Why Bosons and Fermions are Distinct...
Perhaps Because Bosons are Simple Like Waves and Spin at c and Fermions Spin at Faster Than Light Inside;
By Local "MASS ENERGY INEQUIVALANCE", Because Mass and Energy are Equivalent But Not Equal in Relativity
I once said to my grandmother when I was a teen that democrats then were smarter than the republicans, and she said, they're equally smart just in different ways. And this made me think.
You may say mass and energy are equivalent, so there is no extra centrifugal force of the atoms or energy radiating out of the Earth in violation of energy conservation. Yet I believe my grandmother's remark tells us about the deeper truth. In a healthy civilization the democrats and conservatives are in balance like the energy of centrifugal and inward force. Even so there are definite distinctions in how they act and live that can be measured.
The local realms of symmetry in my belief are not equal even if equivalent because if they were equal, the electron and plus charge would be so much alike as Maxwell believed the light wouldn't propagate through the field. If you have a weighing machine and you look at the speed of the signal between the weights on the beam, it's bound to be far faster than the weights. Empty space couldn't balance the local symmetries if the light only carries itself. And this idea that the wavelength of the light wave changes before it reaches the observer is evidence that the connecting matter wave of Special Relativity is indeed faster than light that connects it with the high speed observer so information about the momentum and wavelength of light are conserved.
The faster than light matter wave and the local distinctions that can be measured both seem evidence that relativity is incomplete.
I believe Einstein's rejection of the Kaluza Klein method for the cause of the mass and charge of the electron was incomplete. If mass is caused by spinning energy, the mass of the electron, the deep scattering experiments, and renormalization follow more straightforwardly by assuming its internal spin is faster than light. If mass is spinning energy, there's more internal mass than the speed of light spin would allow.
The Kaluza Klein method involves higher dimensional spin inside for the electron, and I believe Einstein rejected this for two reasons; the faster than light spin is forbidden by Relativity, and the change of phase needed (to throw off the relativistic events) would violate the Unified Field.
(The Kaluza Klein has been considered to be the foundation of the idea of more advanced physics of the 11 dimensions inside the quanta predicted by some physicists. I don't know that there has been evidence yet for this but it has had real influence in the history of physics, so far!)
What happens if we accept the FTL spin of the heavy quanta? We have an explanation for rest mass. Relativity has no cause for rest mass that Einstein could have advanced by use of the Kulaza Klein method..
Note that if there is no faster spin and all quanta spin only at the speed of light, since light already spins at c because it moves at c, and slower motion for a heavy quanta is essentially not allowed by conservation of angular momentum.
There can be no electron or any particle heavier than light if relativity is true and momentum is conserved. The electron like light would spin inside at the speed of light. If mass is spinning energy and it all spins at c, unlike my idea GWD, there can be no complexity of mass like extra quantum numbers for the hadrons predicted by Special Relativity.
So by rest mass not predicted by Relativity, the muon suddenly gains weight from .5 mev to 105 mev because not only is the electron that creates it spinning at faster than light inside, the change it the electron to the muon involves another phase change than from lower energy light to the electron.
So I believe in the Kaluza Klein and also that Chou's tunneling experiments about the heavy nuclei have Faster than light spin. Chou himself says he doesn't believe this is disproof of relativity because he holds the wave to be only the average so while some of the wave is faster than light, this fits Einstein's belief. Yet Einstein said no signal containing information can move faster than light.
I hold In my idea GWD General Wave Dynamics any wave has to contain information to keep it internally stable in its rest frame, etc. so if it's a wave that's faster than light it contains information by definition.
(So I believe we might be able to refine Chou's experiments with methods like shortening the distance from the emission to the absorption of the FTL tunneling wave and so speed it up or slow it from faster to faster than light! And e.g. we could change from one limb of the spinning heavy quantum it's tunneling through for proof of FTL etc. )
You may ask, "Isn't this solvable about rest mass if we say all the quanta spin at the speed of light? All the gradiations of masses of the heavy quanta are with the same external speed of spin outside, and this is by way of just changing the radius, all at the speed of light".
Note that if we simply allow different radii for the speed of light of the spin, these radii couldn't communicate because no sideways radial FTL signal would be allowed by Relativity to connect them and the disconnection would give internal structure to the electron with the different radii, like a shear force. Yet the electron "has no internal structure" just the smooth quantum well, and no more.
