h/wavelength multiplied by the radius (wavelength/2 pi). The photon angular momentum is h/2 pi. One wavelength of electromagnetic radiation consists of two energy pulses just as rf antenna excitation current consists of two energy pulses per cycle. Each pulse carrys 1/2 of the energy in one wavelength or in this case 1/2 of the energy in one photon so each energy concentration will have angular momentum equal to 1/2 of the photon angular momentum or h/4 pi.
DonJStevens 19:29, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
- Alexander Burinskii prepared the paper "Microgeon with spin, Sov.Phys JETP, 39, 1974, p.193." He considered the Kerr ring as a gravitational wave-guide for stationary photon propagation along the Kerr ring orbit. I have not read this yet but it should be of interest. DonJStevens 16:35, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Kerr ring? Did you mean the so-called ring singularity, or corotating (counterrotating) circular photon (test particle) orbits in the equatorial plane? Something which is always an issue in this kind of discussion is that it is not always clear in gravitation theory whether conventional notions from quantum mechanics are appropriate, still less how to apply them rigorously, or to come up with better notions. But you probably know this. Thanks for the citation.---CH 04:23, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi CH; The Kerr ring is treated as ring singularity and a gravitatoinal photon waveguide (in the particle equtorial plane) by Burinskii. In his Dirac-Kerr electron paper page 2, Burinskii writes; "Recall, that angular momentum J = h bar/2 for parameters of electron is so high that black hole horizons disappear and the source of the Kerr spinning particle represents a naked singular ring. -- It was suggested that the Kerr singular ring represents a string which may have some excitations generating the spin and mass of the extended particle-like object -"microgeon"-." More detailed information follows. The very best of writers and theorists has some problems with clarity when working with this subject. I believe Burinskii is on the right track here. DonJStevens 19:27, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Burinskii is (at least mostly) correct because evidence that the electron is gravitationally confined is accumulating. As an example, the following equation defining the electron Compton wavelength, has no logical basis if the electron is not gravitationally confined. Electron Compton wavelength is equal to 2 times (3Gm) exponent 1/3, times (2 pi) exponent 5/3. Where m is the electron mass.DonJStevens 00:56, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Students beware
I created the original version of this article and thought I was monitoring it for bad edits, but apparently not, given the comment by Don Stevens about work by Burinskii which I believe is flawed.
In any case, I am leaving the WP and am now abandoning this article to its fate. Just wanted to provide notice that I am only responsible (in part) for the last version I edited; see User:Hillman/Archive. I emphatically do not vouch for anything you might see in more recent versions. I hope for the best, but have some reason to think that at least some future versions may present slanted information, misinformation, or disinformation.
Good luck in your search for information, regardless!---CH 23:57, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Don't leave
Hi CH; I want to seriously ask you not to leave the WP. Your input is much needed and will be very difficult to replace. Regarding the Burinskii work; it may be flawed; reviews by others like yourself will expose errors that may exist. I believe Burinskii would appreciate communication from you describing any apparant flaws.
If he can show that time dilation factors outside of a K-N bh and within a K-N bh are equal, his basic concept will be more difficult to find flawed. DonJStevens 16:13, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
