TruthAboutLight

Facts about light?

From: http://www.fnal.gov/pub/inquiring/more/light/light_page35.html

1. Light from the classical point of view

Maxwell was The Man. He unified electromagnetic phenomena with his equations
Light is an electromagnetic wave
We describe EM waves by their frequencies
Visible light is just a tiny fraction of the whole EM spectrum
Speed of light depends on the medium the light propagates in.
In matter particles can travel faster then the speed of light

2. Light and the theory of relativity

Einstein was The Man. He wrote the theory of relativity
In a vacuum, light propagates with the highest possible speed in the universe
In the theory of relativity, two speeds do not simply add up; therefore it is not true that 1+1 is 2!
Any moving object gains mass
Any moving object ages more slowly than a stationary one
It is possible that a red light was emitted but a green light was received
Simultaneity of events depends on the frame of reference
Any moving object is contracted in the forward direction
If you found an object moving at a speed greater than 299,792,458 m/s check your instruments, something is wrong

3. Light in the quantum world

Planck was The Man. He solved the black-body radiation problem
Light consists of a bunch of particles called photons
Our world is dual; everything behaves as both a particle and a wave.
We have plenty of photons at Fermilab :-))

Maxwell described classical light, which is an illusion, it turns out wave propertied are statistical effects of a lot of individual photons which manifest alternating changes at a particular rate.

Einstein showed alternating changes have a particular speed independent of frequency (energy), insuring a universe where the orderings of changes never gets mixed up over time.

In our world most photons reflect a change in momentum of an electron. Which means an electron, or equivalent, changed quantum state to a state with a different number of Plank actions of momentum. A photon is manifest with respect to every such change.

Simultaneity of events, and therefore time itself, depends on the frame of reference, making time a local phenomonon, discriminated by local event orderings. Everything is a clock. Each clock is a dimension of time. Time and momentums moves at the speed of light in space as light.

Photons now come in flavors?

The photon is the exchange in momentum between electrons since that is the singular effect causes us to say a photon went this way or that relative to our perspective. Only like spin, spin up or spin down, electrons exclude each other manifesting the momentum exchange we perceive.

Scientists have lumped together the effects of spin up and spin down interactions into the behavior of individual photons. This error obscures the mechanism of magnetic effects and ultimately the actual nature of space and time.

Only like spin electrons, spin up or spin down, exclude each other manifesting the momentum exchange we perceive. This is contrary to the standard model of light as this suggests alternate handedness between up interactions and down interaction manifesting two independent types of photons. All photons are considers spin one, 1/2 plus 1/2 equals one. But down spin electrons are spin -1/2, -1/2 plus -1/2 equals -1. Real photons must be spin 1 or spin -1 such that they only interact with electrons of the proper spin.

Polarization is parallel to the direction of charge acceleration (monopole antenna orientation) independent of spin. While spin provides the necessary dimensionality for binary polarization to be manifest, the direction of polarization is independent and orthogonal to the direction (handedness) of spin.

This suggests a different model of individual photons where our current model is an abstraction that is a combination of two independent types of photons on average. Rather than the advance wave always being left handed, and the retarded wave being right handed always, adding to spin one, the actual handedness would depend on the spin of the interacting electrons as both spin and charge are discreetly propagated across space.

This issue of photon handedness is an important issue that needs to clarified. as the standard interpretation of photons is that photons in spin up interactions and photons in spin down interactions are indistinguishable.

This is simply not true. The field vector between electrons is non-zero only for electrons of like spin. This means that electrons of opposite spin have no effect on each other what-so-ever. This also means there are two distinct types of photons, those that mediate spin up interactions and those that mediate spin down interactions.

At some point in the analysis it is generally assumed that the up and down electrons effects will be equal and they are thrown into the same pot with the two independent effects added together. But this is not strictly true and it leads to a misleading, a.k.a. wrong, interpretation of photon properties and behavior as an averaging of up and down effects.

