Chapter 99: The Principle of Relativity, the Role and Importance of Magnetism, the Amplitude of Electromagnetic Waves and Unfolding the Photon

by Darryl Penney

Abstract: Traditional physics views electricity and magnetism as being related as described by Maxwell’s equations and neglects their orthogonality, which is a simple concept that leads to the Principle of Relativity and absolute/’new’ physics that provides a simple description of the working of the photon and explains the enigma in traditional physics that an electromagnetic wave passes through magnetic and electric fields unaffected, but is affected by the entanglement with energy leading to the effect of diffraction and the conservation of energy. Magnetism has a crucial organisational role in recording the speed of moving frames of reference and providing choice to the act of measurement to prevent a logical singularity and shows how the enigma of the Special Theory of Relativity is due to the use of an incomplete Newtonian physics.

I believe that the universe is constructed on orthogonality/choice and that we, by necessity, must view/expand the null space through a probability/fractal lens that allows that expanded view. The requirement of a probability/fractal space complicates our view of orthogonality and leads to the Principle of Relativity. From chapter 97, ‘in a probability/fractal space, the Principle of Relativity is that everything is relative to something else (1+(-1))=0, except for the conservation of total energy, the speed of electromagnetic waves in a vacuum and the increase in energy/organisation per unit of newly created space [dark energy].’

Orthogonality is basic and is buried in the Principle of Relativity in the equation (1+(-1))=0 and it can be immediately seen that (1) and (-1) are opposite/independent and yet linked and this linkage is also shown in the second orthogonality (1+(-1))=0 [physical] and (1 and (-1))=0 [logically/organisationally] that there are always two parts that are independent and yet related [Principle of Relativity]. It is difficult to comprehend that independent things are related/entangled, but (1) and (-1) only exist because everything is continually moving apart so that (1) and (-1) continue to exist, and the universe, seen through a fractal space, must continue to expand because a fractal requires repeatability [Big-Bang/Big-Whoosh].

As an example, to increase the understanding of orthogonality/choice, from chapter 98, ‘another example that has perplexed physicists for centuries and can be explained simply by orthogonality is the difference between gravitational mass and inertial mass [gravitational between the planets and inertial tangential to the motion] and they have the same value [for logical reasons], but operate orthogonally/independently and are thus fundamentally different/independent because inertia is (literally) energy and gravity is (literally) organisational/logic [energy versus organisation orthogonalisation].’

Notice that ‘the difference between gravitational mass and inertial mass’ is because ‘inertia is (literally) energy and gravity is (literally) organizational/logic’ and this shows a difference [orthogonality] that is ignored in Newtonian physics because Newtonian physics does not have a formal recognition of organisation. Ignoring the differences with masses can be done, in most cases, because they have the same magnitude of mass, but electricity and magnetism will be seen, I believe, to be similar, in that they are orthogonal, but different in that they do different jobs and are recognisably different and yet interact between themselves. Traditional physics views electricity and magnetism as being the same thing and ignores orthogonality, which is a simple concept with a multitude of contexts from which the universe is built and run.

A small digression about ‘what is physics?’ might be in order because from chapter 96, “up to now, most scientists have been too occupied with the development of new theories that describe what the universe is to ask the question why. On the other hand, the people whose business it is to ask why, the philosophers, have not been able to keep up with the advance of scientific theories.’ (A Brief History of Time, Stephen W. Hawking, p 174) It appears that we both agree that both technicians [concept] and generalists [context] are necessary to fully understand a subject [place it in context], but there are other considerations.’

‘Considering the “what?” and the “why?” in the above in the light of orthogonality and the Principle of Relativity, the quotation is correct in the traditional Newtonian physics, but shows another aspect of orthogonality. Mathematics is said to be the “handmaiden of the sciences”, but I believe that mathematics is the concept and physics is the context [horizontal orthogonality], but philosophy is a lower level [vertical orthogonality] because philosophy spawned mathematics and physics. Thus, I believe that the quotation is incorrect because physics is not only responsible for the concept “how?”, but also for the context “why?” [Principle of Relativity] as a third orthogonality. The orthogonal of philosophy (concept) might be the ‘spread of learning’ because philosophy was the original discipline, however, the point of this paragraph is that physics must pursue its own “why?”.’