My other reply is that this wouldn't explain the distinction between bosons and fermions as I'll try to elaborate on this post. If they are distinct, there may be evidence for the Kaluza Klein and a phase change, mass and energy aren't equal, and this would involve more than relativity.
Note also that the radius also would have to fit Planck's constant and the speed of light if it's truly universal. If the sideways motion is at the speed of light, there can be no radial change, and all the masses like the plus and minus charge are the same.
This idea that the internal spin is FTL would be the cause of the experimental evidence found in the 1970's that there are indeed the virtual spacelike and timelike photons as predicted by Einstein. I wondered about this when I was in my 20's . If "time is reversed" for FTL in Relativity, yet there is no evidence around us yet seen for FTL, perhaps the solution might be seen by Feynman’s idea about the particles and antiparticles having time reversal. Einstein believed that the FTL interval balanced the slower motion with the 0 interval at the speed of light. At first I tried to fit this to just say as with the reversed spin of the particles like small clocks, the plus charges move fast nearer to c and the minus charges move slow as in nonrelativite distinction of mass and energy, and the 0 interval wouldn't be the speed of light, rather at 1/2 the speed of light, mediated perhaps by the light between them. Even so I searched for evidence for this 0 interval at half the speed of light, and there is no great cosmic resonance at one half the speed of light.
So I left this for rest and cogitation, and more recently I have a possible more advanced way of solving this.
If the spacelike and timelike virtual photons exist, and if we look all around for all the motion at slower than light we find real evidence the FTL interval isn’t a mere idea if both spacelike and timelike photons exist there would seem to be a real area where the FTL motion exists. So the real way the FTL motion exists that would seem to give the interaction and symmetry between the virtual photons would be about the FTL events and where they physically exist is inside the spins of the heavier quanta. Faster than light internal spin would solve this otherwise unresolved symmetry of the virtual photons.
One problem in relativity is about mass. Sure you can say the outside of each quantum spins at the speed of light, this by simple use of Planck's constant. But constance while of real value to Relativity has the problem that if mass is spinning energy and all the quanta are spinning at the quantum speed of light, they would all have mass of 1 and minus 1 etc. (I say in my belief, the Uncertainty Principle gives mass as spinning energy because it uses the relationship between mass or momentum and time in a definite way. If time is about frequency and is a curve in higher math, mass and time become more the same. If you add more mass to a spinning body it tends to spin faster and time speeds up, for the Earth or for a quantum..)
The idea of a phase change to allow change of mass being change in energy and without so much interaction with the outside field and Planck's constant would allow many masses of many wavelengths and energies inside. So if all the quanta are made of the matter waves and mass is spinning energy by way of the Uncertainty Principle, we take the matter waves as we find them and look at resonances and interference and so on and then we simulate by putting them inside the electron, calculate the speed and see if we can use the derived information to predict when the electron becomes a muon and so on for all the heavy quanta eventually.
One use of the idea may be about the distinction between fermions and bosons. Bosons would spin at the speed of light like energy, and the fermions with the phase change would all spin inside at Faster Than Light. The faster than light phase change from Relativity doesn't allow compatibility. This is why you can put two bosons like light in the same place and time, yet the fermions are more solid and don't unify as well so by the phase change and FTL spin, mass is indeed distinct from the energy of the bosons, so the two types of particles fermions and bosons are a sort of cosmic balancing point, relative and non relative. Energy is simple more like a wave, and mass is more complex like with more complex quantum numbers.
Relativity says they are equivalent, but if they aren't equal, there must be more than relativity in physics.
The phase change and FTL that Einstein didn't accept for the electron would allow another great idea that he also hoped to solve. The phase change gives the (non relativistic) stability of the quanta and the world around us. So if this is "disproof of relativity" it's also a way Einstein was also right in a deeper way, even if his ideas about relativity are "non absolute".
I believe the Higg's field outside the quanta gives mass instead of the internal spin..Wilczek recently won a Nobel prize by his work that shows the high energy Higgs' gives only 1/5th the mass of the heavy fractional charges in QCD. This would follow from Line Removal. The mass is caused more from the outside, this isn't ruled out. First, the spin is internal. If you want to milk a cow, you don't go out in the middle of the field with your stool and wait for the cow to back up to you to milk the cow. So too if the Higgs' field is flat, I believe it may no more cause mass than uniform motion causes acceleration.