This wrong view of the photon may be significantly responsible for peoples difficulty in believing the simplicity of the event time model of propagating differences. I've largely ignored this discrepancy between standard theory and the information model, but it represents a real error in standard theory resulting in spin aberrations. Such aberrations have let some theorists to suggests that there may be error is Schrodinger's equation itself. This is not necessarily the case. The problem only arises when we average the spin effects and assume that should reflect the behavior of individual photons, which it does not. It does suggest that spin might better be considered an independent fifth state of the electron for many problems.

So am I the first to notice this problem? It is so simple and obvious it is hard to believe that all the great scientists have made this mistake and none has cried foul.

In college when I challenged my professor on this issue he convinced me that the advance wave contributed the other half spin to make photon spin one. How gullible I was, I believed him for 30 years knowing full well that only electrons both up or both down interact by excluding each other from a common state (reflection) while opposite spin electrons are oblivious to one another and readily share states (transmission). Clearly the photons in each case are distinctly different with non-overlapping effects do to being of opposite spin.

I cannot dispel the myths of fields and forces without first correcting the bogus model of the photon. The only rational I can think of for the error is that everyone assumed that light was already well understood and took the first mathematical simplification they could find to come up with the expected classical answers. At that point they figured they were finished and could learn no more from the quantum. That is false. The real nature of magnetism, and even space and time itself becomes evident only when we consider up photon interactions and down photon interactions independently.

QED is supposed to be equivalent to quantum theory, it does not add effects that do not already exist in Schrodinger's equation or Hilbert spaces. But QED almost ignores the spin effects much like spin networks assume charge is largely ignorable. They then add back in the spin effects in QED by imposing a field. It is a convenient pasting together of the quantum and the classical. At the bottom layer you still have electrons changing discrete state, and for each discrete change in momentum there is an equal and opposite relative change elsewhere which, in QED, we say is mediated by a photon.

ANY change in momentum of an electron equivalent to photon exchange. Quantum state includes momentum and position. Electrons do not have two different types of momentum one for problems in QED and another for matrix mechanics.

If you look at the universe as one big quantum system there is no way ever that electrons of opposite spin will interact. The potentials are zero, the vector fields are zero. There can be no exchange of momentum. Modeling the exchange between them as a photon will NOT change the underlying quantum effects, where every photon is an exchange of momentum between exactly two electrons which by quantum theory must be of like spin. This implies two distinct types of photons.

Why? If a photon is an information packet, then what difference does it make if the packet is originated by up spin electrons or down spin electrons? All photons are exclusionary, yes? So they are effectively same spin as all other photons (this would cause all photons to be exclusionary), yes?

I'm way out of my depth of understanding, so I'm just looking for a basic clue. In information science, it doesn't matter what state the object that is signaling in... the signal always takes the same form(s). Ok. So up and down electrons cancel, same electrons ignore each other. Fine. But why should that impart an up or down to the signal (photon)? If it did, then wouldn't up signals cancel out with down signals, just as their originating senders cancel when they meet? Everything is trying to add back to Zero, right? So all those "i + x" signals and objects, when they meet "-i - x" should instantly cancel out. And ignore or propropagate through any other signals or objects. Yes?

---StarPilot

Check your facts StarPilot. Each occupied quantum state includes one spin up and one spin down electron. The Pauli exclusion principle states only that an electron of the same spin will not occupy the same state. Electrons of opposite spin do not see each others at all. The society of up electrons occupy up space independent from the society of down electrons occupying down states discriminating spacetime independently. Their independence is manifest as Magnetism.

I believe photons have spin in two independent dimensions. There are, in fact all right handed, which I contradicted above, but the difference 1 or -1 spin manifests is orthogonal to the right handed spin, which all photons propagate, rather than annihilate or reflect.

But actually for photons, reflection and transmission are indistingueshable. Because they are all right handed, all the interactions are orthogonal with a net zero effect (a canceling that has been canceled). In other words, whenever two right handed signals meet in space, they see the approaching wave spinning in the opposite direction they are spinning and can only pass through each other and fail to cancel regardless of phase.

The second binary "spin" of the photon is perpendicular to its right handedness and distinguishes whether it is a right handed photon with an up twist or a down twist.