This argument shows that the way that Newtonian physics described physics 350 years ago, is not adequate today and that physics needs to consider both ‘what?’ and ‘why?’ on the same level to avoid the confusion that has occurred in only considering top-down. In other words, currently, Newtonian physics (practically) ignores organisation [and choice] and cannot comprehend the place of organisation that is (literally) half of physics, and now I find the same has occurred for magnetism, and considering the importance of electricity and magnetism in our technology, this is an opportunity that should be taken to understand it better.

To foreshadow the aim of this discussion, in my belief, Newtonian physics is energy based and orthogonality requires an organisational side [quantum gravity plus housekeeping organisation] and the same can be said for electricity [energy] and magnetism [organisation], but with a difference that magnetism has a role to play in electromagnetic radiation as the ‘speedometer’ that is the mechanism [of choice] that allows the strange effects of relativity to come into effect as the speed difference [measurement] between two frames of reference increases. Just as we use electricity from electrons that the universe uses as atoms to build itself, we use magnetism in electric motors, whereas the universe uses the organisation of magnetism to monitor and safeguard the universe from [logical] singularities. As parasites, we grab whatever we can use for our own comfort/benefit.

The strange effects of relativity come about because we have to look through a probability and a fractal space and the dimensions, created by (1+(-1))=0, require a constant speed of light, expansion etc. This imposes a logical restriction on our ability to measure when we use an energy-based speed of light [traditional physics] instead of the accounting speed used by the organisation of the universe. Quantum gravity is the relationship [hyperbola] of attraction between all energy/organisation from the nucleus to the stars and magnetism has another use because there has to be a mechanism to measure/control the speed of light/energy because of the restriction to the constant speed of the photon. In other words, magnetism is similar to quantum gravity [organisation] but has and does a different job and further, traditional physics measures electricity and magnetism with the same yardstick even though one is energy and the other is organisation.
‘Magnetism is as familiar as a fridge magnet or a compass needle, yet it is also a force that is still not fully understood by physicists, and which is difficult to explain in any detail…. Gilbert … demonstrated that although both static electrical charges and magnetism have powers of attraction and repulsion, they are different kinds of forces…. James Clerk Maxwell … with a rigorous mathematical description of the relationship between electricity and magnetism, the two forces have been united into one: electromagnetism.’ (History’s Greatest Discoveries, Joel Levy, p 142)

Traditional modern physics says that electricity and magnetism go together like the proverbial horse and carriage, and modern physics is firmly seated on Newtonian Physics, and thus, is incapable of understanding the basic orthogonality relationship and is littered with enigmas. As an example, ‘in Einstein’s equations, magnetism and electricity were manifestations of the same thing seen by viewers in different frames of reference; an electric field in one moving frame would be seen as a magnetic field in another.’ (50 Physics Ideas, Joanne Baker, p 91)

This quotation suggests that firstly, ‘magnetism and electricity were manifestations of the same thing’, whereas, I believe that they are orthogonal/independent with electricity being energy and magnetism being the organization created by the change in energy brought about by the difference in the speed of the frames of reference. An analogy might be appropriate, as a car’s relationship to its speedometer is organisational and is an instrument of the car and necessary to the car, but is different to a car. Thus, magnetism is a manifestation of choice based on the speed of one frame of reference with respect to another because there must be a means of monitoring that speed difference because the speed of energy is a constant/maximum that we call the speed of light in a vacuum and further it is an absolute as noted in the definition of the Principle of Relativity. This corresponds to the car staying within the speed limit of the road/law with respect to our method of measurement.

Secondly, ‘seen by viewers in different frames of reference’ suggests that magnetism and electricity are the same thing but orthogonal in different frames of reference due to the motion and thus a measurement of the speed difference. To digress, a probability space has the dimension of (a+b)=1 where a and b are general measurement/record and Life has used this to operate the mind/brain with concept/context and the physical universe uses the simple form [measurement/entanglement/choice] to keep track of energy [conservation of energy] and to guard against ‘tripping’ a singularity. Note that these are organisational singularities that occur because of the [organisational] restrictions on the solution of the organisation, thus the speed of every frame of reference in the universe is monitored against every other frame by using the accountability of the space.