The low energy Higgs' has been discovered, and I believe it gives mass by being in the interface between the internal spin of the heavy quanta and the external flat Higgs' field. The heavy quanta spin (externally only at the speed of light). And this imparts spin to the Low Energy Higgs (LEH). The LEH's are also spinning at much faster than light but with much shorter wavelength (as Einstein believed about low energy quanta to get around quantum uncertainty) than allowed by Planck's constant and the speed of light, this would also be how the LEH are an independant parameter in the Standard physics.. These act like much smaller gyroscopes to stabilize and transmit the information about the momentum of the field through the Higgs' field itself. In truth mass mass may be a combination of the internal spin of the quanta the LEH, and the Higgs' field, all three are needed to conserve the changes in momentum and energy conservation of the field. Even so because of the phase change and FTL motion of the mass, it is distinct from mass in relativity, there is no cause for mass in SR. Einstein believed mass isn't strictly speaking thermodynamic, yet electromagnetic fields have mass too.
You may know that at high energy, light behaves like a heavy particle. Yet they both travel at the speed of light. This would only be possible if mass is spinning energy if there is distinction in the spin not found in SR. One important thing about this way of distinction of mass and energy is about the simplicity of energy vs. the complexity of mass as it relates to the collapse of the wave function.
This might be also a bit distinct between bosons and fermions. If bosons spin only at the speed of light and fermions spin inside at faster speeds, at some radii where the FTL spin is influencing the collapse of the wave function, I believe the distinction of mass and energy might give a slightly different speed of the collapse.
So high energy light might collapse a bit faster than other light all else held the same.
Einstein and Lorentz held that space contracts in the line of motion in order to explain the difference between motion and non motion.
Here I offer the following explanation since Einstein offered none. The small low energy Higgs' quanta (which have been predicted and recently found by experiment) exert the pressure that causes the contraction. We haven't directly seen the low energy field since it is mostly wavelike and converts over to much faster than light externally. It becomes like a superfluid here so it's much faster than light and this changes its phase so it's so efficient we don't usually find evidence for it even while it maintains the conservation of momenta of the low energy external fields.
I believe in Newton's idea that the low energy flat Higgs' field is a way the spinning bucket of water "knows" if it's spinning or not. This may only be a way to measure spin if a gyroscope only senses changes in rotation not linear motion, so it's not as absolute as he believed. Note that this version of the low energy field of gravity and inertia isn't at rest. It moves at higher speed than light as the EPR speed and at the speed of gravity by its low displacement toward the sun. The field gives way and causes force only at the ROA with the LEH by proxy all deputies sign up! This would be why Einstein and Mach believed only the relative motion of mass and energy were what "matters"! The low energy waves exist to send information about energy conservation between such as the starship and the light in SR. Because they give way so well to find like of the heavy quanta, they only so to maintain the common forces seen around us in such a passive way, as if the space and time are empty as Einstein believed. So other than the low energy Higgs' field the spinning bucket might use, this way of connection of all the external events would not be so much any absolute source of rest by which motion is measured as a way of sending and storing information about changes in Mass and energy reliably. This is why the Michealson Morely found no evidence for the Medium Maxwell assumed even while it conserves energy. Or for example if you run around the room, the medium is there and you feel the force by change of your motion by way of the LEH at the ROA of each quantum exercise boost yet the outside waves being low energy and more slippery slide and make it so you don't knock down the lady near you in the gym with the force of the wave needed even so to conserve energy. The low energy waves and particles would also be the dark matter and the same general evidence would be there like the evidence for dark matter. And both would seem invisible to sensors even while it makes up most of the cosmos, this in essence is more evidence for dark matter. It may be what you find all around.
Light is a transverse wave with large density of snapback and the particles at ROA (Radius Of Action ,see below) would be the cause at its radius, even so for constant motion at greater distance the waves are not so quantum and they give way much more smoothly, this is why Stokes believed the medium was like sealing wax, with strong force of high speed impact and giving way under slow or continued force of low energy. The light has a large snapback at the ROA yet the planets move through the waves with no resistance not because the waves are not viable, even while they have the important value of maintaining the momentum and energy conservation of all the fields by connecting the inside spin with the outside motions of the fields.
The pressure of the particles freezes in by way of the force between the plus and minus electric charges as Maxwell believed to predict the speed of light exactly based on the force between them as in resilience of the medium. The plus and minus charges act like a weight and counterweight of the elevator, so uniform motion continues without awareness as much by the high speed observer.