Since the proton is only an imaginary idea, since all we experience is momentum exchange between electrons, it is equivalent to consider a photon as a chain of virtual positrons and electrons. the way the wave equation evolves, whenever a difference is manifest that is equivalent to an electron, a virtual or real electron is manifest. We only call it a real electron or positron if coincidentally a nearby real electron difference was canceled. It that case we say the electron moved. When there is an interaction with the vacuum (virtual positrons and electrons) we invent the photon which represents the propagation of spins in two dimensions at alternating positive and negative values. These propagations are indistinguishable from the virtual particles manifesting those differences. The wave of particles exhibits properties of waves and particles to some extent.

It does seem rather impossible that I might be the first to realize the myth of the magnetic field being an angle between the electric and magnetic fields, when the TruthAboutMagnetism is that up interactions are independent of down interactions. But I've confirmed the facts... somebody must have thought of this.

--JimScarver

Okie-Dokie! :D So, two up spin electrons can interact, but not one up spin and one down spin electrons? Fine then. Two like spin electrons exclude each other, while non-similar spin electrons ignore each other. So what is a photon really doing? :-D What bits of info is it really propagating? Is it just wandering forward, until it finds an electron it likes (gets absorbed by)? Then, bam! It passes its bit of info into that electron? So are you saying that's why a photon rejects (reflects? passes through and ignores?) certain electrons? That seems to be what you are saying. If a photon is a momentum state change packet, and momentum change information can only happen between like spinning electrons, then a photon could only be absorbed/received by a like spinning electron as the original electron that created/emitted that photon in the first place? Re-reading everything, that does seem to be what you are saying. Ok... so why? Not that I was arguing against that premise to begin with, as I was really only out to make a small dig on the "right handed" bit (see below. ;) originally. But since we are talking... Are we confident in this? In basic information theory, your listener can discriminate, your signal can discriminate, both can discriminate, or neither might discriminate. It seems you are saying that the standard is that a photon is viewed as a non-discriminatory signal that is supposed to be universally acceptable by all electrons. AIR, in classic physics, a photon is created by a state change of an electron which drops from a higher to a lower energy state. I do not recall of any instances of the reverse at this time. When an electron absords a photon, the electron jumps from a lower state to a higher state. And, of course, if that state is not "stable", the electron will then emit a photon, and drop to a lower, more stable state, continuing the photon proprogation.

If scientists are using an "average" model, then why would they expect to be able to accurately model how one individual photon behaves? Wouldn't they only be able to model how the average photon in a stream behaves? No matter how they arrive at their model, if the presumption is half are positive and the other half are negative (or whatever terminology is the proper one for such), then there should be no real expectation to be able to model any individual photon, should there? Just the "average" behavior. Or did I miss a step somewhere? Of course, in classic terms, a photon is a photon, so maybe that's where the disconnect between QM and classics happens? Entirely different premises/foundations being used to create models and expectations. Obviously, for most scientists/physicists/engineers, the classical model has worked well enough to this point that making a more accurate/refined model hasn't been a priority for their needs. Although I suspect as NanoTechnology continues to advance, inaccuracies in such models will become serious issues.

Why is all light right-handed? Where is the anti-light that is left handed? :-D Isn't left handed really right-handed from the opposite direction? So, all light going one way is right handed, and all light going the other way is left handed, from any given point? It's like saying DNA twist up or right; from the opposite orientation, it twists down or left. Aren't you really just saying that photons do not interact with each other, regardless of their local circumstances?

I've heard many times that magnetism is merely electricity at a right angle. Anywhere you have electricity flowing, you have a magnetic field oriented at a right angle to the flow of electricity. Anywhere you have magnetism, you can "harvest" that field and get electricity (for example, by moving wires through a magnetic field, such as what happens in dynamos/power generators). Since you can create one by utilizing the other, we intuitively understand they are related in some direct fashion. So, what is that relation? Is it merely a matter of some flavor, color, mood, kinkiness, whatever for some hidden or base bits then? Why does flowing electricity (moving electrons) create a magnetic field? As electrons have charges, it seems logical to me that you could use a magnetic field to "push" electrons along a wire that is moved in a particular way through a magnetic field. But why should electrons moving along a wire create a magnetic field? And shouldn't all this talk of magnetism and electricity be on the TruthAboutMagnetism page? ;-)