In other words, both the [concept of the] conservation of energy [of every particle/energy] and the speed [relative] of every particle is monitored by the general a and b of a probability space [(a+b)=1]. This is a property of a probability space and is the reason behind the mathematics of concept/context, Feynman’s sum of histories and Occam’s razor where certainty is only attained by a complete accounting of organisation [the opposite of ‘slow’ energy]. It has been said that our planet is a life-form, but it is apparent that the universe is an organisational life-form and we [the mind/brain especially] are built on the same principle. Whilst (a+b)=1 is the mechanism of the accounting of the space, for all a and b, we are now considering magnetism that varies as the speed between every frame of reference and can be compared against an absolute, and that absolute is, I believe, carried by every photon for comparison and is, at a guess, the amplitude.

Thus: magnetism is the organisational energy created orthogonally with the energy change necessitated by two charged particles moving in two different frames of reference, also, magnetism is the ‘speedometer’ that allows logic to compare the speed between the two frames of reference and prevent the measurement of frames of reference exceeding the speed of light. The first part is the simple definition/explanation of magnetism that has escaped traditional physics for centuries because of omissions in its basic Newtonian structure, whereas the second part shows the use and the necessity of magnetism as a fundamental part of the organisational structure of the universe, so, this definition tells more of the whole story. Notice that this definition consists of two parts [Principle of Relativity] that are concept and context [and requires choice].

Let us start with the usual picture of an electromagnetic wave as shown in Wikipedia with electric and magnetic fields arising and falling in rhythm because electric fields generate magnetic fields and vice versa at right angles to each other [possibly a small appreciation of orthogonality?]. The enigma is that the energy of the photon, as shown by the electric and magnetic field, drops to zero at every half wavelength. It would make more sense, in an energy sense, if the electric and magnetic fields were out of sequence by a quarter of a wavelength because the sum of the squares equals unity and that would mean that the energy transfers from electric to magnetic fields and the total remains constant. But, as above, they generate each other at the same time, so, how does the photon remember how much energy it is supposed to have? Obviously there is more to it and probably involves the concept/context of organization.

The mind/brain uses the concept/context of wave/particle duality that is a higher ‘use’ of the orthogonality space [between the orthogonals] than the physical world that uses measurement/entanglement [only the orthogonals], and this duality occurs in every particle and, in particular, the photon, and when the wave is at zero, the photon is in particle form and when the wave is maximal, it is in wave form. Thus, orthogonality provides a ‘shimmer’ that makes available choice in the physical world and makes orthogonality, ‘either this and that, else stays the same’ available with the ability of both the physical and organisational to choose. Orthogonality and choice [in the form of shimmer, see chapter 94] are the bedrock of the universe and the structure of the universe is produced by the requirement of space to provide ‘living room’. The expanding universe is evidence of this necessity, as is the wave/particle duality [forming atoms].

The neutron is energy/organisation in a solid state and orthogonates to a proton and electron and the proton/neutron bond in the nucleus is part of the quantum gravity organisation with the gravity of the galaxies being the other extreme. The electrons encircle the neutrons/protons [roughly equal numbers due to the bond] in Bohr orbits depending on their wavelength and are, in some cases, loosely held and form electric currents that have an associated magnetic field with all the properties found in a physics textbook. However, quantum mechanics and relativity are major players in any discussion because we view the universe through a probability/fractal space that dictates that the speed of light is relatively slow (see chapter 98) and that everything is probabilistic.

According to modern physics, the speed of light ‘is fixed by the absolute electric and magnetic properties of free space’ (p 89), which says very little, and what it implies is incorrect because it is the measurement that determines the relative speed between the object and the measurer’s mind/brain. The ratio of the dimensions, length to time for all energy is a constant and the same constant [Lorentz transformation] applies to all of the dimensions for logical simplicity. That is a bottom-up reason from the dimensions [of a probability/fractal space] that the speed of electromagnetic radiation is fixed [with respect to the measurer], organisationally [the speed is the same to each mind/brain], not the electric and magnetic properties of free space, which is completely different [as is being outlined here]. This again shows the lack of appreciation of organisation and energy in traditional physics and this is crucial to thinking because our logic is (literally) organisational physics.

