Hi!

Can gravity be the elongated fields of photons?

Figure 6-15 in the book "Electromagnetic Fields and Waves" by Paul
Lorrain and Dale Corson shows how equipotential surfaces V=constant
get elongated perpendicular to the direction of propagation of a
moving point charge. At near light speed it seems that the elongation
will be very long! Also see how field lines gather at 90 degrees from
the direction of propagation:
http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~phys1/ja...ingCharge.html

It seems to me that a photon, that is in essence a moving EM field at
the speed of light, should be elongated as well. The photons emitted
perpendicular from a body should have the strongest field at your
point of view. Also it seems that the elongation would elegantly
explain how a single photon can interact on itself in the double slit
experiment!

Perhaps other clues to this are dyons, magnetic monopoles, dark
energy, gravity experiments by ESA and Fran De Aquino?

Comments welcomed!

/ Roger Persson

gubbenimanen wrote:

Hi!

Can gravity be the elongated fields of photons?
[snip crap]

Comments welcomed!

Virtual photons are spin-1 vector bosons. Gravitons would need be
spin-2 tensor bosons. Idiot.

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2

L@@K! A Google poster! With a yahoo email address!

Gravity is the perpendicular product of a photon emission and
a positron field, with time coordinates replaced with space
coordinates, taking the integral from 0 to the next electron
shell quanta, divided by the action of the nearest non-charged
large hard-on excellerator, in your shorts, spewing fetid garbage
to the wrong newsgroup for no reason, like a high voltage
epileptic chain-saw rammed up your back-side with 240V.

"gubbenimanen" wrote in message
...
Hi!

gubbenimanen wrote:
Hi!

Can gravity be the elongated fields of photons?

No. If gravitation is mediated by a boson it is a boson of spin 2.

Bob Kolker

gubbenimanen wrote:
Hi!

Can gravity be the elongated fields of photons?

No. This is ruled out experimentally.

The simplest tests are precision tests of the equivalence principle.
Photons, pretty much by definition, couple only to charged matter
-- photons are quanta of electromagnetic radiation, and electric
charge is what electromagnetism couples to. But we observe, to
accuracies of better than a part in a billion, that gravity couples
to nuclear and electrostatic binding energy, which carry no
electric charge. We also observe that gravity interacts with light
-- the Sun deflects light, for instance -- while photons do not
interact with each other.

More generally, we observe that gravity couples universally to all
forms of energy. This is tested experimentally for nuclear binding
energy, electrostatic and magnetostatic energy, the energy of weak
nuclear interactions, the kinetic energy of electrons in atoms, and
even gravitational binding energy. It can be shown that this requires
that gravity must be described by a certain type of tensorial field
("spin 2"), while, as others have pointed out, photons are (again,
observably) spin 1.

The spin 2 nature of the gravitational interaction is further tested
by the behavior of binary neutron stars. Spin 2 fields couple to
quadrupole moments, while spin 1 fields couple to dipole moments,
which are typically much larger. If gravity coupled to a binary pulsar
dipole moment, the system would emit gravitational radiation much
faster than we observe. Observations of the orbital decay of binary
pulsars instead very closely match the predictions of a spin 2 coupling.

You might want to read Cliff Will's popular book _Was Einstein Right?_
for a nice introduction. If you want something more technical, try
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/...6-3/index.html.

Steve Carlip

There's perhaps 1e100 photons/atom, and on average there's perhaps
less than 0.1 atom/m3 of our all-inclusive universe. Go figure.
.. - Brad Guth


gubbenimanen wrote:
Hi!

Can gravity be the elongated fields of photons?

Figure 6-15 in the book "Electromagnetic Fields and Waves" by Paul
Lorrain and Dale Corson shows how equipotential surfaces V=constant
get elongated perpendicular to the direction of propagation of a
moving point charge. At near light speed it seems that the elongation
will be very long! Also see how field lines gather at 90 degrees from
the direction of propagation:
http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~phys1/ja...ingCharge.html

It seems to me that a photon, that is in essence a moving EM field at
the speed of light, should be elongated as well. The photons emitted
perpendicular from a body should have the strongest field at your
point of view. Also it seems that the elongation would elegantly
explain how a single photon can interact on itself in the double slit
experiment!