---StarPilot

The photon is really an artificial idea of how we see exchanges of momentum over a distance. In the quantum what is happening is the propagation of differences between virtual positrons and virtual electrons in the vacuum. When an electron drops from a higher energy state to a lower state, a virtual positron of equal energy is manifest in the abandoned state in the next instant since the change in value of the state is the exact opposite of an electron being there. That change is then filled by either a real electron or virtual electron from the vacuum, when filled from the vacuum we call it a photon propagations until some real electron fills the difference ending the chain of propagation.

Most modern scientists are using a statistical model. They don't pretend to say what individual photons are doing. Many say the photon takes all possible paths but that is interpreting statistics, not individual photon behavior.

In college, my professor convinced me that all light was right handed by showing from Schoedingders equation that photons, as virtual interactions cannot interact with each other since they meet with opposite spin. But I have confirmed my original contention that the vector potential for interaction between opposite spin electrons is zero, no interaction. Every article on the net dealing with electron interaction confirms this fact and then goes on to assume the average behavior. There is no controversy. The vector between opposite spin electrons is zero.

The equations for spin and charge are nearly identical. Each one may be considered to represent a spin like quality. This gives the electron two independent dimensions of spin. Thus we can have right handed light that is up or down. This is where reconciling the terminology between the standard model and the information model becomes difficult and ambiguities may arise.

Left handed light exists in worlds made of antimatter. While left handed like light is synthesized in the laboratory it seem impossible that truly left handed light could propagate through right handed spacetime. The only reason spacetime exists is because the signals fail to cancel each other and propagate.

Charge and spin are independent and orthogonal, charge is associated with the electric field and spin with the magnetic. But the idea of fields is simply the aggregate of quantum interactions. Since the charge and spin manifest independents necessarily, any attempt we make to manipulate one is countered by an orthogonal effect of the other.

The true nature of light and TruthAboutMagnetism are manifestations of the same effect. Light manifest velocities and its nature also manifests the Truth About Gravity.

--JimScarver

Light does not manifest velocities. Space manifests velocities. Light perceives itself as timeless. It is created, it is destroyed (received). There is nothing in between to the photon. It is other things in parallel timespace that a photon of light seems to have velocity. But velocity requires something to travel a specific distance over a specific time span. To the photon, there is no time span, ergo there is no velocity. It is a timeless instant between its birth and its death.

An outside observer is required to measure manifest time, as it takes an observer and its framework to determine the measurements of the metrics used to calculate the derived value of ambiguous and/or variable units (Observed time X to cover observed distance Y).

So, given that you have to have an observer, how can light manifest velocity? It cannot. It is our perceptions that time is passing. Time is an illusion we create because that's how our thinking matter likes to organize things, due to it having an inaccurate data store of previous states to compare Now against.

Does the Universe sense the tics? Or is it just a photon and only experience (creation,) a timeless instant (, death)? If it doesn't "remember" the tics, then the Universe is truly timeless, and it's us that are insane, believing in Thens and Nows and Futures (time).

Just in a zennish mood today. ;)

---StarPilot

Events continuously defines spacetime intervals t=e/h and expansion velocities according to the energy of discrete momentum exchange between masses.

Velocities are the spacetime component result of all interactions, momentum exchanges between electrons. The mass component of the momentum exchange manifests masses. See TruthAboutMagnetism.

Everything decomposes to Plank actions which equal binary discriminations. Events manifest expansions, entropy of events manifest contractions. Quantum theory is confirmed to great accuracy, its operators are discrete and non-linear, without the possibility hidden linearities per Turing etc. The discrete nature is apparent.

The units of Plank actions, forcedistancetime or energy*time, are the emergent properties in our experience due to action. Without quantum actions there would be no force. actions are like clockwork, no space or time or matter exists independent of these actions for a force to be applied in. Energy of motion is relative to motion, I cannot tell how much energy a body has since I cannot say absolutely what the velocity is. Energy of motion is not fundamental and cannot be composed of anything fundamental. But quantum exchange of energy, or momentum is absolute and multiple of Planck actions.