The constant/absolute speed of light [with respect to the measurer] means that a singularity/nonsense is created if a particle exceeds that speed and cannot be measured by traditional physics and there is no other possibility than by changing the dimensions of the particle’s frame of reference [Special Theory of Relativity] by the Lorentz contraction. I have always wondered how this could be done and suspect that the reason is the same as, I believe, that every person, no matter how they are moving, sees the speed of light as an absolute [Michelson-Morley experiment], that is, organisationally. Nothing changes with the moving particle [energy], but the measurement [organisation] becomes impossible in an energy/physical sense because there is nothing [energy-wise] that is able to measure above that speed. The universe continues to function because it uses [the infinite speed of] accountability, that is not appreciated by Newtonian physics and this is the context that goes with the concept, as required by the Principle of Relativity.

The universe is a simple place built on a simple formula [in the form (1+(-1))=0], so why should our understanding have problems? I believe that it is the limitations of traditional physics and mathematics that is causing the difficulty, apart from the natural urge to not change our thinking. The equation creates the universe and that equation requires expansion for it to exist and remain valid and a fractal repeats a simple organisation continually and this expansion is ‘written into’ our universe that we see as the Big-Bang/Big-Whoosh, but also, orthogonality creates areas of stability [atoms] using the wave/particle duality of the electrons (chapter 97). The expansion is balanced by the creation of energy [dark energy], thus creating organisational stability through expansion.

Restating this, if two charges are considered, there is necessarily a measurement/entanglement between them because (1+(-1))=0 contains three important properties: measurement between 1 and (-1), entanglement between 1 and (-1) and the equation is only stable if the space is expanding. If the charges move with respect to each other the energy relationship changes and the [necessarily] associated organisation also changes and that change we call magnetism. Notice that organisation has infinite speed of entanglement, whereas energy is restricted to the speed of light and that we are concerned with charged particles. As an example, the recording of (so called) gravity waves from cosmic events that we see in the newspapers is the energy reaching us after millions of years, not gravity changes.

So, what is magnetism? Firstly, it is a direction, and this has been recognised by having been called north/south [reversing the motion of the charged particle reverses the polarity] and secondly, forms part of the organisational entanglement similar to quantum gravity that is instantly accountable universe wide. Thirdly, magnetism is a speedometer that measures the relationship between frames of reference. The Special Theory of Relativity describes what must happen to frames of reference as their speed approaches the absolute speed of transmission of the [positive] energy component [light] that is bound by the dimensions of a probability space, but the measurement between frames of reference must be made as an organisational solution [negative] that is akin to the measurement of the speed of light by the mind/brain as shown in the Michelson-Morley experiment.

The Michelson-Morley experiment effectively says that the speed of light is constant as measured by all observers irrespective of their motion with respect to each other. This is an enigma in Newtonian physics and is a postulate in Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity and means, to repeat, that every measurer’s mind/brain measures the speed to be the same. This is not a physics’ ‘energy’, but is a logical/organisational happening/solution due to the absolute in the Principle of Relativity that comes from viewing [the null space] through a probability space. Absolute time [null space] becomes relative time as we open up the null space using a necessarily slow speed of light and so the time and space of observers vary and give the effects as shown in the Special Theory of Relativity. This change in space, time and both forms of energy occurs because they are the only things that can change to preserve the Principle of Relativity.

Traditional physics is top-down and, thus, by necessity can only describe ‘how?’ things happen, whereas organisational physics is bottom-up and answers the question of ‘why?’ things happen, and of course, this is an orthogonality that leads into the ‘new’ physics. So, fourthly, the ‘how?’ [concept] of magnetism involves the ‘why?’ [context] of magnetism and we then realize that magnetism is the logical mechanism/solution behind relativity. It is the speedometer and a speedometer is only necessary if we need to watch our speed because there are speed limits that attract penalties and the speed limit is the speed of light and there is no possibility of exceeding it [in a measurement]. Note that a measuring space will do its best to return the type of measurement required [wave/particle duality].