Perhaps other clues to this are dyons, magnetic monopoles, dark
energy, gravity experiments by ESA and Fran De Aquino?

Comments welcomed!

/ Roger Persson

On Apr 21, 11:55 am, wrote:
gubbenimanen wrote:
Hi!
Can gravity be the elongated fields of photons?

No. This is ruled out experimentally.

The simplest tests are precision tests of the equivalence principle.
Photons, pretty much by definition, couple only to charged matter
-- photons are quanta of electromagnetic radiation, and electric
charge is what electromagnetism couples to. But we observe, to
accuracies of better than a part in a billion, that gravity couples
to nuclear and electrostatic binding energy, which carry no
electric charge. We also observe that gravity interacts with light
-- the Sun deflects light, for instance -- while photons do not
interact with each other.

More generally, we observe that gravity couples universally to all
forms of energy. This is tested experimentally for nuclear binding
energy, electrostatic and magnetostatic energy, the energy of weak
nuclear interactions, the kinetic energy of electrons in atoms, and
even gravitational binding energy. It can be shown that this requires
that gravity must be described by a certain type of tensorial field
("spin 2"), while, as others have pointed out, photons are (again,
observably) spin 1.

The spin 2 nature of the gravitational interaction is further tested
by the behavior of binary neutron stars. Spin 2 fields couple to
quadrupole moments, while spin 1 fields couple to dipole moments,
which are typically much larger. If gravity coupled to a binary pulsar
dipole moment, the system would emit gravitational radiation much
faster than we observe. Observations of the orbital decay of binary
pulsars instead very closely match the predictions of a spin 2 coupling.

You might want to read Cliff Will's popular book _Was Einstein Right?_
for a nice introduction. If you want something more technical, tryhttp://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2006-3/index.html.

Steve Carlip

How much mass can a zero-mass spin-1 photon haul?
.. - Brad Guth

On 20 avr, 19:26, gubbenimanen wrote:
Hi!

Can gravity be the elongated fields of photons?

Figure 6-15 in the book "Electromagnetic Fields and Waves" by Paul
Lorrain and Dale Corson shows how equipotential surfaces V=constant
get elongated perpendicular to the direction of propagation of a
moving point charge. At near light speed it seems that the elongation
will be very long! Also see how field lines gather at 90 degrees from
the direction of propagation:http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~phys1/ja...ge/MovingCharg...

It seems to me that a photon, that is in essence a moving EM field at
the speed of light, should be elongated as well. The photons emitted
perpendicular from a body should have the strongest field at your
point of view. Also it seems that the elongation would elegantly
explain how a single photon can interact on itself in the double slit
experiment!

Perhaps other clues to this are dyons, magnetic monopoles, dark
energy, gravity experiments by ESA and Fran De Aquino?

Comments welcomed!

/ Roger Persson

TRANSLATOR IS WELCOME !!!
(Tout le fil m'intéresse : si un bénévoile québéquois voulait bien
participer à ce tournant vers la révolution scientifique)

==========================
The value of the constant is
Kdevia = 2,17004 10-6 (m 3 s -1 J -1)

The constant is multiplied by 1367 W m-2
And you find the value of the deviation (m s-2)
Soit 1367 * 2,17004 10-6 =
Et l'on trouve 0.002966448 m s -2
Ce résultat indique que la trajectoire de la Terre est déviée de 2.97
millimètres par seconde

The constant Kdevia is proved by every planet

(It is the same than GMso / R²)

The second step is to find how many photons came from the Earth to the
Moon, to prove that Kdevia is also good for the satellite.

=====================================
CONSTANTE DE DÉVIATION HÉLIOPLANÉTAIRE

La constante de déviation gravitationnelle hélioplanétaire est égale
à
Kdevia = 2,17004 10-6
m 3 s -1 J -1
Sa signification :
Toute planète recevant une énergie locale, Eloc, en provenance du
Soleil, aura sa trajectoire déviée d'une quantité égale à :
Eloc * Kdevia
Eloc en
J s -1 m -2
Eloc calculée sur un plan perpendiculaire à la direction des photons
depuis le Soleil jusqu'à la planète
======================================
http://site.voila.fr/monsyte/de/SCIE...an etaire.htm

A text of the site of “the New Spark”:
THE TRUE EQUATION OF GRAVITATION HÉLIO-PLANÉTAIRE

By Yanick Toutain

08/05/07 17:15 - 09/05/07 01:350

2 errata 6/07/07 18:35

Tuesday May 8, 2007

PREAMBLE:

Isaac Newton had insisted well: “Assumptions not fingo”, I do not
pretend of assumptions.