This would seem like terminal velocity with the cushion falling in the air and the Earth's gravity except there is no friction felt because while the waves try to move the body in uniform motion at higher speed ahead, the particles try to slow the motion with the result being uniform motion like terminal velocity. The one major distinction is there is no friction unlike the cushion due to the reversal of entropy for the quanta inside. So the LEH exert pressure only on the outside of each heavy quanta at what I call the ROA Radius of Action. This would seem to be the cosmic balancing point between mass and energy, a balancing point where the Higgs' doesn't disappear even at the lowest energy unlike all the other heavy quanta in physics.
So here the Lorentz contraction is caused by the pressure of the LEH, these waves are not commonly seen even though they are in all the field, and since the heavy quanta have to be held together more than radiate out to exist as we see them, they have attraction and negative entropy, at least on the outside near the ROA, and so. And so the LEH exerting pressure only exert pressure on the outside of the heavy quanta and don't cause reradiance like the cushion because of negative entropy, like e.g. gravity which radiates in more than out (and I believe indeed that this outer zone of the quanta is derived from gravity, and so as others say, gravity may have important connections to the collapse of the wave function).
So this idea of terminal velocity would explain uniform motion by a mechanical method and also the Lorentz contraction, for which Einstein offered no cause.
Near the speed of light there is more and more pressure on the heavy quanta and this creates the augment of the mass. The rest mass comes from the FTL phase change inside of the heavy quanta, and this is why the more mass an object has the slower it tends to move by simple conservation of angular momentum. Einstein' believed that at near the speed of light the observer would notice no real change or nothing unusual in the starship going on. Even so I think first the quanta would line up as e.g. electrons with high energy fields. This would change many of the properties of the events in the starship, this isn't mere change of space and time, this would involve events like changes in different historys seen by two observers at different speeds watching the higher speed starship. Since when the two observers match up the different historys of the two observations can't be time reversed even while the thermodynamic heat will cause different historys (e.g. change in the thermostat would cause more accidents, leading to time spent healing the accident, and other events) if relativity is true and the observers are absolute, even so they can't be time reversed when the observers of different speeds compare movies.
If you take a helix and force it against the wall, it would make the "events of its spin" go faster by the helix being "squashed". Since in the theorems time is always proportional to frequency, and also time is an acceleration, the spins of the quanta like small clocks would speed up even while slowing even more as seen by the distant observer.
So in my belief the Lorentz contraction with time might speed up onboard the high speed starship. The distant observer sees the time slow down even more. This would be because of the stretching of the redshift of the light. Note that the relative red shift is in any direction unlike the doppler redshift, and I believe this is due to the internal force exerted on the field by the LEHs so it’s compressed by the field yet reacts more in radiance for the redshift, like the sun has gravity to squeeze out the heat of fusion at another wavelength of the energy.
And the reason for the paradoxical distinction is here again, the distinction of mass and energy. The mass of the starship and the predicted speeding of time is overbalanced in this way by the even more influential slowing of time at long range as in relativity due to the opposition of the long wavelength light which is like energy, and the mass of the starship. Like truth and falsehood in life and science one or the other will win out, and while relativity wins out for long range observers, I believe this would be another possible way to disprove the complete equality of mass and energy.
As I say elsewhere, these ideas about the speeding of time locally and the polarization of light not found in SR may be testable in the lab by way of my invention, what I call the Relativistic Wind tunnel, RWT. This involves the idea that since motion is relative, we send the high speed motion of a field like light with lasers or masers past the small starship in the lab to find effects like the Fitzgerald contraction, the polarization of the quanta and this idea of the speedup of time onboard the machine. If the speed of light is more thermodynamic and not about empty space time, there may be more complex events involved with the RWT than Einstein believed. And at the least the RWT will help us find the Fitzgerald contraction, since only the slowing of light not the change of the contraction yet has been found as in particle accelerators. While all the physics of the accelerators and other machines fit Relativity, due to the ideas like the inequality of mass and energy as above, there may be more in store.
If mass is spinning energy you might wonder about the recent experiments that show mass may be spin independant. I would think since the gravity is at another energy than the inertial field (if gravity and inertia are the same "where's the huge gravity around an ultracentrifuge"? And the inertia radiates out not in like gravity.) the gravity waves of the quanta go through the slower speed of light realm of Planck's constant on the outside (this FTL motion is needed to cause the information about momentum to be moved outside and in). The slower speed of the quantum spin at the higher radii might convert the FTL spin of the outer radii to a more radial motion by an exchange of motion and this interaction would be why the quanta don't accelerate indefinitely and they conserve momenta well. The pressure between the inner spin and the quantum spin which resists the FTL would give the radial acceleration of gravity.