In Newtonian physics I could make the following a postulate, that there is no possibility of a particle of energy (with no charge) reaching the speed of light except as a photon. I do this because magnetism [as the speedometer] registers only charged particles that are capable of exceeding the speed limit, as well as being contained in the photon that maintains/measures the speed limit. I would have to make it a postulate because Newtonian physics does not recognise logic/common-sense/organisational-physics because they are not energy based, unless it is necessary and most scientists agree with it.

In traffic theory, if a car passed another, it is taken as a transfer of momentum [not an addition], whereas, in real life a policeman will ‘book’ you if you exceed the speed limit in passing, as happened to me through their ‘forward radar’ fitted to their cars, even when they were kilometres away. The ‘cosmic policeman’ is just as ‘unfair’ and chaos [logical] will occur if any energy/measurement exceeds the speed of light in a vacuum, but can an uncharged particle exceed this speed? My view of organisational physics contends that it cannot, and it is my decision that only charged particles can be accelerated sufficiently and they have, I believe, a speedometer on them in the form of magnetism. Magnetism must be part of organisation somewhat like quantum gravity with an infinitely fast accounting.

The role of ‘cosmic policeman’ greatly enhances magnetism’s importance as a fundamental part of the universe’s organisation and further shows that electricity and magnetism are not the same. Considering Newtonian physics, the Michelson-Morley experiment is enigmatic because every mind/brain is affected [in measurement] and this could only happen in a measuring space [probability space], and in the same way the measurement of speed, conservation of total energy and doing something about it could only happen in a measuring/organisational space. It is easier to consider the universe and its workings as organisational solutions where everything works based on five inputs/dimensions of energy, space and time passing [not time interval], so, let’s look at organisation/quantum-gravity through the following quotation.

‘Einstein made the revolutionary suggestion that gravity is not a force like other forces, but is a consequence of the fact that space-time is not flat, as had been previously assumed: it is curved, or “warped”, by the distribution of mass and energy in it.’ (p 29) This consideration that firstly, gravity is not a force is that which I am saying, and secondly, that space-time is warped is, I believe, a complication that is not very helpful and as the energy to space ratio is constant, above, and the speed of light is constant there is no reason to suspect that the dimensions created by the expansion are not simple [constant/linear not parabolic]. In other words, at the instant of creation the expanding [initially logical, not hot energy] space and time are orthogonal [not “warped”, but independent] by necessity, and remain so and I think that organisation is a better assumption than a ‘rubber sheet’ space-time deformed by mass and the reason that I say this is because both interpretations are organisational [concept], but quantum gravity broadens our understanding [context].

An example of the need for a speedometer is shown by the following quotation. ‘after 1,000,000 years neck and neck, the light ray would beat the proton to the finish line by about 4 centimetres…. Cosmic-ray scientists refer to it a the “Oh-My-God Particle”…. It had more than 50 joules of energy, or about 12 calories.’ (Extreme Cosmos, Bryan Gaensler, p 89) This is an example of the workings of relativity, the speed limit [concept] to energy and the need of a speedometer [context] and that magnetism is the physical means that logic can measure, and work on changing the dimensions [to the measurer] to prevent excessive speed [as viewed through traditional physics].

If we are looking at a frame of reference that is close to the speed of light relative to us, what causes the mass/energy etc. to increase and the answer is, that it does not increase. Our measurement of its dimensions changes so that our measurement of the speed of light is not exceeded and this reflects a relationship [entanglement] between concept and context. Looking at the Michelson-Morley experiment shows that measurement obeys logical laws that maintain that the measurement of the speed of light is constant to each measurer. The constant speed of light is a small price to pay to be able to use a measuring space and we do live in a measuring space because that is how we see/measure our surroundings. The Principle of Relativity says that there is energy and organisation and to not appreciate organisation distorts our view. In other words, we establish a concept and a context between the frames of reference of the form (a+b)=1, or in physical terms (1+(-1))=0, so, we should expect measurement to have an entanglement [context]. We consider ourselves to understand energy and have based Newtonian physics on it, but consider hammering a nail, the energy is apparent, but there is a lot of organisation involved that we are dismissing.