He had taken care well not to give a cause to the gravitation


Photogravure = sun

Hélioplanétaire = which relates to the Sun and the planets, which
relates to the relations between the Sun and planets

“I explained the phenomena of the skies and our seas by the force of
gravity, but I did not allot yet of cause to gravity. [...] I did not
succeed in yet deducing [...] the reasons explaining the properties
from gravity, and I do not pretend of assumptions. Because all that
does not result from the phenomena calls necessarily an assumption;
and the assumptions, which they are metaphysics, physical, founded on
qualities occulted, or mechanical, do not have their place in
experimental philosophy. 32


Gleick quotation

However, the two gaps, the two theses which miss with the conceptual
grid, it had already advanced them: the light as a photon and the
photon as a brick.




THE LIGHT AS A PHOTON




Contrary to the rumours distilled by the relativists, for Isaac Newton
the assumption of the light comparable with the sound, the assumption
of a wave in an improbable ether, had quickly become a nonsense. It
was completely convinced that the light was made of “very small bodies
emitted by brilliant substances”.




THE PHOTON AS A BRICK




But, this reflexion had not remained with this stage. Isaac Newton
had also formulated the assumption according to which the atomos, the
building block of the matter could be the grains of light themselves:




“Aren't the coarse bodies and the light mutually convertible, and the
bodies cannot receive a great part of their activity of the particles
of light which use their composition?”


Opticks 374

Quotation of J. Gleick

p. 190

GAPS OF THE PRINCIPIA




It is extremely probable that Newton, victim of the hatred of the
antimaterialists - the heinous Leibniz robber at the head - wanted to
be limited to what could not be called in question: One sees, still
with the 21 ° century, clicks it cretins to tolerate, their pars, the
worst stupid things: invisible and unknown dark matter, “holes” that
they are black or “of worm”, dimension exceeding 4 known dimensions,
worlds parallel… and to howl with sorcery each time somebody Formula
One an assumption of good sense which comes to shock their monnayées
beliefs.




It thus misses the time of the signal and the fact that gravity is a
phenomenon of photons with photons




THE TIME OF THE SIGNAL




It is the alive one of Newton that the first approximations speed of
light were announced by Römer. 1665 precede 22 years the publication
of the mathematical Principles of natural philosophy.

It is astonishing that Newton included/understood only the aphelion,
the “maximum distance” to which we see the Sun, at the beginning of
July is not a distance, but only the length of the way traversed by
the light to reach us.

Admittedly, Newton regarded the Sun as motionless in absolute space,
but what could be negligible for the bond Sun Ground it is not any
more for the way in which we see Mars.


Isaac Newton was 22 years old.

Römer announced 240.000 kilometers a second.

80% the true speed.

Indeed, when we see Mars with such or such place, it is obvious for
all the children of the 21° century that Mars is not any more at this
place. As the image of Mars that we see travelled during a time of
several hundreds of seconds, at the moment when this image arrives in
our eyes or in the objective of the camera, the planet Mars is on the
right or on the left place where see we it.

That, Newton would have been able to include/understand it and take it
into account in its analyses (when well even it would have persisted
in regarding the Sun as motionless)

It seems probable to me that in the files of Newton pages must be
where this assumption could be with the state of draft.


With the children of the 21° century:

Will know that the TOTALITY of the graduate cretins (engineers
professors etc.) expressing itself in fr.sci.physic or
fr.sci.astrophysic still did not include/understand that in May 2007.

GRAVITY OF PHOTONS with PHOTONS




The comprehension of what the matter is made of bricks photons has a
consequence quite as fundamental as the preceding one: It can nothing
exist of other than the photons. Consequently of what, the light is
the active ingredient of the gravitation; and this active ingredient
is exerted on bodies which are nothing other than agglomerated
photons.

The gravitation is thus only the consequence of the shock of the
photons (in form light, isolated) on other photons (agglomerated, in
form matter).

The gravitation is thus, simply the modification of the trajectory of
formed bodies of agglomerated photons, run up against by “isolated
photons”.