Electrons exchange momentum instantaneously, this would require infinite force, I don't believe force can cause instantaneous change in velocity of electrons due to energy exchange. We see energy exchange, in the quantum there is only action.

Plank actions are the same thing and they discriminate a binary difference, one bit, one truth, in the information universe.

Only action are manifest fundamentally. Events have no witnesses events are gone as soon as they occur, and when opposite velocities cancel, due to interaction with matter, there is entropy of spacetime, contraction, gravity.

http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/Sciences/Physics/Mechanics/Lagrangian/Actionunit/Actionunit.htm "Action has been recognized as the most fundamental invariant of physics, since not only all classical dynamics can be derived from Hamilton's principle of stationary action, but also the Schr?ger equation of quantum mechanics and, more generally, any laws governing physical transformations, which may be described by a given number of state functions and of their first derivatives with respect to a given set of independent variables (generally space-time coordinates).".... " the number of action quanta equals the number of information bits and vice versa."

Quantum state is never witnessed, neither is change of state, only state change rates in the quantum are manifest in our world, quantum actions manifesting motion at the speed of light propagating each other by failing to cancel each other. Fully populated state spaces manifest four dimensional matter by two two dimensional electrons occupying each state, spacetime is populated in only three dimensions by propagating differences in charge and spin propagating each other since only the dimensions of positive charge, up spin, and down spin are represented enforcing non-communicative quantum logical interactions that omits ultimate cancellation of the orthogonal differences.

--JimScarver

Re: Photons now come in flavors?

Re: Photons now come in flavors?(Score: 1)
by bbishop(wobishop6464@hotmail.com) on Jul 05, 2004 - 07:23 PM

OK, I reviewed this more extensively and I have some pretty extensive comments. Hopefully this UI will let me post them; here goes.

The photon is the exchange in momentum between electrons since 
that is the singular effect causes us to say a photon went this 
way or that relative to our perspective. Only like spin, spin up 
or spin down, electrons exclude each other manifesting the momentum 
exchange we perceive.

Exclusion by the law of spin and statistics is not related to the action of the EM force field.

'Indeed, there is no EM force fields in quantum mechanics.' - jim

The momentum exchange between electrons by means of the EM force field is quantized as the exchange of photons.

'Exactly. An integer change is momentum state if equivalent to a photon exchange.' - jim

However, the law of spin and statistics, and the exclusion that happens for spin 1/2 entities because of it, are not due to the EM force but to the fact that in half-integer spin entities, the law of spin and statistics requires that a superposition of two particles be calculated as a subtraction. Thus if two identical entities attempt to superpose, they will be canceled.

'Yes. The probability of occupying the same state goes to zero.' - jim

If these entities carry conserved charges, and the electron carries three (mass, electric charge, and weak charge), then the superposition is impossible because the conserved charges could not be conserved.

On the other hand, photons carry phase messages between electrically charged particles, and the effect on a charged particle of the receipt of a photon is to change its phase. In macroscopic terms, this phase change shows as a change in momentum.

'This is a reversal of phase, an alternation, a reversal.' - jim

The best possible proof of this is the existence of neutron stars. Neutrons carry no electrical charge, and therefore are not repelled from one another by it. However, the neutrons do not superpose; they compress to a mass of finite size. This is because they are fermions and cannot superpose because of the law of spin and statistics.

'Yes, the same bases as the exclusion principle, they cannot occupy the same state.' - jim

Scientists have lumped together the effects of spin up and spin 
down interactions into the behavior of individual photons. This 
error obscures the mechanism of magnetic effects and ultimately 
the actual nature of space and time.

Only like spin electrons, spin up or spin down, exclude each other 
manifesting the momentum exchange we perceive. This is contrary to 
the standard model of light as this suggests alternate handedness 
between up interactions and down interaction manifesting two 
independent types of photons. All photons are considers spin one, 
1/2 plus 1/2 equals one. But down spin electrons are spin -1/2, 
-1/2 plus -1/2 equals -1. Real photons must be spin 1 or spin -1 
such that they only interact with electrons of the proper spin.