If the first orthogonal is energy/organisation, the second orthogonal of organisation is energy plus quantum gravity [attraction], magnetism [policing] and other organisation, thus quantum gravity and magnetism have a common requirement of accountability, but different outcomes. At least, an important part of physics has been better explained when compared to the modern Newtonian physic’s idea that ‘electricity and magnetism go together like a horse and carriage’. They do work together through our ingenuity in electric motors etc., but it does show how we bend nature to our own uses.

I believe that we have found that magnetism is independent/orthogonal to electricity, and is the organisation part of the energy that arose/created from the difference in the speed of the frames of reference and that its value is a measure of the speed difference between the charged particle and the observer so that, being organisational, there is an infinite speed of accounting to ensure that [measurement of] the speed of light, in vacuo is not exceeded. This interpretation severely diminishes the elegance of Maxwell’s equations that link electricity and magnetism because, whilst not incorrect, as they are mathematical descriptions of simple experimental laws, they are a mixture of two independent/orthogonal relationships and show our prowess as a parasite. Thus Maxwell’s laws might be correct, but the underlying assumption that they represent two related effects may not be the case, and further, the name ‘electromagnetic’ suggests this association, even though photons do not react with either electric or magnetic fields.

As this theory needs a prediction, so, returning to the Principle of Relativity [(1+(-1))=0 and (a+b)=1], it can be seen that the equation of the physical and of the mind/brain can orthogonate to the physical and organisational [(1+(-1))=0, (1 and (-1))=0, (a+b)=1 and (a and b)=1], and that requires a measurement/entanglement and/or concept/context for everything apart from the three absolutes. Thus, the current textbook concept is that a photon is sinusoidal electric and magnetic waves rising and falling together, orthogonally, to some amplitude with the energy (E) equal to Plank’s constant (h) times the frequency (f). This representation is troubling/enigmatic and quite possibly wrong because firstly, if both electric and magnetic fields drop to zero every half wavelength, how does the photon know how much energy it is supposed to be carrying, as above, and secondly, why is the amplitude not used? The law [E=hf] is extremely important, but traditional modern physics makes no mention of the amplitude of the photon wave. Why, when traditional physics considers that increasing the amplitude of a wave increases the energy, and that is clearly not so for electromagnetic waves?

Firstly, a digression, because [literally] everything is an orthogonality, but an orthogonality may be the same in some regards, but different [states such as water, steam and ice] or independent [such as the frequency and amplitude of a wave]. E=mc2 is a relationship that illustrates this because energy and mass are the same thing [states of each other] and the units that we use to describe energy and mass are (presumably) related through the speed of light. E=hf is another case in point, of the second kind, but not so trivial because energy is orthogonal to mass as well as organisation. This might seem confusing because everything [in the universe] is an orthogonality if it is not identical [(1+(-1))=0], kept separate by expansion [the universe] or by orthogonality [the atom].

E=hf is readily apparent because we evolved to see the change in frequency as colours as part of our reality, but frequency and amplitude are orthogonal and no one has pointed to amplitude and said that it does some job, and yet it is as important as frequency. Radios have been invented that are amplitude modulated and frequency modulated, but in the fundamental physics of electromagnetic radiation no one has questioned the amplitude, so, it could be a constant, and if it is constant, it could be so, for a very good reason. In a probability space the dimensions dictate that the speed of light must be constant [absolute] and this could mean that the amplitude is constant and so has passed ‘under the radar’ of scientists.

These two deficiencies [incompleteness and amplitude] are rectified in the light of the above, quite simply, I believe. We could use the wave/particle duality shimmer (chapter 94) where the diminution of the wave is the conversion to the particle so that choice is presented twice in each wavelength. The magnetic field is orthogonal to the electric field [energy/organisation] and that leaves only the amplitude and magnetic field to be explained.