They are these modifications of trajectories which appear either in
the form “attraction” or in the form “repulsion”




OBJECTIVE OF THIS TEXT




The object, limited, from this text goes to consist to transform the
equations of Kepler and Newton concerning the gravitation and the
movements of planets to give them a form materialist compatible with
the two preceding additions to the theses of Isaac Newton.

It is not need to add only all the other theses - under the reserve to
take into account what precedes - are considered veracious, to start
with the concepts absolute space, absolute time, absolute place,
absolute movement and absolute velocities. The only modification will
consist in replacing the absolute word by the objective word which
clarifies the concepts more.




***




CONSTANT OF DEVIATION HÉLIOPLANÉTAIRE




The constant of gravitational deviation hélioplanétaire is equal to

Kdevia = 2,17004 10-6






m3 S -1 J -1

Its significance:

Any planet receiving a local energy, Eloc, coming from the Sun, will
have its deviated trajectory of a quantity equalizes with:

Eloc * Kdevia


Eloc in

J S -1 m -2

Eloc calculated on a level perpendicular to the direction of the
photons since the Sun to planet

This quantity has dimensions of an acceleration (meters per seconds ²)
but corresponds simply to the quantity of deviation (in direction of
the Sun) of the trajectory of planet.


m S -2

Its use is strictly identical to that of Isaac Newton concerning
gravitational acceleration.




The Flight Path Vector is decreased by a quantity equal to
Eloc*Kdevia*unitédetemps




For a Eloc value = 1367

It is enough to multiply 1367 by Kdevia

That is to say 1367 * 2,17004 10-6 =

And 0.002966448 are found

This result indicates that the trajectory of the Earth is deviated of
2.97 millimetres a second


J S -1 m -2





m S -2

Naturally, when, at the beginning of July, the Earth in front of the
Sun, is at the point of aphelion, the received energy of the Sun is
weaker: only 1321.67 joules per m ² a second.

And thus, the deviation is weaker: only 0.0028681

The deviation is of 2.86 millimetres a second.

Whereas, 6 months later, on January 2, at the point of perihelion, the
Earth - behind the Sun - receives 1413.086 joules (7% of energy in
more).

And thus its deviation will be more important: 3.066 millimetres a
second.

The deviation of January is 7% more important than the deviation of
July.




INTERPRETATION MATERIALIST




The direction of this equation is very simple: The shock of the
photons of the Sun deviates the trajectory of planets.

The quantity of deviation depends on received energy:

The light coming from the Sun corresponds to the equation of Planck
called equation of the black body. This equation indicates the
distribution of the various kinds of photons which reach us coming
from the Sun.

In 1 joule coming from the Sun, there are yellow photons - an integer
of yellow photons -, there are green photons, red photons, the purple
ones, but also of the infra-red photons, ultraviolet photons.




These photons arrive to the Earth, to Mars or Jupiter, each planet of
the solar system.

And their arrival on each planet starts billion shocks. These are the
shocks which deviate the trajectories of planets.

Anything else!




LAW IN R ² AND the SURFACE Of a SPHERE




This multiplicative law of a constant is, obviously compatible with
the law of Isaac Newton (resulting from Kepler)

The value of Kdevia is even calculated according to the equations of
Newton




Kdevia = (local acceleration/Eloc) /2

Local acceleration = G Mso/R ²

And thus

Kdevia = G Mso/(R ² * 2Eloc)


Mso masses Sun

G gravitational constant

However Eloc = Etot/(4 pi * R ²)

From where

Kdevia = G Mso/(R ² * 2Etot/(4 pi * R ²))

Kdevia = G Mso/(Etot /2 pi)

That indicates that the law in R ² mask in fact a constant: Kdevia

Kdevia constant whose value depends on the photonic emission of the
Sun, the mass allotted to the Sun and constant G, gravitational
constant.


Etot total Energy emitted by the Sun a second

It should be noted that at the origin, the first report which made the
author was that of the root fourth of energy.