You have confused Pauli exclusion, that which keeps electrons from the same orbital shell (actually a resonance pattern around the nucleus, but we'll keep the old terminology for now) from having the same spin, with the law of spin and statistics on which the Pauli exclusion is based and of which the Pauli exclusion is a special case.

In addition, because you have confused these differing exclusions, taking the special case for all cases, and because you have confused the law of spin and statistics, and the exclusion forces that result, with the EM force, your conclusion that only electrons of like spin handedness can interact is unsupported.

'No. What I am suggesting is that the quantum mechanical description of the system is complete and what we call EM forces are emergent from the quantum and can only be consistent with them.' - jim

Polarization is parallel to the direction of charge acceleration 
(monopole antenna orientation) independent of spin. While spin 
provides the necessary dimensionality for binary polarization to 
be manifest, the direction of polarization is independent and 
orthogonal to the direction (handedness) of spin.

Well, polarization of a massless entity is simple, because a massless entity cannot have transverse spin, only longitudinal spin, and in addition can therefore only have two polarization states. Despite the fact that this is a vector boson and therefore should have four degrees of freedom, it has only one because transverse spin is excluded from massless entities.

'I have struggled with this problem and diagrammed spin as you suggest. But the spin equation suggest a spin vector perpendicular to charge, and charge is longitudinal. This suggest transverse spin. This suggests to me that we should view the phase change not lengthwise, but sideways. the views are equivalent.' - jim

Why is transverse spin excluded? Massless entities must move at the speed of light, or they cannot be massless. They must do so in their entirety, and a transversely spinning particle has one side moving in the direction of motion and one side moving opposite it- this is impossible for a massless particle, and therefore forbidden.

'One side moves in the direction of motion, charge, and one perpendicular, spin. This implies an alternating positive and negative mass. This mass can be considered to belong to the virtual particles the signal is propagating through. Since it has a net effect of zero it is ignored.' - jim

Now, an electron, along with a positron, forms a four component state vector called a "spinor." This spinor has four degrees of freedom, but only two of them are held by the electron; the other two are held by the positron. These degrees of freedom correspond to a longitudinal spin and a single axis transverse spin.

'Yes! This is my point exactly.' -- jim

So electrons have a two-component spin that polarizes them. When they receive a photon, with it's spin-encoded message about what phase the emitting electron had, they adjust their polarization and thus their phase is adjusted, resulting in a momentum transfer. This is the action of the EM force.

'No. Well yes, that is one interpretation, it is the interpretation that I challenge. It is based on the false notion that EM properties are somehow at the root of quantum mechanics. The momentum exchange in a space of discrete momentums is a positional change in velocity space. The distance generated in this momentum space is what is called the phase adjustment. The only reason such a momentum distance change is manifest in quantum mechanics is such that like spin states do no occupy the same state. There is no interaction otherwise' - jim

Finally, polarization is the direction of the spin axis. This is the definition of polarization. What exactly are you trying to say here? Because what you actually have said makes no sense.

'Polarization is in the direction of the spin vector. When you say spin axis you are implying something actually rotating which is not the nature of quantum spin.' - jim

This suggests a different model of individual photons where our 
current model is an abstraction that is a combination of two 
independent types of photons on average. Rather than the advance 
wave always being left handed, and the retarded wave being right 
handed always, adding to spin one, the actual handedness would 
depend on the spin of the interacting electrons as both spin and 
charge are discreetly propagated across space.

Hmmm. First, the advance wave and retarded wave, depending on your visualization and on your chosen gauge, represent magnetism and electricity. Magnetism, according to Maxwell, is a force that is felt only by moving electrically charged particles, at right angles to their direction of movement and at right angles to the gauge of the magnetic field (the line from north to south, normalized to the direction of movement of the charged particle), and with a strength dependent on their velocity and on their distance from the generator of the magnetic field.

'I was taking about the photon and antiphoton, as adding the spin of each was my physics profs argument for spin one photons.' - jim

Second, the identity of neither the electric nor the magnetic force has anything to do with the absolute helicity of the photons that are mediating them. Both are represented by photons, and the difference between them is a matter of the relationships of the phases of the particles involved, that is a matter of the relative helicity. This is the complete and consistent description and explanation of the magnetic and electric forces.