The magnetic field has an amplitude that represents the difference in speed [notice speed] between the charged particle and the observer and is a [organisational] constant because the speed of light is the same for every observer irrespective of their motion in a probability space. Thus the amplitude in the photon is constant [for the electric and magnetic orthogonal components must be the same] and represents the maximum [speed of light] and is available for (organizational) comparison with charged particles or observers. Just as there has to be physical choice for reactions to be carried out, there has to be comparisons within that choice, and as I have said before, fractal expansion provides the correct energy ‘direction’ [zero first to maximum last for logic]. In other words, the amplitude of the magnetic and electric waves must be the same because of orthogonality and we know that the frequency is available for the energy [both energy and organisation are equal] and the speed [of light] is (possibly) determined by the amplitude and this assertion, that the speed is a constant/absolute, is seen [relative to] by every observer.

Clearly, electric and magnetic waves seem to fit the circumstances, but it has always been of concern to me that light, though it supposedly contains a magnetic and electric field, is not bent by a magnetic or an electric field. The answer may lie in organization/logic because if a photon were bent by a magnetic or electric field, the entanglement would affect one of the electric or magnetic waves and they would no longer be equal, as required by (1+(-1))=0. In other words, there is a logical reason that a photon cannot react with an electric or magnetic field [where only one is affected], however, the entanglement of quantum gravity [attraction of mass] is apparent in the bending of light by matter/energy in diffraction because both energies [(1+(-1))=0] are affected equally.

The equality that these questions point to, in the fundamental fact of orthogonality, that traditional physics ignores, in the main, strongly suggests that there must be specialists and generalists [(a+b)=1] to properly investigate/understand a problem because this energy/organisation carries over into our social system and the very core of where we are going as humanity. In other words, universities are hampering research by not having generalists to match their specialists.

Conclusion: from the above, the photon is the ‘workhorse’ [energy, concept] of the universe and connected to every other piece of energy [gravity, context] and consist of a pulsating [provides choice] orthogonality of particle/wave [duality, orthogonality] that moves at a set speed [absolute of the probability/fractal space] (possibly) determining the amplitude of the electric and magnetic fields [orthogonal, equal] relative to any measurer, and the energy is determined by the frequency. This is a simple picture of the photon, but it requires the use of absolute/’new’ mathematics and physics in a probability/fractal space, with orthogonality, no Big Bang, belief in the wave particle duality etc., but it does suggest a solution to the enigma of why the electromagnetic wave is unaffected by electric and magnetic fields.

Everything in the universe is an orthogonality and presents two views/’faces’, and an alternate concept to the context in the paragraph above, is that a photon is energy/organization considered as a wave/particle, a third orthogonality shows that the wave aspect is electric [energy] and magnetic [organisation] and a fourth is that they are linked together at 90 degrees [orthogonality] and so on. This shows that Newtonian physics cannot adequately describe a physics of energy/organisation by energy alone, as it has been doing/attempting for 350 years, and at a later date, it will be shown that top-down derived traditional mathematics and Newtonian physics are fundamentally different [orthogonal] because they need to be.

Newtonian physics and counting mathematics align with our accepted use and views of our reality, but modern physics has shown that a change is needed and that could be, I believe, a simple amalgamation of the top-down and bottom-up. This view is enhanced by the finding that the long accepted picture of Maxwell’s laws and the choice of naming photons as electromagnetic waves, even when they do not exhibit those properties was a typical top-down ‘inspired guess’ that the inclusion of logic/organisation can now justify.

The major gain from recognising and including organisation is to place modern physics on a firm base and provide a mathematics of concept/context that allows context equal importance in the social sciences where it is sorely needed to improve the functioning of society.

References: all quotations are fully referenced in the body and earlier chapters can be found on darrylpenney.com if required.

Chapter 98: The Principle of Relativity, the Creation and Euler’s Equation Explained

Chapter 97: You Asked For A Simple Theory, Stephen Hawking, So, Enjoy It!

Chapter 94: Why Newtonian Physics Needs Choice

Subtitle: Defining Choice Within a ‘New’ Philosophy, the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle Resolved, the Physics of Choice Creates Atoms Through the Wave/particle Duality/shimmer, Mind/thought is the Organisational Orthogonality of the Brain’s Energy Consumption, Orthogonality defines the dimensions, How the Voting System Effects Housing Affordability and How to Fix It Through Rational Choices

Chapter 96: the Unification of Top-down and Bottom-up and the Theory of Everything