The equation of Kepler improved by Newton gave

Period ²/R3 = 4 pi ²/G Mso

This equation had another possible writing:

Period ²/R = 4 pi ² R ²/G Mso

G Mso/R = 4 pi ² R ²/period ²

G Mso/R = (2 pi R/period) ²

GMso/R= (Speed of revolution of planet) ²

But this equation could change again:

Eloc = Etot/(4 pi * R ²)

And thus

1/R = square root (Eloc*4 pi/Etot)




And thus then:

(Speed of revolution of planet) ² = Gmso*racine square (Eloc*4 pi/
Etot)




There was then the speed of revolution of the planet (average over one
year) which was proportional to the fourth root of received Energy
(“constant” solar)

Speed of revolution of planet =

Eloc (1/4) * G Mso * 2 * square root (pi/Etot)


Erratum (6/7/07) “proportional” to the place of “equal”: the
attentive reader of the equation will have rectified itself.

This equation (cumulative over one year) hid, in fact, the Kdevia
equation.




A materialist thus regards the laws in R ² as the result of a
spherical influence, like the results of shocks coming from a central
source spreading itself in space on a spherical form. The R ² was
simply the ray of the sphere




PARTICULARIZATION OF THE EQUATION




This law, valid for planets and their trajectory does not function -
in this simple form - for the gravity of the objects attracted by
planets.

The Moon should receive 627 joules (M-1 s-1) coming from the Earth

And the objects held and released on Earth should receive 2260 kw to
justify acceleration of 9.81 m a second ².

What is - first access - absurdity.






WHO SEEKS WILL FIND




The author does not wait to have improved this equation: who will
want, will seek it to find the total solution.

By Yanick Toutain

Tuesday May 8, 2007


At the date of the 6/7/07, the author still does not have the
generalized formula.

July 26, 2007 the Last bounces: Newton had considered such an
assumption! To see: Newton and wind of the mills


NOTES AND COMMENTS




“But was one to interpret the light like a wave or a whole of
particles? He still thought, as assumption, that the light was a flow
of material particles, but did not explore of them less the apparently
undulatory phenomena: ” Aren't the luminous rays driven sometimes like
an eel? “Buried Hooke, Newton also buried ether - this medium likely
to vibrate under the action of light waves, following the example one
being which transmits waves when a stone there is thrown. Such an
ether would interfere with the permanent movement of planets -
established so perfectly from now on.

He trusted his corpuscular theory: the rays of light are “very small
bodies emitted by brilliant substances”. 23 Ainsi, it seemed to take
the wrong way (...)

Note 23 Optiks, Question 29, p. 370 "


Quotation of

James Gleick

Isaac Newton

A fabulous destiny

2003-2005 Dunod

p. 167-168

The preface writer is a malicious and heinous nutcase.

This biography of “a relativist is rather honest for a a little
limited partisan of orthodoxy

Surface of a sphe 4 pi R ²

++++++

1367: the relativistic cretins is obstinated to call this number
“solar constant”. (And that since 1837 and the introduction of this
concept per Claude Pouillet)

Their idiocy is double:

1° This number changes at each second. As soon as the way to traverse
Sun to the Earth increases, a larger number of photons “magnifying
glass” the Earth and thus the solar “constant” falls

2° But their incommensurable silly thing seems - also - to ignore the
second phenomenon (described by Cotardière) “(...) taken measurements
(...) revealed a decrease of the “solar constant” of 0.019%, perhaps
bound per annum to the one of the cycles of the solar activity.”




+++++++++++++




This text has been the subject of several drafts on books for several
years. And is, naturally the continuation of the equation “fourth
root” published in 2002. The two reasons justifying its failure to be
published on monsyte since October 2006 are

1° the complete absence of interlocutor materialist on the forums
fr.sci, accepting simply the concept of vacuum (the preceding
publication of the function describing the fourth root of energy had
started only comments imbeciles and deprived of some interest that it
is

2° the fact that this equation is incomplete and describes neither the
modifications of trajectories of the satellites, nor the gravitation
near the ground of a planet.

The reason which has just started its publication in this beginning
May 2007 is simply a pleasant text of Mr Xaustein. This Sir, within
the framework of a debate, in Spanish, with another contributor, had
extremely pleasant remarks relating to me - slicing with the malicious
silly thing of usual Armingaud, Caudron, Lauwaert and other asses
relativistic, being unaware of the simplest beginning of the bible
which they assert and passing their leisures (important) to fill the
forums fr.sci.physic with heinous diatribes whose only and single
interest consists of the nearest construction of the million young not
graduates, who will come soon to draw - there - absolute confidence in
their intelligence confronted with the display afflicting with the
silly thing fouls of the qualified engineers, of the students of
normal sup., of the professors of physics and of mathematics teaching
as well in college as in university and which poured kilometers of
stupidities that a 8 year old child of 2020 will look with an amused
eye, surprised and vaguely scandalized.