'Aligned spins clearly result in what we call magnetic forces. But in quantum mechanics, where there is no magnetic or electric forces, electrons, exhibit a spin vector behavior consistent with both magnetic and electric forces simply by manifesting momentum exchanges only where electrons would otherwise occupy the same state.' - jim

Third, adding two non-integer spins to get an integer spin is impossible, unless by the symmetry operations of supergravity, which are not possible at the temperatures we see here on earth, or even at the center of the sun; this has probably not been possible since before the inflationary epoch in our universe, with the possible exception of inside of a black hole (and if so we will never know about it). Spin can only be changed by integers; by no operation except the above-mentioned supersymmetry operation can spin be changed by 1/2, and certainly that is not happening anywhere in our universe at this time.

'I'm not sure I get exactly what you are saying but I agree that adding the spin of the photon and antiphoton partner is improper.' - jim

Spin is a matter of phase paths, this time the phase of the outside of a particle. It either has an odd number of nodes in the phase (half-integer spin) or an even number of nodes (integer spin). Topologically, these two states are as dissimilar as a donut and a sphere. You cannot continuously deform the donut into a sphere; there is no way to get rid of the hole. Similarly, you cannot deform a spin 1/2 fermion into a spin 1 boson, because you cannot get rid of the extra node or add one; you can only cancel one node with another, giving a difference of two nodes, and since spin is represented as S=n(hbar)/2, this is a minimum difference of one whole unit.

'Yes. In effect, is is just spinning the donut end over end and calling it a sphere. I model spin as being half dimensional vectors, and while dissimilar spins can over time be seen as opposite and one dimensional, at any instant they can only be orthogonal.' - jim

This issue of photon handedness is an important issue that 
needs to clarified. as the standard interpretation of photons 
is that photons in spin up interactions and photons in spin 
down interactions are indistinguishable.

This is simply not true. The field vector between electrons 
is non-zero only for electrons of like spin. This means that 
electrons of opposite spin have no effect on each other 
what-so-ever. This also means there are two distinct types 
of photons, those that mediate spin up interactions and 
those that mediate spin down interactions.

Again, you have confused Pauli exclusion with spin-and-statistics exclusion, and both with the EM force. You have not proven your premises, so this conclusion is not warranted.

'I understand clearly the roots of the exclusion principle in spin-and-statistics exclusion, and indeed the exclusion principle is just one case where occupied state results in reflection rather than transmission of a difference vector. It has not been shown that reflection occurs in any other case.' jim

In addition, the handedness is certainly very important indeed; the relative handedness determines whether the force will manifest as the static electric force or the dynamic magnetic force. However, these forces operate equally between up spin and down spin electrons.

'I am not clear on the meaning of handedness here. The standard interpretation is that all light is right handed in a world of matter rather than antimatter. The only left handed light is artificially generated. The standard interpretation is that the angle between the electric and magnetic field determines how the forces are manifest. For individual electrons the angle is always orthogonal and the angle we perceive is averaged based on the proportion of spin up and spin down participants.' - jim

At some point in the analysis it is generally assumed that 
the up and down electrons effects will be equal and they 
are thrown into the same pot with the two independent effects 
added together. But this is not strictly true and it leads to 
a misleading, a.k.a. wrong, interpretation of photon properties 
and behavior as an averaging of up and down effects.

It is not so assumed. In fact, these differences determine the the exact nature of the phase change that the receiving electron undergoes, and therefore are the difference between the electric and magnetic forces.

'We can view the phase change as 180 degrees, always, as the interaction is 100% or zero, only. This is perceived only for the reference frame where the energies of the participating electrons are equal and reflection is at equal. More commonly we see the exchange in a particular direction in time from high energy to low and account for it by assuming a phase shift between 180% and 360% at the receiving side. But this is merely a matter of chosen gauge theory or perspective.' - jim

I'm going to leave the rest out; with these points made, the rest would be only repetition. I'll be curious to see your response.

'I hope my responses make some sense. -- jim