Or as I say elsewhere the speed of the gravity may be so hugely more by GWD it would have only a small change in the spin with the net acceleration compared on both sides of the quanta at c, even so it wouldn't be a zero change with spin and its magnitude of the effect is readily based on the speed of gravity compared to the speed of light spin.
Finally I want to say that recent evidence seems to show that high energy light from cosmic sources seems to travel at a different speed than low energy light, high energy light arrives a few seconds before the lower energy wave.
(I would think because of light being a boson as you add on more energy it would move more slowly it being the opposite of the fermions, as in the opposition of mass and energy.) Relativity tells us that the light is the same as space time, and if all the changes fit inside the constant speed of light, there is "no room for relativity about change in the light itself". Light is at the speed of light yet it connects with all the rest of the quanta at slower than the speed of light. Yet how can light both move at the absolute speed of light and slower than light also? It would need something Faster Than Light to connect its already speed of light motion to change into the higher energy. Light at high energy behaves like a heavy quanta as expected if it has internal FTL spin, yet by relativity light is simple and without change. As I say elsewhere the Equivalence Principle and the ideas about the equivalence of mass and energy both seem to involve unlike masses moving at like speeds with the same force applied.
Yet if Einstein assumes mass and inertia are the same, he's assuming what he's trying to prove. You raise different masses to the same height and they fall at the same rate because it took that much more mass to raise the heavier weight and that much more energy is liberated by the heavy mass as it falls. Yet using the same force gives a different rate of motion and they fall at different rates like the earth and moon.
Due to conservation of momentum and angular momentum, a heavy mass tends to move slower with the same force applied. So if high energy light has had the same force often applied, we would expect heavier light to move at another speed than low energy light. This result about the different speeds of light hasn't yet made it into the mainstream of physics, even so I think it may be...if of worth to us in R and D about science...
Like the moon falling around the Earth at different speeds, it seems possible that this high and low energy light sight may allow the two light waves to bend at different rates with the gravity lens, something Einstein's ideas wouldn't allow.
WHAT ABOUT LIGO?
Mach and Einstein believed gravity and inertia are essentially the same thing. LIGO may have found an event associated with the gravity at the speed of light. If it's inertia then it would be at the speed of light since inertia and SRT with its absence of gravity is much about the speed of light. But gravity has an extra tensor that can't be transformed away. If inertia is what LIGO has found and it's at the speed of light, SRT says it can only change wavelength. I believe it may change both speed and wavelength, because of the extra tensor and because gravity is an acceleration. So LIGO would have the radiant outward particles of the equivalence of centrifugal force. It radiates out from the source. Gravity on the other hand would change both speed and wavelength and the particles would move inward.. So if we have three sensors at three radii, at different radii of the Earth they would change wavelength, but by the much larger speed of gravity, there may be a small change in relative motion of the speed of the sensors.
Even if gravity moved at the speed of light, due to the coherence of the field, the inward particle motion at any speed at all means that this change could be sent as information back to the source of gravity at the nearer radius.
The real reason I would hold that you can't add your speed to the speed of light in Special Relativity is because the light is more a particle as Einstein believed, uninfluenced from emission to sensor, and this is because light is more quantum.
When you plug in gravity to quantum equations you get infinities, and it would be because gravity isn't mostly quantum. This the coherence of gravity would seem to be a real measure of its faster than light motion, at any rate for the waves.
So if you shake a mass at the higher radius, in GWD General Wave Dynamics, the information in gravity wavelengths would arrive at faster than light for the inner radius. The light would only send the information at due to Planck's constant and relativity's power over the heavier quanta like light, but the complete continuity Einstein believed in for gravity wouldn't always just give received knowledge, it may be by the much higher speed allowing the connection of gravity. Complete continuity would be infinite.
Others hope to use Feynmann's idea that if two quanta can be in resonance and superimposed, and Feynmann believed that if this is done by gravity of the quanta, by improved sensors, then gravity is quantum. To me this seems like saying if a wave interacts with a boat, this is real proof the boat is made of the wave! So I disagree with Feynmann here, and the cause of infinities when you plug gravity in quantum equations is because gravity is more a wave and nonquantum.