These remarks related to my certainty of the photons as a single cause
of gravity.

Rather than to incite Mr. Xaustein to simply go to read again the text
“Blind men who we are” and to satisfy to me to indicate a bond
allowing a reading translated (AltaVista-Systran-babelfish) into
Spanish, with his intention, like with that of its interlocutor, I
judged good to make appear this incomplete equation.

That could be the occasion of a collaboration if a reader free or
Spanish-speaking would like to harness himself with the generalization
of the equation (or rather with its “particularization” in the case of
a gaseous medium and in the case of a multiple gravitation - what is
the case of the satellites, undergoing the Sun and their planet).








Appendix





Data used








Rsote


149562419000


It is not the astronomical unit (it is the ray on the assumption Ain
Al Rami)











Laphélie


152105142000


length of the way of the photons to the aphelion (it is not a distance
between 2 bodies)











Lpérihélie


147103311000


length of the way of the photons to the perihelion (it is not a
distance between 2 bodies)











ElocTerre


1367


(J (m ², S)






GMso


1,327124380E+20


“constant heliocentric of the gravitation” (m^3/s ²)





















Calculations










SushT =surface sphere photogravure Terre=4*pi*Rsote ²


2,81096E+23


(m ²)

Etot = ElocTerre*SushT






3,84258E+26


J/S

solar acT=acceleration undergone by the Earth


0,005932895


m/s ²

deviation a second ² = acT/2




0,002966448


m/s ²

and thus










Kdevia = deviation a second/Eloc




2,17004E-06












Elocaph Eloc with the aphelion = Etot/(4 pi *Laphélie ²)


1321,678071


Elocpérih Eloc with the perihelion = Etot/(4 pi *Lpérihélie ²)


1413,085956












deviation by dryness with the aphelion = Kdevia * Elocaph


0,002868097


deviation by dryness with the aphelion = Kdevia * Elocaph


0,003066456












One checks: (Gmso/Laphélie ²)/2




0,002868097


One checks: (Gmso/Lapérihélie ²)/2




0,003066456

On Apr 20, 9:26*am, gubbenimanen wrote:
Hi!

Can gravity be the elongated fields of photons?

Figure 6-15 in the book "Electromagnetic Fields and Waves" by Paul
Lorrain and Dale Corson shows how equipotential surfaces V=constant
get elongated perpendicular to the direction of propagation of a
moving point charge. At near light speed it seems that the elongation
will be very long! Also see how field lines gather at 90 degrees from
the direction of propagation:http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~phys1/ja...ge/MovingCharg...

It seems to me that a photon, that is in essence a moving EM field at
the speed of light, should be elongated as well. The photons emitted
perpendicular from a body should have the strongest field at your
point of view. Also it seems that the elongation would elegantly
explain how a single photon can interact on itself in the double slit
experiment!

Perhaps other clues to this are dyons, magnetic monopoles, dark
energy, gravity experiments by ESA and Fran De Aquino?

Comments welcomed!

/ Roger Persson

Falling light changes colours. Light falls in chnaging time and this
changes its energy. It goes up when falling in by blueshift and is red
shfited when going out of the field. :Pound Rebka. Not to forget the
Einstein shift. There is a doubled cause of redshift.

Mitch Raemsch Twice Nobel Laureate 2008

Mitch Raemsch

Thanks everybody for your comments!

You said graviton is a spin 2 boson! Is it possible that paired
entangled photons can work as a graviton by quantum superposition? I
have read that a spin flip of an electron from -1/2 to 1/2 spawns a
photon with spin +1. So what if two entangled photons (spin -1 and +1)
interact together as a graviton (spin 2)? We know from photon
teleportation that the other photon gets opposite spin and that they
can interact at large distances.

The elongated EM field at light speed through a double slit, I wrote
about previously, seems to coincide with the pilot wave theory ( David
Bohm and Louis de Broglie)!

If two electrons moving at high speed towards each other what can we
expect the fields interact with each other? Fields having opposite
rotation creating some cork-screw interaction?

Your answers appreciated!